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) |

Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
2666
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:13:00 -
[1381] - Quote
I'm in favor of all theses changes, just responding to fenistill:
fenistil wrote:
DSpite, have you ever seen solo 10 of 10s being done? Or actually havens and sanctums are kind of tough to do solo. Now you could sit in small haven at the spawn point in your Vargur with 100km rnage and destroy everything with a t2 medium shield booster providing all the tank you need.
Every 10/10 except Blood Raider Naval Shipyard is easily soloable in ships like Rattlesnakes and Tengus (and now with the MJD, all lots of other ships). i know because I've done all of them.
I already sit still with a machariel in havens and only move in sanctums to get closer to rats, all with a medium faction booster fit and not having to lock myself down for someone to catch me. If sanctums and havens are hard to tank, there's something wrong with your fit. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:13:00 -
[1382] - Quote
The idea seems to be a solution in search of a problem. The main driving reason(s) given by CCP is that you wish to expand the use of the Marauders from PVE focused ships to a dual role into PVP use. The current proposed changes simply do not fulfill that. The main problem I learned about when I was a brand spanking new pilot and sought to learn to one day pvp in a Golem was a two-fold problem that plagues the Marauders as a viable PVP ship. The first and most hindering aspect for PVP use of all Marauders is their extremely weak sensor strength. The second is their relatively weaker dps compared to the cost of the hulls of other ships in their price range(s). This new bastion solves only half the problem while creating an entirely new one of complete immobility. The Golem and all Marauders in general are already very slow thus justifying the tractor range and speed bonus that tractors get on these ships. Making them slower to artificially create a need for the MJD is just something that should not be done. Pilots out to fly the ships as they like without being herded into some fixed fit just cause you like to see pilots using the MJD more. If anything make the MJD a variable distance module and you might get your wish of seeing more of them used effectively. The change while drastic and essentially fixing one aspect of why Marauders are not used for pvp by making them immune to EW under bastion mode does not solve the second reason which is they will die to half competent pilots quite easily. They will be big fish in a barrel that regenerate their bodies, but die once they run out of calories to burn(capacitor). This is not a bad thing entirely, but makes them good at one thing and that is bait ships. I suggest that if you really want to see Marauders used in PVP you simply have to increase sensor strength by an amount that would make them difficult to jam by all but skilled and fitted dedicated EW ships. That is one of the main reasons to never use them to PVP ever. The second problem is dps or more importantly applied dps. The fact that a damage bonus is missing on the new bastion mode is an obvious and glaring issue with Marauders now if the changes stay as they are. Marauders do not so much lack in the tank department as they lack in the applied dps. Marauders as they are now tank well enough on their own for their tanks not being the issue for not being used for PVP their damage is. Increasing the effective applied dps on these ships would see their use in PVP more likely and viable alternative to Faction/Pirate battleships. The drone capacity decrease is also poorly served as the current changes lower the full sets of of drones one can carry to combat smaller and faster ships. The bandwidth change is not as crippling and effectively locks them out from using drones as an effective backup weapon system so I don't entirely disagree, but just makes them less worth for their main role as PVE ships. To end my rant i will just say that the proposed changes while seemingly impressive and pvp enabling are hardly that and will only highlight the obvious deficiencies with the Marauders class as a whole for viable PVP.Current changes make for great and long KM gang kills and bait ships. Yeah they will see more PVP use initially, but once they prove how niche their use will snow dive. |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
281
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:21:00 -
[1383] - Quote
Zeus Maximo wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Here is a counter-proposal:
"The marauder class battleship is an evolution of tried and tested hulls, designed for extended sorties behind enemy lines. Marauders focus on dealing damage and evading capture by the enemies of the empire. As such, marauders have built in technology that gives them:
5% bonus to base speed per level 18% per level reduction in effectiveness of inbound webifiers Microwarp drives immune from the effects of warp scramblers.
(note, they still may not enter warp if disrupted or scrambled)
Emissions from these bulky and unstable high-tech propulsion units has a debilitating effect on sensor arrays and thus the sensor strengths of these ships is known to be weak, leaving them susceptible to battlefield interference. (sensor strength unchanged)"
Web bonuses replaced with 5%/level cap recharge bonus.
Now the marauder can carry on PVEing nicely, has a chance to slip through gate camps/get back to gate, can apply a little battlefield dps until neutralised with ECM and can slip away - justifying the price tag.
It can also get between mission gates more quickly, so isk/hr goes up a little. The extra cap allows use of MWD for better positioning with short range weapons.
Now what do I buy? A vindicator/machariel that does PVE very quickly but which if caught, must fight and die? Or a marauder which is not overly suited to PVP, but can generally slip away if things are not going well?
How the hell does a PVPer catch this thing if it can MJD out of trouble every single time? "Microwarp drives immune from the effects of warp scramblers." That is MASSIVE!
no mate. Micro WARP drive, so you can burn back to gate. Not micro JUMP drive :-)
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |

Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:24:00 -
[1384] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Here is a counter-proposal:
"The marauder class battleship is an evolution of tried and tested hulls, designed for extended sorties behind enemy lines. Marauders focus on dealing damage and evading capture by the enemies of the empire. As such, marauders have built in technology that gives them:
5% bonus to base speed per level 18% per level reduction in effectiveness of inbound webifiers Microwarp drives immune from the effects of warp scramblers.
(note, they still may not enter warp if disrupted or scrambled)
Emissions from these bulky and unstable high-tech propulsion units has a debilitating effect on sensor arrays and thus the sensor strengths of these ships is known to be weak, leaving them susceptible to battlefield interference. (sensor strength unchanged)"
Web bonuses replaced with 5%/level cap recharge bonus.
Now the marauder can carry on PVEing nicely, has a chance to slip through gate camps/get back to gate, can apply a little battlefield dps until neutralised with ECM and can slip away - justifying the price tag.
It can also get between mission gates more quickly, so isk/hr goes up a little. The extra cap allows use of MWD for better positioning with short range weapons.
Now what do I buy? A vindicator/machariel that does PVE very quickly but which if caught, must fight and die? Or a marauder which is not overly suited to PVP, but can generally slip away if things are not going well?
and ye wonder why ccp ignore you... If in doubt...do...excessively. |

Zeus Maximo
Mentally Assured Destruction
417
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:27:00 -
[1385] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
no mate. Micro WARP drive, so you can burn back to gate. Not micro JUMP drive :-)
Even worse..... The other changes he suggested would diminish webbing effects on the ship. Even then.... How would one stop one of these ships from getting away? |

Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
434
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:31:00 -
[1386] - Quote
Zeus Maximo wrote: How the hell does a PVPer catch this thing if it can MJD out of trouble every single time?
"Microwarp drives immune from the effects of warp scramblers."
That is MASSIVE!
scanners and/or fitting for long range
jump past me I still shoot you jump away I have a warpin in seconds
|

MBizon Osis
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:36:00 -
[1387] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Meyr wrote:I'm thinking that a few Carriers and Dreads at all IV, and able to be fully insured, will be preferable to an equal number of Marauders (even at all V), in the eyes of most 0.0 alliance leaders or FC's.
Honestly, I'm not sure why CCP feels the need to go in this direction. There has been ample need for a higher-end PVE ship for years, as evidenced by the way these ships are used. There are any number of hulls that are very good at PVP, but absolutely suck rocks at PVE. If you're okay with that, it stands to reason that you should be equally happy with a bare few ships that are too expensive for true PVP, but work well as a PVE investment.
If you want a way for your Goon buddies to grief hisec carebears, how about simply creating a new hull category, like you did with Tier 3 BC's, and leave what had been a marginally successful hull series focused upon its original purpose - turning rats into ISK.
Unless you're going to revamp the gate-to-gate footprint of half of the mission maps, your proposed changes are worse than useless. Micro Jump Drives will put you 40 kilometers PAST the gate, decreased mobility makes getting to the next gate an even more lengthy proposition (but I'm guessing you're okay with that, since it gives the mission gankers more time to scan down and kill those evil mission runners), you take away the drone bays (REALLY? ONE flight of Medium Drones for a Gallente battleship? At long last, have you no shame?), no added CPU (meaning that your gankers will still get sexy drops), and you expect the mission-running player base to be happy?
The only ones happy with this are your true target audience - Goons, and those like them, who hate everyone they refer to as 'carebears', and who go out of their way to grief them. You've given them the perfect platform with which to grief small, non-aligned, 2 & 3-man industrial corps doing T2 invention in a hisec POS.
The Law of Unintended Consequences - look it up. Meyr, it is a waste of time even discussing this. The pandemic legion guy is involved in wrecking this ship class, and he HATES PvE. He is used to massive moon goo as income, and has zero use for anyone who grinds to pay for anything. (This is the same guy who said on the forums that anyone who did not vote in the CSM elections he does not have to listen to) This is the same guy who wrecked small and heavy drones in missions, and ignored over 100 pages of people screaming how bad an idea it was, (and still is). He will ignore any feedback on this, just as he does about any PvE mechanic. I use a Paladin in Incursions, and it is losing about 8% DPS(120 DPS lost from going from 3 Garde II"s to 1), its ability to web frigates in close (2 webs at 90% effectiveness slowed down a ship to 1% of its base speed, now it will be 16%, a 16 fold drop in effectiveness). The improvement in optimal range? Who ******* cares? I was already shooting stuff in optimal at 20 km with a properly fit Paladin. Further, it will be impossible to micromanage the timing on that bastion module (60-64 seconds minimum timer) to have it time out the precise moment the incursion finishes, so we will have entire fleets sitting their holding their manparts, while all the timers run out, before moving to the next site, hence another big loss in ISK/hour. When you factor in the 30 plus % nerf to armour bonuses , and the 30 plus % nerf to web range bonuses next week, and THEN the loss of the OGB (which the pandemic legion guy has guaranteed is happening soon), anyone using a Paladin or Kronos in an Incursion is righteously screwed in armour incursion fleets. This was another premeditated attack on high sec income, since the null sec cartels apparently can't make enough money now, and need to drive more serfs into null for the cartels to maintain their income stream. (btw, listen to the Crossing Zebra's industry podcast near the end where one of the goon CSM members says that the moon goo drop in prices is a temporary thing)
+1 |

Razefummel
unknown dimension Alpha Volley Union
604
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:38:00 -
[1388] - Quote
Would someone PLEASE explain where this change has something comon with balancing ? Just give the Marauder Class Battleships more Sensorstreingh and the PvP-Balancing is absolutly done. just saying.
Greetings
Raze 21 Tage Trial: https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=5a429c6a-3cfd-4ecd-8ffc-0d8921dbbaad&action=buddy Difficile est saturam non scribere. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:41:00 -
[1389] - Quote
Zeus Maximo wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
no mate. Micro WARP drive, so you can burn back to gate. Not micro JUMP drive :-)
Even worse..... The other changes he suggested would diminish webbing effects on the ship. Even then.... How would one stop one of these ships from getting away? I agree this would be a bad change and would drastically change mechanics. My view is like their class name suggest Marauders ought to be Marauding rather than being turned into fixed gun and missile batteries. If anything id like to see this new bastion mode be more like a marauding mode where speed and damage is increased letting them do their thing called marauding.
|

Tanik Fera
Transcendent Sedition Dustm3n
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:45:00 -
[1390] - Quote
I believe it was mentioned there would be medium and small MJDs introduced in the future. Is this still in the works? As far as for PVP will the MJD bonus on marauders be made less relevant in 6 months, a year? |
|

Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:46:00 -
[1391] - Quote
 If in doubt...do...excessively. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:53:00 -
[1392] - Quote
Razefummel wrote:Would someone PLEASE explain where this change has something comon with balancing ? Just give the Marauder Class Battleships more Sensorstreingh and the PvP-Balancing is absolutly done. just saying.
Greetings
Raze I agree and perhaps some more base speed and/or bonus prop module(s). |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
281
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:58:00 -
[1393] - Quote
Zeus Maximo wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
no mate. Micro WARP drive, so you can burn back to gate. Not micro JUMP drive :-)
Even worse..... The other changes he suggested would diminish webbing effects on the ship. Even then.... How would one stop one of these ships from getting away?
That's rather the point. It gives PVE players a chance to do pve in hostile space....
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:02:00 -
[1394] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:Came looking for marauders, found seebees, left disappointed. Perhaps CCP should change the name of the class of ships to seebees and then the class would make more sense.
|

Just Lilly
117
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:15:00 -
[1395] - Quote
CCP should add +2 warpstrength to all marauders, they are suppose to be annoying and harassing
+5 warpstrength while in bastion mode
Just for laughs  Powered by Nvidia GTX 690 |

Battle Cube
Cubes' Freakout Room.
16
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:22:00 -
[1396] - Quote
Any hope for dev reply on whether or not they are still going in this direction for marauders? :( |

Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
281
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:24:00 -
[1397] - Quote
on a Sunday? sir you have no heart... :) A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:28:00 -
[1398] - Quote
Just Lilly wrote:CCP should add +2 warpstrength to all marauders, they are suppose to be annoying and harassing +5 warpstrength while in bastion mode Just for laughs  Perhaps +1 warp-strength has merit in allowing a pilot to actually make use of a MJD before turning into a wreck and the +5 might as well be +9000 warp-strength in bastion mode for all the good and just for the lulz. If CCP adds this +9000 warp-strength I wont cancel my account as a result of ruining the ship class id like to pvp in. |

kahn liam
Boosters Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:54:00 -
[1399] - Quote
Don't get rid of the pali/kronos webs! way more usefull then some increase in turret falloff, imo. |

Marc McIntyre Crendraven
The Knights of Retribution
8
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:03:00 -
[1400] - Quote
I don't think i have ever used the stasis bonus on the paladin, frigs hardly ever get that close so the optimal range bonus makes more sense. as for the kronos, i prefer the fall-off bonus but the web bonus is still useful. |
|

kahn liam
Boosters Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:27:00 -
[1401] - Quote
Marc McIntyre Crendraven wrote:I don't think i have ever used the stasis bonus on the paladin, frigs hardly ever get that close so the optimal range bonus makes more sense. as for the kronos, i prefer the fall-off bonus but the web bonus is still useful. it's pretty usefull for using in conjunction with blap dreads and cheaper then vindis....
granted with the complete roll change they might not even be used for that any longer, but still i'd rather the webs then the falloff. maybe that's just me. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:27:00 -
[1402] - Quote
I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance. Sensor strength increase seems like something that should have been looked into and wondering if and what the results were as well in terms of balance or the imbalance it created. |

Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
122
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:28:00 -
[1403] - Quote
Marc McIntyre Crendraven wrote:I don't think i have ever used the stasis bonus on the paladin, frigs hardly ever get that close so the optimal range bonus makes more sense. as for the kronos, i prefer the fall-off bonus but the web bonus is still useful. Not having the web bonus is a major kick in the teeth, because that translates to a 400% increase in target velocity. If they want to give the Kronos a 400% bonus to blaster tracking to compensate I'm down with that, but I very much doubt it would happen....
Also there is a ridiculous assertion in this thread that the 90% web bonus was overpowered:
Large blasters are an oddity - sub 10km optimal on a very slow platform, fundamentally only really works if you can pin down any targets straying in range to near stationary. Overpowered? not really, because you simply kite said slow, lumbering platform outside of 13km. I should also point out, from the perspective of someone who extensively flew blasterthrons back in the day of 90% webs (2004-2008), that it was still perfectly viable back then to get in under the guns in frigate sized platforms (heck if you got close enough in a cruiser you could still mess up tracking sufficiently), the only recourse the blasterthron pilot had was to 'tickle' the MWD to attempt to pull a little bit of range.
In the days of MWD-killing scrams, boosted afterburners, and tracking disrupters bolted into spare mid slots, 90% webs on a lumbering vulnerable Battleship platform are in no way overpowered.
P.s back in the day the Kronos had 99% webs....
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |

kahn liam
Boosters Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:29:00 -
[1404] - Quote
Nano Quantum wrote:I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance.
The last thing EVE balance needs is another "fast skirmish" situation, since this role is decidedly cramped thanks to a plethora of ships that excel at it. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:40:00 -
[1405] - Quote
kahn liam wrote:Nano Quantum wrote:I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance. The last thing EVE balance needs is another "fast skirmish" situation, since this role is decidedly cramped thanks to a plethora of ships that excel at it. I suppose if they did not explore this possible alternative mode this would be a very valid reason for not doing so since there are ships that fit that more or less. It would be telling however to know how much concept testing they did into changing this class. |

Razefummel
unknown dimension Alpha Volley Union
604
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 21:46:00 -
[1406] - Quote
Maybe this incredible Idea was from "CCP EA" because EA was known for its perfectly balanced Game Mechanics and Units in their Games... who knows?
I don-Št like the Idea of the "Cynobaiting Highsec-Dreads" witch is presented here...
21 Tage Trial: https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=5a429c6a-3cfd-4ecd-8ffc-0d8921dbbaad&action=buddy Difficile est saturam non scribere. |

Big rEy
ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 21:48:00 -
[1407] - Quote
The bastion does not make a marauder strong enough for incursions or level 5, and it does not make it faster in L4. Don't care about PvP. It's a marauder. It's for PvE. I do like the transformation thing, but without a damage buff, it's useless. My character has 4.6 mil SP, most of them in scan & salvaging and I still can do The Assault and Worlds Collide without problems in a 1.2 bil RNI and the bonus room from angel/guristas extravaganza it's a joke for my tank. A golem will be even better at tanking. So it's not a necesity to bring more tank ( I do not complain, I like it, more it's better) for PvE and the pourpres of a marauder, it will be better to give more dps, or even better to give both tank and dps. Now, the bastion it's a bonus in PvP in my noob/new player opinion but how can you fight in a marauder vs 2 bs + decent logi with just 1.400 DPS in a torp golem? If you want to be used in PVP, make the bastion module give some damage buffs. The golem have gained +200mil on jita, from 0.95 to over 1.25 bil since this announce. It's too expensive, more than a pirate BS, so why would not be better than one? And if ccp is working on marauders, make the range bonus of tractor beam better. 60-70km ore more :P Just my opinion as a new and inexperienced player of eve online. Always I will be ready to meet the next challenge even if is bigger that me ! |

Cassius Invictus
Thou shalt not kill Exiled Ones
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 22:09:00 -
[1408] - Quote
Big rEy wrote:The bastion does not make a marauder strong enough for incursions or level 5, and it does not make it faster in L4. Don't care about PvP. It's a marauder. It's for PvE. I do like the transformation thing, but without a damage buff, it's useless. My character has 4.6 mil SP, most of them in scan & salvaging and I still can do The Assault and Worlds Collide without problems in a 1.2 bil RNI and the bonus room from angel/guristas extravaganza it's a joke for my tank. A golem will be even better at tanking. So it's not a necesity to bring more tank ( I do not complain, I like it, more it's better) for PvE and the pourpres of a marauder, it will be better to give more dps, or even better to give both tank and dps. Now, the bastion it's a bonus in PvP in my noob/new player opinion but how can you fight in a marauder vs 2 bs + decent logi with just 1.400 DPS in a torp golem? If you want to be used in PVP, make the bastion module give some damage buffs. The golem have gained +200mil on jita, from 0.95 to over 1.25 bil since this announce. It's too expensive, more than a pirate BS, so why would not be better than one? And if ccp is working on marauders, make the range bonus of tractor beam better. 60-70km ore more :P Just my opinion as a new and inexperienced player of eve online.
Sry Mate, but you really don't see any advantages in lvl 4 mission running with proposed changes? The ECM immunity alone will make a lot of missions much much faster. Increased range also.
CCP, just and idea: why don't you add a 50% damage bonus to racial SMALL weapons. How would you like to see marauder fitted with mixed weaponry (as a true battleship should)? It would compensate for web and drone loss, allow for alternate use of high slots, and make a unique and fun ship. |

Teantis
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 22:14:00 -
[1409] - Quote
I honestly can't see this as turning marauders into anything except more gimmicky versions of what they already are. The bastion module is going to have very limited use in actual PVP because an increase in active tank, sizable though it is, isn't worth the tradeoff in terms of mobility, especially on a battleship size hull. Battleships are already very vulnerable to blap dreads, and making them stationary will only make them more so, especially since active tanks don't really do anything to combat a ship that can just straight up alpha you off the field. The MJD bonus is similarly gimmicky, as they're mainly used in larger fleets where marauders are cost-prohibitive. Also, removing the web bonus from the paladin and kronos, which is the main reason you see any marauders used in pvp at all at this time, strikes me as a bad idea if you want to encourage them to be used in pvp in the first place.
With that said, the bastion mode is going to be hilarious for pve, where you'll be able to get a null kronos with a ridiculous active tank applying damage reliably at 60km, rather than the 35 or so you max out at now. It'll especially make doing the serpentis sites with the rats that orbit at ~50km much less painful in a kronos, and you won't really miss the webs, which I personally very rarely used while doing sites with the kronos anyway, because you can replace them with double TCs instead.
In all I don't think these changes will actually achieve your goal of more marauders used in pvp, but will make them hilarious pve rapemachines. |

MBizon Osis
State War Academy Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 22:14:00 -
[1410] - Quote
This is going to be a composite post made of several separate quotes I feel are a cogent analysis of the Dev's proposed marauder changes.
"You are wrecking both the Kronos and Paladin by removing a key element: the web bonuses, plus gimping all of them in DPS by nerfing the drone bays." "and lose DPS because the drone bandwidth is one third of what it was." 'DPS=drones + turrets/launchers Give them all the ability to use heavies/sentires. that would help to bridge the gap as mentioned above" "i would agree that losing the drones and web buff would just make these a huge liability in PvE, yeah you could tank for a long time but that will do little to help you deal with the frigs that get close and keep you scrammed and webbed. would make marauders mostly a liability in a mission" "the thing that keeps them on the side line for PvP now is their stupidly low sensor strength. no point bringing in a bs that can easily be perma jammed by 1 flight of light ecm drones." "Now that I look at it again, the drone bay thing is really hideous. The Vindicator has 11 effective turrets and 125mbit drone bandwidth. Please give these at least 100mbit/175m3." "I think if you wanted to see these ships in PVP all you had to do was increase the sensor strength and make no other changes whatsoever. They were fine." "I prefer the same flexibility with mediums too. So, 2 flights of lights, 2 flights of mediums, and 1 flight of salvage ... :) Too much to ask for?75 for the lights + salvage ... then 100 more for the medium drone options for Amarr and Galente. :)" "The MJD bonus is okay, but it doesn't resolve the main reason why Marauders aren't used in PvP; the fact that a frigate with 5 light ECM drones can keep a Marauder permanently jammed, due to it's horrid sensor strength. And since they can be so easily jammed, no one wants to risk a 700 mil ship that can be completely neutralized. You want to fix them? Make their sensor strength the same or better than their T1 variants. You will then see them in more fleets." "Paladin needs the cap bonus changed. Bake that into the hull, then add something else. A tracking bonus would be nice, especially without drones. " "I fly the Kronos more then any other ship in eve, and i am training the Paladin now. Tell me what is the point of killing anything outside of 40KM range in a ship that cant move. Your making it so stuff takes longer. And a nerf to the drones?? At the moment i fly with a set of salvage, scout and change between a set of 5 medium or 3 heavy/sentry drones. I always thought this ship would be getting more drone ability, not less. Not one of these changes has addressed that fact that other (pirate) ships do better then these ships. The changes seem great for PVP But not one single person who has trained these skills for this ship has done so for this reason. I think you are giving new people a reason to train these at the expensive of everyone that trained these for their original purpose." "No offense, highsec mission runners didn't need this. IMHO leaivng the tank alone and increasing the damage output of marauders over other BSes would have been far more useful as you would still have your "ultimate carebearmobile" but it would also be usable by lowsec/nullsec mission runners, nullsec ratters, and even good in some classes of wormholes." "i would have been happy if all they did was increase the PG and left the rest the same.... If you want to be this radical, the dps boost should be added to bastion mode. And why you gotta take away my drones? i like not taking years to kill PVE frigates.....thats just a smack in the face. Its not like they give use damage boost" "Second, wrecking the drone bay is simply dumb. People use that for Sentry DPS, or salvage drones. Why are you gimping the effective DPS on these ships? And please don't talk to me about how the improved range on guns will improve effective DPS. On long range stuff, sure. But try running Buzzkill, or the 2nd room of Worlds Collide, where stuff is ON TOP of you, when you land." "Really doesn't make sense to reduce the drone bay space so drastically on these big ships.. it's nonsense, please don't do it, the reduction in drone bandwidth is just as ridiculous." A big +1 to every one of these points of view. Thank you MB
|
|
|
|
|
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 |