| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
   |
Posted - 2007.10.24 17:59:00 -
[1]
There is already better Raven version with better tanking ability. It is Rattlesnake. CNR happened to be the gank version of Raven and thus has extra launcher slot.
And idea to use Marauder as salvaging ship .. hmmm .. indeed. Thats pretty good idea actually. Caldary one is somewhat low on low slots, but with that nice base cargospace it would still be adequate for almost all level 4 missions.
I might even start looting again if I can just jump to each stage and collect it all in reasonable timeframe. So not entirely useless for missions afterall 
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:01:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Akita T
CNR gets +16.6% DPS right off the bat, and CAN fit a 4th damagemod if it really wants to due to faction tank effectiveness, for an additional +5.9% DPS (T2) or +6.6% DPS (CN BCS), for a grand total of +17.65% DPS with T2 mods or +17.76% DPS with CN mods compared to the base Raven version.
Actually CNR does not even need to use faction tank to fit 4th damagemod. I use 4 of them + signal amp II in my low slots in cruise missile setup with just T2 tank. It would also possible to fit 5th BCU without problems, but signal amp II is slightly better for those select few missions where rats start out from ~120 km. I also have room for one target painter in that setup and no problems tanking level 4 missions (yes - T2 tank, not faction, no I don't need to warp out in missions). Torp raven would need some faction gadgets in tank section also tho to pull off 4 BCU's, but meh - torps are not going to be viable for missions anyway when that patch comes.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 05:16:00 -
[3]
Originally by: FT Diomedes
Originally by: Akita T
Unless suddendly most missions ALLOW MWDs, no other changes they could possibly make will influence that in favor of the Marauders... in case they decide to spam us full of frigates in L4s, guess what, it's Drake/NH then.
The trend in recent mission changes has been to have fewer ships, with higher bounties - as in Recon Part 1.
Well one thing they can do to make marauders more attractive is smaller waves with longer pauses between then, but it's rather lame. Almost as lame as 80 km between gates and nothing to kill while you wade last 50 km. Another possibility would be if they would change NPC's in missions so that they will like to get close and personal, but it would kinda shaft turret battleships without tracking or web bonuses for missions.
I personally just hate wave based missions without triggers. It's just so damn boring twiddle my thumbs for something like 3 .. 4 minutes waiting the next wave to spawn. Like Tech secrets on lev 3 and to smaller extent new recon 1 of 3 on lev 4 (if I want to kill them all).
Those are rather unlikely tho as under the need for speed iniative it was announced that CCP is trying to replace small ship swarm (like massive attack) with fewer bigger guys.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 19:38:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Kerfira
A T2 fitted CNR has a hard time keeping an XL perma-tank up and still fit 3 BCU's, whereas this is much easier on the Golem.
I would also to like to point out that you don't need permatank for lev 4 missions. You need to last long enough to do them without needing to warp out.
I use faction only in 'gank' section on CNR and are able to do all of them with just T2 tank (having also target painter in there) using cap injector. Altho granted, it can get tricky in laggier locations. For those who can afford it faction tank adds some comfort for not having to babysit their shieldboosters.
Whats best - CNR with faction 'gank' and T2 tank is approx the same price as Golem base hull shall be. It's also not cost effective to suidice gank it as if approx half modules survive they will not cover the insurance + fitting costs needed to kill it before concord.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 08:06:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ath Amon
to use these ships to salvage in mission is not a real option... just go back grab your favoured nano/cargo bs equipped with 8 salvagers/beams and run back... it will be way way faster than to use the ones of marauder...
only scenario when this can be helpfull is for ratting
Oh ofc it's option if you are chaining them in CNR. Rats die so fast that wreks sit in nice tight clusters. With 40km and 1000 m/s tractors you can loot all level 4 missions what are currently worth looting isk/h wise without moving an inch (not all lev 4 missions are worth looting/salvaging) slightly faster than you can currently in salvage fitted destroyer/interdictor. Those with 80 km between wreks or crap loot/salvage (like gurista) are not worth looting isk/h wise currently and will not be so with marauders either (if your running speed is high enough, and it is in faction fitted CNR).
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 07:26:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sylper Illysten
After the resonding Dev response to the carrier nerf threads, does anyone else find the complete lack of Dev response to the Marauder concern threads to be just another slap in the face to mission runners?
Not really. They propably intended it that way and are quite content with current stats on them. They are good pvp boats and very good tanks. Damage wise well ... not so stellar but I have feeling they really did not want to make missionrunning any faster than it's already is.
It's already quite hard to balance missions so that they would be doable with all battleship class vessels and you would not run out of targets 50km before next gate even in good ship with good skills (it actually happens in some missions still if you are riding pimped raven).
|
| |
|