| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc
351
   |
Posted - 2013.09.10 15:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
if they were to be stationary, they would be called castles or something..
i mentioned this in the marauder post, but i dont think they are going to read through 170+ pages so hopefully this catches their eye along with the other 20 marauder posts i have made.
i want to address:
the name marauder in general...
resists
scanning
salvage
tractor beams
tank
alignment time
speed in general
new possible bonus to hp ammount
rep rate
they should be fast strikers, not bricks. they should have t2 resists, mjd bonus, faster scan res for locking, low sensor str (fits the role-they arent designed for continual combat, just quick skirmishes).
they should align quickly and mjd. stop and pounce or get at range and snipe. they dont have to have tons of hp, just good hp and resists.
as i put in my post, they could have a bonus like the damnation (5% to armor or shield per marauder lev showing their training to fight the ship). make it start lower than typical bs (because they are lighter and faster), but once the bonus is full (marauder 5), be above typical bs.
the bastion mode is kewl. it would fit in well with this idea since they are immobile once deployed. it would fit in well with the low sensor str too. once in bastion mode, they are unjammable, but out of bastion mode, they are easily taken out with even the simplist of jamming frigs.
they need their reps back since they will have low tanks.
give them an rr bonus. it fits too. when in bastion mode, they cant be repped, and when out, they are easily jammed )and it cant be OP if its easily jammed).
like 5% per lev to reps, rep range or something. maybe a 5% per lev reduction in cap use for rr modules.
its a pve ship:
it still needs a scan bonus for probing.
it also needs the tractor range enhanced a little more.
a salvage difficulty bonus would be a kewl niche for these over a noctis.
we arent putting salvage rigs on em so we have to deal with basic skills. marauders should get these skills increased. maybe 50% bonus. with a probe launcher, tractor and salvager, we can only fit 1. it takes alot of time to salvage with a non-bonused marauder. give us a reason to use it over a noctis.
pve would still have their pve ships, incursions would have a kewl ship, worm hole goers would be able to tend to each other and salvage without having to call in a noctis, and for those running lev 4's, you still have your anti-jam mode as well. |
Lilliana Stelles
873
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 15:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
The new "marauders" should be renamed to what they do.
Bastion.
I think "marauder" is a more appropriate term for some sort of covert/blops ship or hac.
Incarna from 2009. 3 Years later and what we have doesn't look half as good as this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n41s1Iox18A |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
312
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 15:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'm pretty sure marauders was just a fancy name slapped on a line of T2 BS :(
For proper marauders to really work ingame IMO they need sub-systems, while not to the degree of strategic cruisers IMO they need a certain level of versatility over normal ships.
EDIT: Agree with the post above - Bastion ships should be a line of their own - very specialised T2 ships and Marauders a more generalised line that while aimed at a certain set of tasks is more versatile in its approach. |
Striscio
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 15:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
The name argument make sense as much Industrial Ships build things and Logistic Ships move things around 
Yeah.. fancy name, way more important than skill plans people are making since Trinity according to their needs  . |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc
352
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 16:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rroff wrote:I'm pretty sure marauders was just a fancy name slapped on a line of T2 BS :(
For proper marauders to really work ingame IMO they need sub-systems, while not to the degree of strategic cruisers IMO they need a certain level of versatility over normal ships.
EDIT: Agree with the post above - Bastion ships should be a line of their own - very specialised T2 ships and Marauders a more generalised line that while aimed at a certain set of tasks is more versatile in its approach.
EDIT2: My general thoughts for them are fairly inline with the OP's but for instance I think they should have propulsion sub-systems that let you swap between say MJD bonus, AB bonus, (very) short range jump drive and so on.
i would love a burner bonus or something. i dont use mwd much, but whatever..
the mjd is bad ass though and i love the thought of being able to bounce around and snipe. one doesnt need as much tank if one doesnt get hit.
i just think a ship that gets in and dishs it out, cleans up the mess and goes away is what a marauder is "historically".
fast, tough (not impenatrable), good damage, fast locking to show the element of suprise, etc.
if someone has defenses against marauding bandits (jamming), they should be extremely succeptable (low sensor str).
maybe a faster warp speed. like 4.5 au to "arrive first and shred" |
Lilliana Stelles
874
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 17:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
I would *love* to see a BS with an MWD capacitor use bonus.
I don't think it will ever happen.
The original hyperion concept had one, but it got nerfed before it ever went live.
Incarna from 2009. 3 Years later and what we have doesn't look half as good as this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n41s1Iox18A |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Ex Cinere Scriptor
2691
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 17:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
Just brainstorming here, but what if the ship was bonused in the direction of non targeted armaments?
Friend or Foe missiles, I see them referred to as Auto-Targeting now?
Either way, slap on a 100% damage bonus.
Example, inferno missiles
Auto Targeting cruise missile: 281 thermal
Normal cruise missile: 375 thermal.
100% bonus to Auto Targeting: 562 thermal
Combined with 100% bonus on previous:
Auto Targeting: 1,124 thermal (but not specific to any one target)
Normal: 750 thermal (delivered exactly where you want it)
Both would be limited by target's resistances, of course.
Smart bombs: again, 100% bonus.
Possible regular bomb launcher, bonus debateable if multiple launchers possible.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Luc Chastot
Daktaklakpak.
505
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 17:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
They already do: They have bonuses that make it easier to loot and salvage.
Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Verity Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
520
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 17:54:00 -
[9] - Quote
As I've suggested before:
Role bonus: Immunity to non targeted interdiction (ie, goes through bubbles like a T3)
Marauder Skill bonus:
+1 to warp strength per level
+5% to agility and max velocity per level
So, they'd be really good at evading gate camps
You'd need a HIC or multiple points to catch one. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
1199
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 18:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:The new "marauders" should be renamed to what they do.
Bastion.
I think "marauder" is a more appropriate term for some sort of covert/blops ship or hac.
Well, indeed Marauder and their role explanation in Eve is a bit "messed" up, specially for ships that are mainly focused in pve for a very simple reason: sensor strength on top of some other minor weaknesses.
By minor weaknesses I was thinking about capacitors cpu/pg mids for shield ones lows for armor ones of some specific modules (not the bastion one) to improve their dmg application: low for shield ones and mid for armor ones, racial of course.
What makes this ship that bad for pvp?
Sensor strght x 1000000000-¦, this is the most important factor relegating these ships to pve mainly, then dmg application followed by survivability for hulls worth of a huge amount of isk.
Again, doesn't matter what Pierre or Jacques might think about price/balance and other shiftty economics/market arguments, as players and users or future users we care about price/performances point blank, and atm Marauders are most probably the crappiest ships in eve to even think pvp in for the major part of players.
Navy ships and pirate ships are way much better but then we get in to another problem with current CCP design form, if T2 ships are supposed to be very specialized ships doing something no other hull can do as well then marauders are what?
T1s do as good, Navies are better, Pirate ones are way better and worth of their performances despite their ridiculous prices -maybe Ratlesnake needs a good buff and Machariel a little nerf specially to its ridiculous agility.
This latest proposal (version 2) is a bit better however it still doesn't make Marauders a better choice considering cost/performances, which is what we as users are concerned about. Even the "Transformer" thingy doesn't bring the bang for the buck yet.
yep might be funny a couple times then you pick cheaper doing as well and your Marauder goes to high sec kill rats or gather dust, just like before changes and this is what needs to be changed about these ships, they need to become something you want to undock with and do something else than just kill stupid red crosses.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
|
Balthazar Lestrane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
65
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 18:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:As I've suggested before:
Role bonus: Immunity to non targeted interdiction (ie, goes through bubbles like a T3)
Marauder Skill bonus:
+1 to warp strength per level
+5% to agility and max velocity per level
So, they'd be really good at evading gate camps
You'd need a HIC or multiple points to catch one.
CCP is trying to gear Marauders to fill a small niche in PvP as well as retain their effectiveness in PvE..
And you want to let them mitigate risk by being interdictor nullified AND a warp core bonus? Marauders 5 would give a warp core strength of 6? Can I have what you're smoking? |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc
354
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 19:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
they need to be fast strikers until they hit the stop and shoot button.
then, they will be anchored for 60 seconds. once free, they need to move.
stick and move, stick and move.
resistance to take a blow.
bonuses to pve stuff like scanning and salvaging.
that stuff can be negated while in bastion mode where a new set of bonuses come into play.
but for everyday life, we need an exploration/raider. not a cylon raider, but an explorer/raider. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Ex Cinere Scriptor
2691
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 19:54:00 -
[13] - Quote
Mole Guy wrote:they need to be fast strikers until they hit the stop and shoot button.
then, they will be anchored for 60 seconds. once free, they need to move.
stick and move, stick and move.
resistance to take a blow.
bonuses to pve stuff like scanning and salvaging.
that stuff can be negated while in bastion mode where a new set of bonuses come into play.
but for everyday life, we need an exploration/raider. not a cylon raider, but an explorer/raider.
The version I suggested would have benefits, as well as penalties.
A bonused Marauder would land on grid with targets.
Forget locking anything, activate all weapons.
(The golem would use the missiles as described, and the others could either use auto-targeting weapon equivalents or possibly also launchers)
(As precedent, I point out that the SBs all use torpedo launchers as an option, despite some races having obvious benefits with other weapon platforms)
The Marauder, lined up like a bomber is, simply hits warp after a cycle of launched weapons, and leaves grid, only to return moments later from the other direction, to repeat this.
This would give the Marauder a combat edge, and if it fit a few stabs to block a point, who cares if it's targeting range is diminished?
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Verity Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
521
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 20:08:00 -
[14] - Quote
Balthazar Lestrane wrote:CCP is trying to gear Marauders to fill a small niche in PvP as well as retain their effectiveness in PvE..
And you want to let them mitigate risk by being interdictor nullified AND a warp core bonus? Marauders 5 would give a warp core strength of 6? Can I have what you're smoking?
Warp strength would be 5, but then I guess we're just talking semantics (ie if warp is stopped only when Warp strength < point stregnth, or only when warp strength-point strength >1)
One HIC, and its pinned.
3 scrams (thats still small scale), and its pinned.
Small gangs are typically made of mobile ships, ones that have a decent chance of disengaging and avoiding fights, a BS doesn't really fit the bill, hence, we don't see them.
People would be much more willing to take BSs into small gang combat if they could get away easier.
This won't help for large gate camps.
It won't help it defeat another ship (so I don't think its OPd).
It will help it survive small engagements, and thus it will help get people to take these billion ISK ships out of High sec.
It would be a great small gang PvP ship
The warp strength bonus would also be nice for PvE. |
Balthazar Lestrane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
66
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 02:02:00 -
[15] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:Balthazar Lestrane wrote:CCP is trying to gear Marauders to fill a small niche in PvP as well as retain their effectiveness in PvE..
And you want to let them mitigate risk by being interdictor nullified AND a warp core bonus? Marauders 5 would give a warp core strength of 6? Can I have what you're smoking? Warp strength would be 5, but then I guess we're just talking semantics (ie if warp is stopped only when Warp strength < point stregnth, or only when warp strength-point strength >1) One HIC, and its pinned. 3 scrams (thats still small scale), and its pinned. Small gangs are typically made of mobile ships, ones that have a decent chance of disengaging and avoiding fights, a BS doesn't really fit the bill, hence, we don't see them. People would be much more willing to take BSs into small gang combat if they could get away easier. This won't help for large gate camps. It won't help it defeat another ship (so I don't think its OPd). It will help it survive small engagements, and thus it will help get people to take these billion ISK ships out of High sec. It would be a great small gang PvP ship The warp strength bonus would also be nice for PvE.
Have fun getting blobbed in your 1 bil ISK hulls. I doubt anyone is going to use T2 Marauder hulls for small gang PvP, warp core bonus or not. Risk averse ideas/attitudes don't belong in EVE anyhow. Don't want to lose ships? Stay docked. |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
131
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 05:56:00 -
[16] - Quote
If they really should build around their name,
Give them 5 Weapon hardpoints
Bonus to 100% Afterburner speed / 50% MWD Speed
150% Damage Buff
High Rof Bonus
High Tracking Bonus
100% Tractor Beam range
Bonus to Salvaging
Buff the Sensor Range.
Lower the Overall EHP.
Or in Short make them Attack Battlecruiser like, with the ability to one Shot nearly anything, fly fast as **** and salvage while killing at cost of High SP, ISK and low EHP. |
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Sanctuary Pact
415
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 06:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:they need to become something you want to undock with and do something else than just kill stupid red crosses.
I'll bite:
Why do they need to become that? I mean, when was the last time you wanted to do something other than intended in a Mackinaw or the Rhea? Marauders were designed as highly specialized pve boats and that's what they're supposed to be awesome at. I honestly don't understand why they need to be pushed into a role they were never intended for. What's next, alpha mining barge? |
Alirissa Arji
Ardea Technologies
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 07:19:00 -
[18] - Quote
I do agree that Marauders should be Renamed Bastions...Something about a Flying Fortress in space just tickles me pink...Marauders should be reserved for a line of smaller ships...Potentially a Battlecruiser line separate from the existing Fleet command ships?
Something about Those drakes not having a T2 hull...Idk...
Following the example of what a Marauder actually is, I'd say it sacrifices its precious tank for some serious gank...Missile velocity bonus per level, And a universal damage bonus to top it off, rather than being stuck to scourge missiles as the drake is now.*not saying that its a BAD thing...* The Marauder in this example would sacrifice the existing Warfare link slot, And regain its glory as a 8 missile hard point boat...
So, A more organized Breakdown as an example of the idea...
Hell Hound (T2) Marauder
Hull :Drake
Caldari Battlecruiser:
5% Missile damage per level
10% missile velocity per level
Marauders:
2% Agility per level
5% Missile velocity per level
High slots: 8
Launcher slots 8
Turret Slots:0
Mid slots: 4
Low slots:5
At any rate, that's What I believe it should be...I would love to see that hull at some point see some love... |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
405
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 08:27:00 -
[19] - Quote
If you want them to maraud... I dunno.
Just increase their sensor resolution (a lot) for faster locks and give them something like an interdiction nullifier, leave them as they are otherwise.
The bastion module is a cool idea, but I am beginning to believe that it would be way cooler if every battle ship class vessel could use that.
Stupidity should be a bannable offense.
Also This --> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216699
Please stop making "afk cloak" threads, thanks in advance. |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc
362
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 13:46:00 -
[20] - Quote
the t2 bc idea isnt bad for the name marauder. something fast and hard hitting.
like a tier 3 with t2 resists or something. im just throwing stuff out.
but the actual bs version should be mobile as well.
i still believe it deserves a jump drive for mobility.
its a quick penetration ship. get in deep, shred, get out. even if its jump fuel intense..as long as we have the bay for it, i dont care how much i have to spend.
just go to the edge of good guy space and wait for the cyno.
but...this should remain a damn good pve ship. not be remade a pvp fit.
we need an all in 1 ship for worm holes or deep in areas where we dont have the ability to leave a ship in station for another ship.
im damn sure not going to leave it floating in a pos. |
|
|
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Ex Cinere Scriptor
2718
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 14:03:00 -
[21] - Quote
The Marauder name has an implication of use in raids and attacks, but distinctly separate from regular attempts resulting in sov or other permanent occupation.
The marauder, in common context, comes and raids, takes what they want, but always leaves.
They are the farmer, and the crop is the valued items accumulated and created by those they attack.
They harvest these items, and move to the next crop's harvest.
This ship should be great for roams, but with diminishing returns for use in groups large enough to be called a fleet, or involving any large number of capital ships.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc
364
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 20:23:00 -
[22] - Quote
agreed nick.
maybe give the self rep bonus back but give them -5%/lev on incoming rr...
self reliant.
high, balanced t2 resists, self rep, good scanning, good scan res, etc...
but quick. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Ex Cinere Scriptor
2719
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 20:34:00 -
[23] - Quote
Mole Guy wrote:agreed nick.
maybe give the self rep bonus back but give them -25% on incoming rr (-5% per lev to 0 at marauder 5)...
self reliant, highly skilled only need apply...
balanced t2 resists, self rep, good scan probing, good scan res, etc...
but quick.
Especially quick.
Slow and tanky is only useful against NPC's when you have a perpetual active tank possible.
Otherwise, it creates a need for support to bring targets to it, or allow it to catch the ones who would otherwise escape easily.
It feels incomplete.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
5959
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 20:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
OP lost me by using the word "kewl".
Too bad too, half his ideas weren't completely awful.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings? |
Tarn Kugisa
Infinite Covenant
Forsak3n.
462
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 01:14:00 -
[25] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:The new "marauders" should be renamed to what they do.
Bastion.
I think "marauder" is a more appropriate term for some sort of covert/blops ship or hac.
Tier-3 Battleships should be T2 Black Ops/Assault Ship hybrid, named Marauders
Not sure what the Tier-3 T2 ones would be named however
Abaddon
Rokh
Hyperion
Maelstrom
Now all we have to do is rename the current marauder class to something like bastion except more catchy or better sounding
I Endorse this Product and/or Service
EVE Online Battle Recorder
When I press F1 I get ISK |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |