Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lan Wang
C.Q.B Snuffed Out
3441
|
Posted - 2016.09.06 15:45:47 -
[31] - Quote
when you factor in insurance a carrier is cheaper
Loyalist to Angel Cartel
Your killboard reads like a "how to get farmed 101" - Noah Reese
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
1014
|
Posted - 2016.09.06 22:57:28 -
[32] - Quote
The cost in ISK is not up to CCP, nor a reasonable factor in balancing. Give it up, buddy. Marauders are fine where they are.
They are indeed more expensive now than they have been in the past, to the point that they might cost more than a Carrier (don't know Carrier costs, I don't fly them). Problem is, like others have continually pointed out, Marauders and Carriers are two completely different types of ships in Eve meant for two completely different roles. Changing the build cost, even If any of us agreed with you that something must be done, would hardly do much as that assumes build cost is the only factor in who players buy and sell. You're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If the benefits do not justify the cost in your eyes, then don't buy one and look for something else that does or make one yourself.
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
TomyLobo
Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects
146
|
Posted - 2016.09.08 05:17:48 -
[33] - Quote
With the right mods, carriers will tank way more than a marauder can dream of tanking. |
Christopher Mabata
Sentinel Incorporium
409
|
Posted - 2016.09.09 01:45:26 -
[34] - Quote
You made the age old mistake OP of assuming that the price sets the precedent for ship capability, if this were the case then there would be much less in terms of defined roles and tier-ecide in the game. Its called balancing and while CCP doesn't always land it smack on the chops the first time around ( or the 10th ) they still do well showcasing what a ship should and shouldn't be able to do.
No one ship should do everything, and as always price is a 3rd party factor and plays 0% in what the ship does or will do in terms of the hull. Modules on the other hand is a totally different animal.
GÖú Theory-Crafter GÖú Free Agent GÖú Immortal Space Pirate GÖú "Better the Devil you Know than the devil you don't" -Observing and dismantling F&I Discussion Threads since 2013Gäó
|
Divine Entervention
Brand Newbros Test Alliance Please Ignore
845
|
Posted - 2016.09.11 03:58:29 -
[35] - Quote
Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one. |
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1814
|
Posted - 2016.09.11 04:30:20 -
[36] - Quote
Divine Entervention wrote:Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one. Do you need some gloves to grasp at those straws better? |
Christopher Mabata
Sentinel Incorporium
412
|
Posted - 2016.09.11 04:59:49 -
[37] - Quote
Divine Entervention wrote:Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one.
You seem to be forgetting that you also tried to say a T2 Battleship which happens to be weapons platform based, should be as good as a capital class fighter-carrier formerly drone ship based solely on the fact that they usually cost within a 100m ISK of each other depending on supply and demand and that the latter needs an improvement to justify this.
Literally this is like buying plantains at the supermarket and then returning them because they didn't ripen into bananas despite them being clearly labelled otherwise.
GÖú Theory-Crafter GÖú Free Agent GÖú Immortal Space Pirate GÖú "Better the Devil you Know than the devil you don't" -Observing and dismantling F&I Discussion Threads since 2013Gäó
|
Lan Wang
C.Q.B Snuffed Out
3445
|
Posted - 2016.09.12 08:08:15 -
[38] - Quote
Divine Entervention wrote:Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one.
they dont need buffed...and ive pvp'd in them
Loyalist to Angel Cartel
Your killboard reads like a "how to get farmed 101" - Noah Reese
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
544
|
Posted - 2016.09.13 16:47:37 -
[39] - Quote
Divine Entervention wrote:I disagree.
I feel the benefits do not justify the cost.
then don't buy one
/thread |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2016.09.13 16:56:33 -
[40] - Quote
Divine Entervention wrote:............. Their hulls cost roughly the same as a carrier, yet they're far less capable..............
There's your problem - right there!
Try the cost of an equivalent fit.
But no, carriers cost more when just hulls - and then add fighters........and......
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
|
FT Cold
R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
87
|
Posted - 2016.09.16 19:08:03 -
[41] - Quote
Agree with OP here, their build costs are much too high for what they offer. Rattler does everything in PVE better, except for a few WH sites as tank is almost never an issue in PVE. Their DPS is at t1 levels, which is the real issue for PVE, though I think that's fine as a balancing factor for PVP. Dreads perform the same role much better at similar overall costs if they're fit el cheapo, and carriers are stupid strong for what they cost.
I'd like to see their component cost changed to bring their final cost close to the relationship between HACs and pirate cruisers. They'd be a much more attractive option for PVP use at 5-600m a pop. Even if that were to take place, locking a subcap in place, even for 60s, is a tremendous drawback. I'd like to see most of them get another slot, a mid for the kronos, vargur and golem, and another low for the paladin, as well as cap warfare resistance bonus inherent to the bastion module would go a long way towards offsetting their somewhat anemic DPS. The golem needs to have it's target painter bonus replaced with a second missile application bonus instead of shoehorning the ship into sacrificing a mid slot. The paladin should have the capacitor bonus baked into the hull and get a tracking bonus instead. |
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5146
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 02:57:48 -
[42] - Quote
FT Cold wrote:I'd like to see their component cost changed to bring their final cost close to the relationship between HACs and pirate cruisers. They'd be a much more attractive option for PVP use at 5-600m a pop. Even if that were to take place, locking a subcap in place, even for 60s, is a tremendous drawback. I'd like to see most of them get another slot, a mid for the kronos, vargur and golem, and another low for the paladin, as well as cap warfare resistance bonus inherent to the bastion module would go a long way towards offsetting their somewhat anemic DPS. The golem needs to have it's target painter bonus replaced with a second missile application bonus instead of shoehorning the ship into sacrificing a mid slot. The paladin should have the capacitor bonus baked into the hull and get a tracking bonus instead. Personally, I can't see it myself as the Navy battleship variants are also 500-600m in price. You really can't compare a 1.2b hull that's relatively safe in high-sec to a 1.2b hull that has to risk operating in low and null-sec. If anything I'd like to see a new class of battleships with superior performance specs in the 2b+ price range, because once you've mastered Marauders there's really nothing left to aspire to in high-sec except optimizing your ISK/hr.
Making ISK is relatively easy once you hit that point, so it's not like hard-core mission runners can't afford it, either.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Lelorn Chastot
Albion Scientific Projects
0
|
Posted - 2016.09.24 08:17:40 -
[43] - Quote
coming on forums and whineing for nerfs just cause for whatrever reason something does not suit your opinion is bad form and should be ignored by CCP
Mauraders if you can use them are powerfull but there supposed to endure long trips into the unknown solo . and too me its just sour grapes to ***** about them
|
Arcott Rammathorn
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2016.09.29 16:50:41 -
[44] - Quote
I have to agree with the OP as well. From the stand point of a PVPer there is little to no reason to use this ship in majority situations. You still have significantly better options at 1.2b than using a marauder. There's really no incentive to use the ship in logo based fleets due to bastion mode, but this is where the ship really shines. It's unique that it has this ability, but it's pure uniqueness doesn't offer the risk vs reward factor that other ship offer in both Pvp and Pve. I feel a drastic cost reduction is the solution to this. But, you'd also have to do them for BLOPs - which while expensive for how paper thin they are, their utility makes them sit nicely in the balancing scheme of things right now.
I only see two possible solutions here: 1) lower costs for the marauders 2) give them something more to be desired at their price point. And to be frank, 1,500 dps + in bastion would do this.. |
aldhura
United Miners of New Eden
101
|
Posted - 2016.09.29 18:10:45 -
[45] - Quote
Arcott Rammathorn wrote:I have to agree with the OP as well. From the stand point of a PVPer there is little to no reason to use this ship in majority situations. You still have significantly better options at 1.2b than using a marauder. There's really no incentive to use the ship in logo based fleets due to bastion mode, but this is where the ship really shines. It's unique that it has this ability, but it's pure uniqueness doesn't offer the risk vs reward factor that other ship offer in both Pvp and Pve. I feel a drastic cost reduction is the solution to this. But, you'd also have to do them for BLOPs - which while expensive for how paper thin they are, their utility makes them sit nicely in the balancing scheme of things right now.
I only see two possible solutions here: 1) lower costs for the marauders 2) give them something more to be desired at their price point. And to be frank, 1,500 dps + in bastion would do this..
CCP doesn't control the cost of this. You are able to make them for far less yourself if you manufactured every component. You paying for convenience for someone else doing the work. Same principle as in RL with coffee shops, etc.
|
aldhura
United Miners of New Eden
101
|
Posted - 2016.09.29 18:16:19 -
[46] - Quote
Divine Entervention wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:Numbers don't lie, but people do ;)
An explanation for such numbers is this: zkill has recorded efficiency through the last 5-6 years where carriers have been used in large fleet doctrines within null sec. They were extremely successful and hence their high efficiency.
Marauders were all but useless until the addition of bastion, almost no one flew them in pvp and most kill mails involving one is them being ganked
So yes, numbers don't lie. But the person presenting them with no context to attempt to reinforce a poor argument sure is. Month of August: Golem 29.55% Kronos 39.7% Vargur 52.7% Paladin 33.7% Thanatos 73.3% Chimera 67.8% Archon 87.1% Nidhoggur 58.9% (which this would be a story in itself, having dropped 20% in isk efficiency in august from the previous three months 80% average) All of these ships show steady numbers near what's listed here. Vargu looks ok sitting around an average of 45%-50%, but the Nidhoggur sits around 70% usually. Either way, marauder sux.
Its good to know that its the ship that's bad and not the pilot. I should as per the"numbers which don't lie" get an archon and go PVP and win 87% of the time. garmon, kil2.. I'm coming for you....
|
Arcott Rammathorn
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2016.09.29 19:57:21 -
[47] - Quote
aldhura wrote:Arcott Rammathorn wrote:I have to agree with the OP as well. From the stand point of a PVPer there is little to no reason to use this ship in majority situations. You still have significantly better options at 1.2b than using a marauder. There's really no incentive to use the ship in logo based fleets due to bastion mode, but this is where the ship really shines. It's unique that it has this ability, but it's pure uniqueness doesn't offer the risk vs reward factor that other ship offer in both Pvp and Pve. I feel a drastic cost reduction is the solution to this. But, you'd also have to do them for BLOPs - which while expensive for how paper thin they are, their utility makes them sit nicely in the balancing scheme of things right now.
I only see two possible solutions here: 1) lower costs for the marauders 2) give them something more to be desired at their price point. And to be frank, 1,500 dps + in bastion would do this.. CCP doesn't control the cost of this. You are able to make them for far less yourself if you manufactured every component. You paying for convenience for someone else doing the work. Same principle as in RL with coffee shops, etc.
they are 90% in control of what the prices of the item are by switching build costs/invention costs. 10% is the variation in prices done by the player market. For example: t1 ships. When tiericide hit battleships their production costs skyrocketed - they're all about 200m, where tier 1 battleships were roughly 70m before the balance pass. |
Xander Det89
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2016.10.16 22:58:19 -
[48] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:...If anything I'd like to see a new class of battleships with superior performance specs in the 2b+ price range, because once you've mastered Marauders there's really nothing left to aspire to in high-sec except optimizing your ISK/hr.
Making ISK is relatively easy once you hit that point, so it's not like hard-core mission runners can't afford it, either.
Stealth request for Tech 3 Battleships :P. |
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1533
|
Posted - 2016.10.16 23:50:50 -
[49] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:I love my Marauders. They are the most perfectly balanced ships in the game. Each one is pretty much perfect in it's own right. Keep your ****ing hands off them.
Hahaha...hahhahahahaha...hahaha.
Oh wait, you're serious. A ship that is seriously dangerous to run nullsec ratting anomalies in, because a dread might spawn and volley you into a capsule before you can pull out of bastion is perfect/well balanced, when that ship is supposed to be the pinnacle of pve ability, and no other sub capital or carrier has this same weakness?
Dream on. |
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
707
|
Posted - 2016.10.17 12:07:07 -
[50] - Quote
Arronicus wrote:A ship that is seriously dangerous to run nullsec ratting anomalies in Which is any ship, and especially anything larger than a cruiser.
Quote:because a dread might spawn From what I understand capital spawns are a recent development. Marauders were here years ago, and not built or balanced for an NPC that wouldn't exist for years yet to come.
Quote:and volley you into a capsule before you can pull out of bastion You're bringing an active rep ship to a buffer fight?
Quote:is perfect/well balanced, when that ship is supposed to be the pinnacle of pve ability, and no other sub capital or carrier has this same weakness? I saw another thread on the forums where someone was complaining that their carrier wasn't powerful enough to solo a dread spawn. The recurring reply there from dozens of other forum regulars was, "Radio for backup, you won't be killing it solo". Now, you want highsec ships that can surpass that?
If you're ratting in nullsec, you have the full width and breadth of EvE's arsenal of tools at your disposal. There are ships or tactics that fit your needs, and Marauders aren't it. I don't care how nice they are, if they don't suit your needs, find a tool that does.
Marauders ARE perfectly balanced as ships. Maybe they don't suit your needs, but that just means you need to bark up a different tree to find what you're looking for.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
|
Kilarya Amarri
Mactabilis Simplex Cursus
9
|
Posted - 2016.10.17 17:59:46 -
[51] - Quote
Would like to see assault versions of bastion module more suitable for marauder name mobility (warp and impulse) and dps burst oriented so the ships can hunt other classes of hulls besede battleships.
Kronos and varg would shine that way varg especially some ships got 100km opty but var got 1-2km falloff and got turned in fat immobile pig. |
Songbird
86
|
Posted - 2016.10.17 19:30:10 -
[52] - Quote
Whatcha'talkin'bout - wtih t1 ammo I get like 60 km falloff, with t2 up to 80 km falloff with a Vargur. |
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
198
|
Posted - 2016.10.18 11:27:53 -
[53] - Quote
oiukhp Muvila wrote:Divine Entervention wrote:oiukhp Muvila wrote:Divine Entervention wrote:Marauders need a change. Their hulls cost roughly the same as a carrier, yet they're far less capable.
.. You are comparing apples and oranges, essentially two very different ship roles at two different tech levels. You can't really compare their price relative to their different stats. Marauders were designed as top of the line Tech II mission boats purposely gimped at Pvp. Carriers are designed as entry level Capital Ships with counter sub-cap and counter capital remote warfare capability. You might as well be comparing the prices of toasters to drill presses. Purposefully gimped at pvp? Yes, sensor strength was purposely set low to allow them to be easily jammed, before Bastion Mode was added years after they were originally released. Bastion Mode changes that, at a cost of immobility while it is active.
Yes because ECCM isn't a thing. Rather you are given the option of always being down a midslot to buffer your sensor or not.
Kilarya Amarri wrote:Would like to see assault versions of bastion module more suitable for marauder name mobility (warp and impulse) and dps burst oriented so the ships can hunt other classes of hulls besede battleships.
Kronos and varg would shine that way varg especially some ships got 100km opty but var got 1-2km falloff and got turned in fat immobile pig.
... Or build the ship focused on that goal.
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1535
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 19:13:27 -
[54] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:Arronicus wrote:A ship that is seriously dangerous to run nullsec ratting anomalies in Which is any ship, and especially anything larger than a cruiser. Quote:because a dread might spawn From what I understand capital spawns are a recent development. Marauders were here years ago, and not built or balanced for an NPC that wouldn't exist for years yet to come. Quote:and volley you into a capsule before you can pull out of bastion You're bringing an active rep ship to a buffer fight? Quote:is perfect/well balanced, when that ship is supposed to be the pinnacle of pve ability, and no other sub capital or carrier has this same weakness? I saw another thread on the forums where someone was complaining that their carrier wasn't powerful enough to solo a dread spawn. The recurring reply there from dozens of other forum regulars was, "Radio for backup, you won't be killing it solo". Now, you want highsec ships that can surpass that? If you're ratting in nullsec, you have the full width and breadth of EvE's arsenal of tools at your disposal. There are ships or tactics that fit your needs, and Marauders aren't it. I don't care how nice they are, if they don't suit your needs, find a tool that does. Marauders ARE perfectly balanced as ships. Maybe they don't suit your needs, but that just means you need to bark up a different tree to find what you're looking for.
You're missing the point I'm getting at, Marauders run anomalies like sanctums, because they're highly efficient at it, but if you get a dreadnaught spawn near the start of your next bastion cycle, you're dead. I'm not talking about bringing a marauder to kill a carrier, I'm not talking about trying to kill it solo, I'm talking about using the marauder for it's intended purpose, and getting alpha'd off the field because you're in siege, because you got unlucky with the spawn. No other ship faces this same penalty, for the task it is intended to run for.
|
Joseppi Luminari
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 14:00:04 -
[55] - Quote
I dont know what all the haters are arguing about?
his point is simple and you just dont understand it. hes not comparing the marauder and a capital, hes comparing their cost to use ratio.... a capital ship is capable of impacting the game much much much more than a marauder is.
a marauder is a mission running/PVE ship and it costs 2-3 times more than every other mission running ship with arguably no benefit in its mission running capabilities. the fact that this mission running ship costs as much as a capital ship is the only comparison he made and a 100% valid irrefutable argument. a capital ship makes a much bigger impact to the game than a marauder can but they cost the same, that is the problem.
that being said, the only way to rectify that is to make the ship easier to make. has nothing to do with its capabilities. reducing the materials needed to make it would certainly do the trick unless every single person who makes these ships are in cahoots, it will absolutely drive the price down. plus, if theyre more reasonable to make, more people will make them. supply goes up, cost comes down, more people will buy them so demand will go up, it will level out.
They should cost between 400-600 million for what they're intended to be used for. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |