Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 263 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 30 post(s) |
James Amril-Kesh
Goonswarm Federation
5781
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 19:58:00 -
[3841] - Quote
Xequecal wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:You know what would really be awesome? Take what you're trying to do with webs (which is a terrible idea because of the limited range of webs on what's supposed to be a longer-ranged platform) and instead give the Marauders a bonus to target painter strength. Target painting will give a similar damage application bonus to webs and it'll also work at a much wider variety of ranges. This man is right. For PvE, painters would be preferable. You need a way to kill frigs. 5 lights isn't going to cut it in higher end PvE. Hell 10 or even 15 might not cut it in 10/10 plexes with 30+ of them or C3/C4 container sites and their swarms of super elite frigs. As others have said, you can still fit a web, it just won't have that 10% per level extra effectiveness. If you really want to hit frigates up close, you can put a web and your bonused TP on them. You're not going to be doing stellar damage, but you'll hit them.
If you really want to dispatch the frigates, it's much easier to just use your MJD, bastion, and blap them at a distance. Bonused TP makes this an even more viable tactic (especially after the duration gets halved). My Youtube Videos Latest video: August 25, 2013 |
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
74
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 20:37:00 -
[3842] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Then fit a web or two. These are NPC frigs, they don't really try to actively speed tank you, they just burn in with a MWD and then orbit.
Plus no one said these things needed to be able to solo a 10/10 DED complex.
The fact that they need to shoot frigs is why I said they needed to keep the web bonus. A single 60% web will not let large guns hit NPC elite frigs.
Also if they can't solo a 10/10 or a C4, that makes them pretty damn terrible for a 1bil PvE ship considering a Tengu can already do both. |
William Darkk
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 21:14:00 -
[3843] - Quote
125mb/175m3 dronebay seems like a good idea, or at the very least 50/150. Drones are very useful for popping smaller rats. |
Rendiff
Funk Soul Brothers High Rollers
24
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 22:15:00 -
[3844] - Quote
For the time it takes to train into a Marauder versus the time into a pirate BS, the Marauder should be much better than the Pirate and navy versions.
The way I see it the Marauder should be the most powerful sub capital ship in terms of base damage and tank ability. |
James Amril-Kesh
Goonswarm Federation
5783
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 22:40:00 -
[3845] - Quote
William Darkk wrote:125mb/175m3 dronebay seems like a good idea, or at the very least 50/150. Drones are very useful for popping smaller rats. 125 MB / 175 m3 would go really, really well with the immobile bastion mode. My Youtube Videos Latest video: August 25, 2013 |
Sgt Ocker
State War Academy Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 01:53:00 -
[3846] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:William Darkk wrote:125mb/175m3 dronebay seems like a good idea, or at the very least 50/150. Drones are very useful for popping smaller rats. 125 MB / 175 m3 would go really, really well with the immobile bastion mode. I would say from the way things look now, all will have either 50mb or 75mb drone bandwidth (bar the golem which in true caldari spirit will only get 25mb). The emphasis for this class will be on turrets, drones are only for those pesky close up frigates. So would not expect to see any with 125mb drone bandwidth
|
James Amril-Kesh
Goonswarm Federation
5783
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 03:16:00 -
[3847] - Quote
I wouldn't get too hung up on the way things look now, because frankly right now they look awful.
Not too enthusiastic about having both the 30% resist bonus removed from bastion and the repair module bonus removed from the ships. I really doubt giving them full T2 resists makes up for that. I'm also not happy with that latter bonus being replaced by a web strength bonus. I think the web strength is fairly useless for this ship in its intended role. It smacks right up against the MJD and the damage application bonuses. My Youtube Videos Latest video: August 25, 2013 |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1523
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 05:55:00 -
[3848] - Quote
I patiently await a dev update. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
To mare
Advanced Technology
251
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 06:14:00 -
[3849] - Quote
marauder skill bonus -20% to stacking penalty factor
that would be lovely |
Cassius Invictus
Thou shalt not kill Exiled Ones
24
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 06:49:00 -
[3850] - Quote
Ok just figured. At some point T3 will be nerfed (and they should be) but the problem is that this would leave us WH guys with no ships to run anomalies. Marauders could easily take that role. So when proposing anything new for marauders pls try balance it out against future T3 rebalance. Oh and no rr for class 5 anomaly is a no no... |
|
Aimee Maken
State War Academy Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 06:58:00 -
[3851] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Aimee Maken wrote:My biggest thing is that this is the most advanced boat in eve in terms of training time needed for a sub cap. And you guys are trying to harmonize them all with the same stick, regardless of the unique weapon system and racial plays they have. What I purpose is to have the goal of the marauders to be GÇ£Showing the best the race has to offer, and to shore up any weakness in that methodGÇ¥ No hull should be the "absolute best" nor should it "shore up any weaknesses" in a hull. Every hull and racial choice should have some give and take. Overall I find all four of your concepts ridiculously over-powered. Plus I find the whole idea of a moving while deployed battleship to be just a little ridiculous and unappealing. Plus if you want to talk about training time, Black Ops Battleships are actually worse in terms of overall training time, recommended certificates, and they force you to train a set of very specialized skills where as the prerequisites for Marauders all fall under core ship skills.
The shore up the weakness bit is only really considered when you add in the low scan res of the ship, it should never be used in pvp because of that fact and if you do, you need a lot of SEBOs and other support just because of the lumbering nature of the battleships.
For a high end pve ship, this would mean they are balanced around the pirate ships, rather than nerfing the pirates down to their level.
I personally envision the pirate ships to be like T2 ships but with a focus pvp capabilities and balance, their costs should be raised and they should not suffer from the scan res issue of the marauders. So then pirates would have better pvp, okay pve, and cost a ton (1.5-2.5 bil range). While Marauders would have excellent pve, **** pvp (SS), and cost slightly less while have a far larger skill train time.
On blops, I hope they rework the entire line. I wish for anti super use bomber, along with a super change that comps the current pilots as their nigh invincibility turns into just another tier of ship as per tiercide.
Again tho, the thing that you should take away is that they should make each marauder feel unique, and not have the class harmonized like some other T2 lines. They should feel racially matched, if not have the weakness compensated. |
Alxea
Unstable Pirate Sharks Of The Damed Sea
122
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 06:59:00 -
[3852] - Quote
I don't like things getting away from me so I don't like my web bonus being nerfed. Guess I'll just use 2 webs instead of one on my kronos now. >_> Everything else looks good. Make it like a mini dread. Perfect for gate camping and station camping. |
Isinero
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 09:36:00 -
[3853] - Quote
If I am counting well it will means that I will be able to be cap stable with large repairer and only 2 cap rechargers without any issues and I will have still something to spare :-)
Not sure if I am counting it well but bonus to cap recharge seems to be aproximately 33% for paladin. (did someone try to count it ?)
it would be amazing because I will be able to fit jump drive and something else and with just 4 mid slots I am really happy that there is also boost to cap recharger. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1415
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 09:39:00 -
[3854] - Quote
I can't believe that there are actually people bad enough to think these things won't be ridiculously overpowered.. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
246
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 10:23:00 -
[3855] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:I can't believe that there are actually people bad enough to think these things won't be ridiculously overpowered..
*pssst, silence* Now actively requesting any faction / new faction willing to produce these:-áhttp://eohgames.com/labs/Ships/Vanir%20Federation%20Talos-á |
Isinero
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 10:56:00 -
[3856] - Quote
I even count it and it will be "cheap" to have it nice ... so let it be ..... dont touch it :-D I like it :-))
I tried to count what suicide gank needs to do to kill me :-D and if nothing else :-D It is not worth to kill me... thats what I like :-D
1000 dps / nice range / 600 tank (1200 tank in bastion) / mjd :-D for something around 2 billions (500 milion drop in average and cost to shot me down is paroximately 350 - 700 millions based on sector :-D)
I really hope that it will stay like this ... it needs huge amount of training compared to other ships so it will be nice if it will be at least little bit better. |
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
74
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 11:32:00 -
[3857] - Quote
Aimee Maken wrote:The shore up the weakness bit is only really considered when you add in the low scan res of the ship, it should never be used in pvp because of that fact and if you do, you need a lot of SEBOs and other support just because of the lumbering nature of the battleships.
...? These ships don't have low scan resolutions, they all have above average scan res for battleships.
|
Apo Lamperouge
Priests of the Temples of Syrinx Inc.
9
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 11:52:00 -
[3858] - Quote
I'm not sure why there is talk of Marauders being "Short Range Weapons" specialists. I prefer to have Tachy's on my Paladin, combined with the Micro Jump Drive. I'm working the Gallente Epic Arc right now, and the 'heavy dps" missions are very easily managed by a short hop of 100 km and BLAP with Imperial Navy Ultra-violets at 80 kms (and before you ask, yes, I get volleys of 2300-5500 at that range with them, consistently when they get into IN Gamma range...they never make it to Gleam, trust me)
Please do not force me to be choosing one gun type like some Pirate Battleships (Vindicator I'm talking about you. Nightmare you CAN put pulses on...but why?). Let's face it; the Marauder is a PVE ship. It's role is specialized in that. What moron brings tractor beams and a salvage unit to a fleet fight (on a battleship)? Come on, leave it a PVE ship. Fix blops as PVP if you need to do that.
This thread is getting completely out of hand... 191 pages? Who knew that it would be so controversial? A tech 2 ship should be specialized, not watered down to being a "little bit of this, a little bit of that".
Frankly, I'm getting a little worried that this "rebalance" is going to screw them up totally. So Marauders are a little OP for PVE..so what? They suck donkey balls in pvp. I would never think of bringing one into pvp, the ease of which you get your ass handed to you by any ewar is re-donkulous. I have "a lot" of isk, and a lot of skill time invested in my Paladin. If I want to pvp in a battleship, I will use blops or a navy faction battleship if i want to spend money. HAC's or T1 battleships if I don't. There's a reason that all the Fleet Doctrine I've seen is T1 or Navy battleships.
Here's a thought... want to get rid of OP stuff? Just eliminate Faction, Deadspace and Officer modules. Force everyone to use T2 only. That will level the playing field.
That BTW was a joke.
So just stop, you're making a mistake.
Poaster's Disclaimer; this is my opinion only. Remember opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and it generally stinks.
Sometimes a knife right through your heart is exactly what you need. |
Apo Lamperouge
Priests of the Temples of Syrinx Inc.
9
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 11:54:00 -
[3859] - Quote
Xequecal wrote:Aimee Maken wrote:The shore up the weakness bit is only really considered when you add in the low scan res of the ship, it should never be used in pvp because of that fact and if you do, you need a lot of SEBOs and other support just because of the lumbering nature of the battleships. ...? These ships don't have low scan resolutions, they all have above average scan res for battleships.
It's their sensor strength that is crap. Sometimes a knife right through your heart is exactly what you need. |
Nova Satar
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 12:29:00 -
[3860] - Quote
just to confirm, once you've entered bastion mode, is that the part where 3 nados suicide gank you? |
|
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
247
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 12:30:00 -
[3861] - Quote
Apo Lamperouge wrote: Please do not force me to be choosing one gun type like some Pirate Battleships (Vindicator I'm talking about you. Nightmare you CAN put pulses on...but why?). Let's face it; the Marauder is a PVE ship. It's role is specialized in that. What moron brings tractor beams and a salvage unit to a fleet fight (on a battleship)? Come on, leave it a PVE ship. Fix blops as PVP if you need to do that.
I have the feeling you judge those ships from a pure pve-pov. Yeah, railvindis and tachnightmares are a *thing* in incursions or anomalies, yet they were flown a lot with various fittings. Same potentially for the most pvp-prominent marauder, the kronos. Though they are fitted sometimes rails, sometimes blasters for pve, they are near always fitted for blasters+webs+buffer to serve as a dirtcheap substitute for Vindiwebs.
The giant thing you apparently overlooked was the very generous fittings buff, which allowst them to fit a rack of heavy utility mods, i.E. pvp.
Apo Lamperouge wrote: Frankly, I'm getting a little worried that this "rebalance" is going to screw them up totally. So Marauders are a little OP for PVE..so what? They suck donkey balls in pvp. I would never think of bringing one into pvp, the ease of which you get your ass handed to you by any ewar is re-donkulous. I have "a lot" of isk, and a lot of skill time invested in my Paladin. If I want to pvp in a battleship, I will use blops or a navy faction battleship if i want to spend money. HAC's or T1 battleships if I don't. There's a reason that all the Fleet Doctrine I've seen is T1 or Navy battleships.
Most fleet doctrines are based on t1/navy cause every scrub can fly those, and they are cheap within limits. Unlike most smallscale engagements, dumping boatloads of ISK to get a few extrapercent performance isn't worth it when you're one of 200 f1-lemmings.
The complete ewar-problematic is mostly abolished by the introduction of the bastion-module. Being unable to receive RR luckily also disqualifies it for fleet usage. If you're just looking at the raw hull without the bastionmodule, you get a battleship with t2 resists and 4 extrahighs over other battleships, while suffering from (as of now) only low sensor strength.
I really do not understand how those are bound exclusively to pve. They have been in the past with their craptastic fittings and lack of HP or RR-efficiency, but apparently they are going to change that finally. Now actively requesting any faction / new faction willing to produce these:-áhttp://eohgames.com/labs/Ships/Vanir%20Federation%20Talos-á |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
247
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 12:31:00 -
[3862] - Quote
Nova Satar wrote:just to confirm, once you've entered bastion mode, is that the part where 3 nados suicide gank you?
More like 8+ Now actively requesting any faction / new faction willing to produce these:-áhttp://eohgames.com/labs/Ships/Vanir%20Federation%20Talos-á |
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
74
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 12:35:00 -
[3863] - Quote
Why would they waste 6+ attack BCs to suicide gank your marauder? The ship might be worth 1bil but that doesn't drop when you explode. If you don't put billions in deadspace **** on it nobody will bother. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
451
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 12:56:00 -
[3864] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
Ya know, I had an idea once that might just be crazy enough to work.
When in bastion mode you unlock 3 turret/launcher hard points specifically for small weapons. Bastion would give a damage and tracking bonus to those small weapons.
Some people might think this is OP, but look at it closely.
Small ships die at short range, large ships die at med/long range. How do you take one down?
Easy, get small ships out at long range orbiting out of traversal, get big ships under it tanking the small guns and out traversing the large guns.
This would change things up a bit and the big ships would have to play tackle. This would also mean that there major weakness would be heavy brawlers, with good agility.
I got two likes on the quoted posts, but people really need to realize that liking a comment doesn't keep it as part of the conversation... Sure, like a comment, but if you like it, you need to be talking about it, even if it's just saying "hey, i like this". It's enough to keep it as part of the conversation.
Edit: Also, what I mean by "unlock" is the turrets are offlined until you go into bastion mode. If you're one of those that wants your utility for salvage, well, you have to give up something for utility. In this case it would be these small turrets/launchers. However, when bastioned I think you should have the same bonuses as a noctis. This won't obsolete the noctis, as many people like myself feel that the noctis is still way faster if you like to salvage and loot entire rooms. |
Jasper Blanch
Concordiat Spaceship Samurai
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 13:20:00 -
[3865] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
Ya know, I had an idea once that might just be crazy enough to work.
When in bastion mode you unlock 3 turret/launcher hard points specifically for small weapons. Bastion would give a damage and tracking bonus to those small weapons.
Some people might think this is OP, but look at it closely.
Small ships die at short range, large ships die at med/long range. How do you take one down?
Easy, get small ships out at long range orbiting out of traversal, get big ships under it tanking the small guns and out traversing the large guns.
This would change things up a bit and the big ships would have to play tackle. This would also mean that there major weakness would be heavy brawlers, with good agility.
I got two likes on the quoted posts, but people really need to realize that liking a comment doesn't keep it as part of the conversation... Sure, like a comment, but if you like it, you need to be talking about it, even if it's just saying "hey, i like this". It's enough to keep it as part of the conversation. Edit: Also, what I mean by "unlock" is the turrets are offlined until you go into bastion mode. If you're one of those that wants your utility for salvage, well, you have to give up something for utility. In this case it would be these small turrets/launchers. However, when bastioned I think you should have the same bonuses as a noctis. This won't obsolete the noctis, as many people like myself feel that the noctis is still way faster if you like to salvage and loot entire rooms.
How do you propose to differentiate between 'small turret hardpoints' and 'large turret hardpoints'? to the best of my knowledge, there isn't nor should there be a mechanic to differentiate here. This just invites somebody to stack 7 large weapons on their marauder.
|
Isinero
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 13:41:00 -
[3866] - Quote
I counted and with 86000 lowest efective HP (EM and thermal will be aproximately same ) . If I will count phased plasma it will be 89000 hp Unfortunately its hard to get it higher If I will count around 14000 per shot of tornados .... its at least 7 shots to instantly kill me. Its nothing cheap if you take in account that ship is expensive but mods cost less than 1 billion it wont be very profitable to shoot me down:-) (but can do it just for fun. But even then its not very expensive if you compare it to other ships which needs to invest much more to have same result...)
Of course there is a possibility to shot more shots in lower sec .... or use other ships. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
451
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 14:13:00 -
[3867] - Quote
Jasper Blanch wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
Ya know, I had an idea once that might just be crazy enough to work.
When in bastion mode you unlock 3 turret/launcher hard points specifically for small weapons. Bastion would give a damage and tracking bonus to those small weapons.
Some people might think this is OP, but look at it closely.
Small ships die at short range, large ships die at med/long range. How do you take one down?
Easy, get small ships out at long range orbiting out of traversal, get big ships under it tanking the small guns and out traversing the large guns.
This would change things up a bit and the big ships would have to play tackle. This would also mean that there major weakness would be heavy brawlers, with good agility.
I got two likes on the quoted posts, but people really need to realize that liking a comment doesn't keep it as part of the conversation... Sure, like a comment, but if you like it, you need to be talking about it, even if it's just saying "hey, i like this". It's enough to keep it as part of the conversation. Edit: Also, what I mean by "unlock" is the turrets are offlined until you go into bastion mode. If you're one of those that wants your utility for salvage, well, you have to give up something for utility. In this case it would be these small turrets/launchers. However, when bastioned I think you should have the same bonuses as a noctis. This won't obsolete the noctis, as many people like myself feel that the noctis is still way faster if you like to salvage and loot entire rooms. How do you propose to differentiate between 'small turret hardpoints' and 'large turret hardpoints'? to the best of my knowledge, there isn't nor should there be a mechanic to differentiate here. This just invites somebody to stack 7 large weapons on their marauder.
I've thought about that being an issue as well. Firstly, if you did fit more large weapons, you wouldn't have nearly enough CPU/grid to fit all 7 and tank, damage mods, utility, and whatever else. However, if you did fit a full rack of 7 large weapons, then 3 of them wouldn't be usable outside of bastion mode, as per my suggestion. This means that you would bastion, be locked in place, with low tank, low utility, and even if you had extremely high dps, you would get pwned by a couple of t1 frigs, if even more than one.
However, I'm not entirely sure that a bad design goal. Go ahead and allow people to fit out like this. This would it give us a high sec POS basher with long range and high dps, but easily countered if you wish to defend.
Personally, I like the idea of doing just what you're suggesting. It adds a lot of spice to the marauder and they'll be be much more designs out there, instead of a one size fits all fitting design.
So, hull gives bonus to large weapons, bastion gives bonus to small weapons, tractors, and salvagers. This allows for several different fits just in the high slots alone.
However, if you don't like that possibility, then it's easy for CCP to fix it so 7 large isn't possible. Give golem 3 turret hard points and bonus to small hybrids. Vargur gets bonuses to small launchers. And someone else can figure out what to do with the Pali and Kronos. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
451
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 14:18:00 -
[3868] - Quote
Oh, and one other thing.
I'm still quite keen on my idea of balancing the resists on marauders.
So, like I said with the golem. Instead of mixed resists the would be 34em, 34therm, 35 kin, 34 exp. This is the same amount of relative points into resists and the golem currently is, only balanced.
This would be unique to marauders, fit the intent and description of marauders, and if we kept in t2 resists, would be much more balanced across the board. So people could stop complaining about fairness of resist profiles. If you did balance resists I don't know that you would need t2 resists. 2 or 3 Invulns and you're set |
Isinero
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 14:46:00 -
[3869] - Quote
if there will be balanced ressists it would be much much much better. But I dont think that they will introduce anything like that.
So I am happy with at least T2 ressist which I get instead of 37,5 % repair amount :-) (active tank is same, but I have also bonus to passive tanking which is nice)
|
Tlat Ij
Hedion University Amarr Empire
48
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 14:48:00 -
[3870] - Quote
Apo Lamperouge wrote:A tech 2 ship should be specialized, not watered down to being a "little bit of this, a little bit of that". Absolutely, since that was supposed to be the how things were rebalanced. as CCP Ytterbium himself stated in the first devblog on rebalancing back on June 3 last year. And in this post, CCP Ytterbium insinuates that CCP does care somewhat about flavor text concerning T2 manufacturers (although he does have a disclaimer about it) and all of the marauders are made by companies that favor all out damage over anything else, indicating that the marauders should have higher damage than any other subcap ship, and in order to be balanced there would need to be sacrifices in other areas. Like not being able to apply that damage AND be mobile, or not be able to receive RR while being able to obliterate everything, which is essentially what the bastion module does.
Quite simply any suggestion that would make the ship viable in PVP would mean a nerf to tank/damage in order to not be OP. Trying to take a ship designed to be the best at PVE and make it viable in PVP is only going to make it a useless mess. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 263 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |