| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
   |
Posted - 2007.10.24 06:56:00 -
[1]
Ok, so they're not specifically designed ONLY for missionrunning, as the initial devblog mentioning them just had to state.
But they were designed with "missionrunning" in mind.
At least, to a point. The best proof for that ?
The tractor beam bonus, for starters, and the insane cargohold as a nice touch.
However, we do have a problem with them.
They are by far NOT the best missionrunners from their class.
They are still overshadowed by their faction counterparts.
So, you are tempted to say "but what, that's not a problem at all".
Well, I beg to differ ! And quite strongly. They should be BETTER at missionrunning as their faction counterparts.
"Huh, are you insane ? Why should they be better as faction BS ?"
Well, let's look at all other faction ships then, shall we ?
ALL faction frigates and cruisers are only a bit better as their T1 counterparts (where appliable), but with a decent hitpoints bonus, and the ease of use (meaning, low skill requirements).
However, the T2 counterparts (AFs/HACs) are FAR better at whatever the T1/faction ships are, and not only because of the higher resists bonuses. On the downside, they are slightly harder to fit properly, and require a LOT of skills to get into (and then some to properly fly).
Oh, and they (the T2s) are MUCH cheaper as the faction versions. MUCH, MUCH cheaper, almost without exception.
Now, with Marauders, you not only get a ship that's not much better as its T1 counterpart, and in some cases, it's worse as its faction counterpart.
To add insult to injury, initial estimates put the "stabilized" pricetag of a Marauder pretty close to that of a faction ship.
To put it mildly... well, Marauders aren't an UTTER dissapointment, but they do come HEAVILY pre-nerfed.
There's simply too much "not so good" about them to begin wondering "what the heck were the CCP marauder fine-tuners thinking?"
I just hope what we see on SiSi is by far NOT the final version of those ships.
Still, as hey stand right now... you have to wonder... why the heck bother with one, when you can just grab a faction ship at the same price, and with less skill requirements, and perform just as well, if not better in it in missions ?
So, bottom line, CCP guys, get to it, and make them what you initially meant them to be.
Well, ok, you have to give them a flavor, you have to not make them solo pwnmobiles (well, they're not, thanks to the crappy sensor strength and huge sig), so yeah, it won't be an easy task.
BUT GET TO IT.
_
1|2|3 |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:05:00 -
[2]
reserved for analysis
_
1|2|3 |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:06:00 -
[3]
reserved for proposals
_
1|2|3 |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:11:00 -
[4]
Didn't CCP make a point to state that the relationship between T1 and T2 BS was not going to mirror that of other ship classes?
|
Shardrael
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:11:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Shardrael on 24/10/2007 07:12:26
edit: my first line may no longer be valid soon, I didnt see you were going to continue your post with analysis and actually proving your point :P will redo mine once your done
as the rhetorical sticklers might say you sir have not beaten the burden of proof, couldnt say whether your right or wrong as you havent really made a statement proving they are not the best mission runners.
for example their are a number of advantages they may have, and price could turn out to be one, with invention here now driving the price down on everything profit margins on t2 sales have taken a dive to a much lower average percent, this will include the battleships as people will be trying to pump these out party hardy in the beginning to take advantage of the new ship high price syndrome we call supply and demand. granted CNR is hovering above 600 mil right now so some faction ships are way cheaper and almost as good but the new golem has some nice advantages over the CNR, the missle explosion bonus comes to mind when comparing with the new torp changes and also every caldari mission runner with only one account would be running missions far faster killing while salvaging and looting then running the mission and coming back to cleanup in a new ship.
Additionally their is a built in advantage to these things in the higher alpha strike, for example the actualy turret amount to figure dps between a CNR is close, think 8 turrets on one and damn near it on the other, but the golem doesnt have any rof bonuses so in keeping with similar dps it will do larger alpha to achieve that. which means more ships that can be one volleyed which in turn leads to quicker mission times.
The CNR also does not even come close to touching the tank on the Golem, slightly better resistances with a built in SBA is hard to beat. These ships will be the new best tanking ships in the game sub capital which reduces the risk from lvl 5's and makes all lvl4's that much more risk free.
Granted these ships dont blow faction ships out of the water and they probably shouldnt but they do provide a nice alternative that is going to be readily produced.
 Originally by: Stamm
Some people might have been convinced by the official announcement posted by Steelrat, but not me, I wasn't convinced until some random alt posts a brand new thread.
|
Riho
Magnificent Beavers
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:15:00 -
[6]
well.. dunno about others but caldari one SHOULD do the same or more dmg than a CNR and tank ALOT better
more resists and boost amount bonus whit 7 midslots
|
Damned Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:16:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Riho
well.. dunno about others but caldari one SHOULD do the same or more dmg than a CNR and tank ALOT better
more resists and boost amount bonus whit 7 midslots
If u think so, than u fail in math :)
|
Shardrael
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:17:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Riho
well.. dunno about others but caldari one SHOULD do the same or more dmg than a CNR and tank ALOT better
more resists and boost amount bonus whit 7 midslots
with the stats it has now it already does that, and potentially more dmg with fittings and lowslot combo but I havent looked at that close enough to be sure
Originally by: Stamm
Some people might have been convinced by the official announcement posted by Steelrat, but not me, I wasn't convinced until some random alt posts a brand new thread.
|
Riho
Magnificent Beavers
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:19:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Damned Force
Originally by: Riho
well.. dunno about others but caldari one SHOULD do the same or more dmg than a CNR and tank ALOT better
more resists and boost amount bonus whit 7 midslots
If u think so, than u fail in math :)
well if ur such a smart person mind showing me the math and prove me wrong
im not against ppl who prove me wrong... just ppl who make claims they know stuff and acctually dont
|
Damned Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:22:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Damned Force on 24/10/2007 07:22:34
Originally by: Riho
Originally by: Damned Force
Originally by: Riho
well.. dunno about others but caldari one SHOULD do the same or more dmg than a CNR and tank ALOT better
more resists and boost amount bonus whit 7 midslots
If u think so, than u fail in math :)
well if ur such a smart person mind showing me the math and prove me wrong
im not against ppl who prove me wrong... just ppl who make claims they know stuff and acctually dont
Sorry, pls look on this page:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=620524
|
|
|
ElCoCo
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:35:00 -
[11]
The clear edge they have is for those npc'ers that don't have an alt to loot/salvage with.
If the torp "nerf" didn't go into place, the golem would be infinitely better than the CNR for example.
Even though I'm mostly gallente/minmatar specced, I'd never use a vindicator/navythron/megathron/tempest/phoon/fleetpest/machariel/maelstrom for missions.
I'd use the CNR only because it's much less troublesome.
With the kronos, I'd definately use it for missions (with rails)
With the paladin, I'd definately use it (with my alt) although indeed it lacks...something... I don't think it's damage though... optimal range bonus maybe.
The vargur... errr... do ppl realy do missions with autocannons? Rof bonus instead of dmg even hurts so much more ammo-wise. I'd prefer an armor tank arty boat tbh so I still won't fly it.
|
Shardrael
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:06:00 -
[12]
Originally by: ElCoCo
The vargur... errr... do ppl realy do missions with autocannons? Rof bonus instead of dmg even hurts so much more ammo-wise. I'd prefer an armor tank arty boat tbh so I still won't fly it.
at first glance it looks pretty bad but with that falloff bonus and using AC's it would have unusually high dmg at 50km (prob including falloff rigs) whether that makes it worth the ammo consumption or not is up to each individual to decide and I dont know if it would for me personally, but it does present an interesting way to do missions for minmatarr
|
Marylin Monroe
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:46:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Shardrael
Originally by: ElCoCo
The vargur... errr... do ppl realy do missions with autocannons? Rof bonus instead of dmg even hurts so much more ammo-wise. I'd prefer an armor tank arty boat tbh so I still won't fly it.
at first glance it looks pretty bad but with that falloff bonus and using AC's it would have unusually high dmg at 50km (prob including falloff rigs) whether that makes it worth the ammo consumption or not is up to each individual to decide and I dont know if it would for me personally, but it does present an interesting way to do missions for minmatarr
yes, i see this ship as a big sleipnir. put 2 falloff rigs, crazy shield tank, and speed/agility/dmg mods in lows and you get a very mobile and fast mision runner, so fast as to really be able to get close enough and use AC on their full potential
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:47:00 -
[14]
These are amazing mission ships as you can loot while killing without losing any firepower. No more warping out and back with a cargo ship for loot. This will speed up missions a lot.
T2 ammo is also more worth it. Costs for using T2 ammo are cut in half. T2 ammo draw backs also cut in half. Well more as with the web bonus its counters the tracking drawbacks of the ammo..
At first I wasnÆt to keen on he new ship as the damage output is the same as my Hyper. But the more I think about it the more I like the ship. Only can I swap the amour bonus for a 5% shield recharge bonus? DidnÆt think so.
As a gallante railgun using passive tanker I find my self with half the cap usage from turrets which means more SPRÆs, less PDSÆs so a better tank.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
adriaans
Amarr
Advanced Capital Ship Designs
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:56:00 -
[15]
amarr, cap race...yeah right... yes i'm bloody annoyed from the paladin's stats atm...
--sig--
Knowledge is power! |
Gladiator Jonny
Repo Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:09:00 -
[16]
Kronos is gonna be amazing at pvp.
nuff said 
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:10:00 -
[17]
Finished writing analysis and preliminary suggestions.
PRELIMINARY.
As in, almost certainly not the best.
Feedback welcome.
Try to keep the flames to a minimum, will ya ? 
Keep in mind two things when proposing changes:
* they must be GOOD for PvE (as in, much better as T1 version, and even slightly better as faction version)
* they must not be too overpowered in PvP (if you think the LOW-AS-HECK sensor strength isn't enough of a handicap already).
_
1|2|3 |
Marylin Monroe
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:54:00 -
[18]
i think the vargur will be the best mission runner. great damage and AC range, including the possibility of choosing damage type, incredible tank, can be fitted for speed/agility+dmg, ability to loot/salvage at the same time.
i think not even the mighty CNR will come close, unless you are very lazy and just like spewing missiles from 180 km.
as a plus, ACs with that extreme range are almost invulnerable to tracking disruptors, and most important on many missions, defenders.
|
d026
THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS....
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 10:32:00 -
[19]
/signed
At this point i might get a Marauder for PVP (depends on price tough) but def not gonna switch to a Golem from my CNR.
|
Dahak2150
Chaos Monkeys
Monkey Religion
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 10:55:00 -
[20]
Paladin is a waste of training and isk. My Abaddon tanks nearly as well and does much more damage. It's already been well shown that the Apoc is so far outclassed by the Baddon that there really isn't a point to it anymore, so why did we build an almost useless T2 ship off of it? Make it Khanid or give it some actual damage, it hits like a sack of cotton right now.
----------------
Originally by: "Cyberus"
cause its has no sence anyway your brains is simply wont accept that anyway.
|
|
|
Gozmoth
Amarr
Altera Odyssea
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:03:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Gozmoth on 24/10/2007 11:05:03
Is the Paladin will help Amarr for mission running against angels or guristas ? No, thanks to EM.
The ideas around Marauders are cools, but they are flawed by our current problems.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:34:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Akita T
CALDARI : Raven - Raven Navy Issue - Golem
So, this makes the Golem the only Marauder that is not only on par with T1/faction, but actually worse as the faction version, damage-wise.
This is more because the CNR is the only faction ship which does more dps than its normal version.
If we have the odd man out here it is the CNR, not the golem.
Quote:
And let's not even begin to mention the "NPC defenders" issue, which get MULTIPLIED by the fact it launches half as many missiles as a T1 Raven, effectively *doubling* the NPC defender effectiveness. VERY bad.
On this however I definately agree. The current defender use in mission will make the cruise-golem rather pointless and a torp golem has just a too low range to be an effective mission ship.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:36:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Qui Shon on 24/10/2007 11:47:26
Originally by: Akita T
boost Kronos
You really want to boost the new Gank king? That can have 8 fully bonused turrets worth of damage with the cap&ammo of 4, as well as neut and/or nos? Only weakness being the sens strenght. If I were so inclined, I could shout out OMGWTFBBQ-IMBAAAAA!!! Good thing I'm more reserved, and won't do that.
Oh, and I really feel for those specialized in Amarr. Poor sods just keep taking it up the...erm, sorry, it was somebodys sig.
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
Abyss Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:40:00 -
[24]
Firstly...I've not been on the test server so if your stats and analysis are correct then many thanks.
I'm no expert on what makes great mission ships, and I only fly Gallente so I'll restrict my opinion to the Kronos.
I have to say though that after your analysis I'm VERY excited about the Kronos. Specifically the extra damage output (you sure?!?) from 4 highs.
It should be noted that if true, this also frees up grid and high slots for remote reppers compared to the T1/Faction BS. It might not help it become a solo mission runner, but that sure helps any mission group immensely.
I am also now imagining the prospect of using 2 or 3 of these in a small 'marauding' gang fo PVP. The potential repping with a simple spider tank is insane - combine that with a few Neuts and the improved tracking, speed and web bonus - you've got a 'shock' elite group of battleships capable of operating independently versus any size target or much larger group of targets, tanking immensely and yet still pumping out the damage.
Something I'm pessemistic about is the insurance. Do you have any values?
I hope these ships dont get the raw deal most T2 ships do as it will be magnified by much higher cost than other T2.
If I've read you right - I envisage the twin Kronos gang (one probing?) becomming the pvp/merc elite standard for massacring solo mission running faction BS!  Do missions in groups!!!
Perhaps these ships are not what was originally intended, but they are very welcome to a large part of the Eve community nevertheless.
- Ideas are my business...maybe thats why I'm always skint!
Please read my ideas |
d026
THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS....
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:45:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Akita T
CALDARI : Raven - Raven Navy Issue - Golem
So, this makes the Golem the only Marauder that is not only on par with T1/faction, but actually worse as the faction version, damage-wise.
This is more because the CNR is the only faction ship which does more dps than its normal version.
If we have the odd man out here it is the CNR, not the golem.
Quote:
And let's not even begin to mention the "NPC defenders" issue, which get MULTIPLIED by the fact it launches half as many missiles as a T1 Raven, effectively *doubling* the NPC defender effectiveness. VERY bad.
On this however I definately agree. The current defender use in mission will make the cruise-golem rather pointless and a torp golem has just a too low range to be an effective mission ship.
Even the fact that the CNR is out of line makes the Golem pointles because it is still preferable to get CNR instead of a Golem.
|
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:51:00 -
[26]
Originally by: d026
Even the fact that the CNR is out of line makes the Golem pointles because it is still preferable to get CNR instead of a Golem.
You heard the man. Nerf the CNR!
|
The Economist
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:51:00 -
[27]
Edited by: The Economist on 24/10/2007 11:53:39
Kind of agree with you on the vargur, one more mid would be nice (fittings mean autos, autos mean mwd and web minimum, mwd and web means 4 slot shield tank :/), also the grid to actually fit 4x 1400mm's and a mwd without 3 rcu II's would be nice too 
Oh and on a separate note, the fact that one can't tractor neutral and hostile player wrecks means one bonus is completely wasted outside of pve (and ccp stated that though these ships have features that make them good for pve, missions etc, they aren't just mission-running ships).
Sig removed. Please keep sigs to 400x120 pixels and 24000 bytes in size or less. -Kaemonn |
Shadowsword
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:54:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 24/10/2007 11:54:48
I wanted to make a thread about it, but I might as well use this one.
First, those Marauders are weird, from a design point of view. It's as if two guys got their own ideas about a specialised exploration/mission-running ship (it's pretty obvious they were not made with ratting as the primary goal, you don't need tanking bonuses to tank the small dps npcs in belt dish out), and they applied those idea to the ships, without checking what the other was doing. It's most obvious with the Golem: the TP/exp velocity bonuses scream Torpedo usage, but torps aren't optimal for missions/exploration. IT's just not practical enough.
Chronos: That's basically what a Marauder should be: Noticeable DPS increase, but not HAC-level increase, and a bonus to active tanking only, that will be usefull for missions and solo pvp, only marginally usefull in small gang pvp, and totally useless in fleet pvp. But, it has too much powergrid. It should be able to fit 4 425mm rails, afterburner, and two large rep. Not the 4 neutrons, 3 heavy neuts, MWD+cap injector and double large rep I'm hearing about.
Vargur: What does it do better than a Maelstrom, in terms of DPS/tanking? Not enough. The tracking bonus is meh, because autocanons don't need it, and the falloff bonus, while good for pvp, isn't much for pve. With 30k falloff with faction ammos, you'll still miss oe hell of a lot with half the npc battleships, those that orbit at 40-50km. And the ship is in bd need of powergrid, to at least be able to fit 1200mm artilleries.
Paladin: There's something I think CCP hasn't considered here: Laser boats are used only against blood raiders/sanchas/drones & mercenaries. Since those can be tanked with only 1 large rep, 1 EM and 2 active hardeners, that means you don't really need a tanking bonus. Oh, it's still a nice thing to have, but an Abaddon does a better job at mission-whoring than a Paladin with those stats. The tracking bonus is meh, I have no trouble killing cruisers with my current armageddon, and the web bonus mean frigs won't be a problem either, even without tracking bonus.
Golem: What to say that isn't obvious? If used with torps, the lack of range will be pain in the ass, and the explosion velocity bonus usefull only against frigs, the BS/cruiser NPC rarely move at more than 200m/sec. If used with cruises, both the target painter and explosion velocity bonuses are useless (TP bonus only marginally useful against frigs, and that's about 5-10% of what you'll spend time firing at). In either cases, the exp velocity bonus is decently usefull only in pvp, and those are specialized pve ships. There is a serious design dissonance with that battleship.
So, how about proposals to correct things?
There's one thing to keep in mind first: as an almost universal rule, pve players will use weapons that can hit consitently at 40km, even if that means less dps.
- Change the 100% damage role bonus to 115%. To prevent the chronos from being a pvp solopwnmobile, nerf it's powergrid, and drone bandwitch to 50, or even 25. The marauders won't be be-all-end-all ships. Still very vulnerables to EW, still barely more survivables thant T1 BS agsint small gangs, and everyone know Eve's pvp is ganks most of the time.
- Scrap the Golem's explosion velocity, it's useless, and replace it with a velocity bonus. OR, if you want it to use cruise missiles, replace this bonus by the old RoF bonus of the Raven.
- About the paladin, the role bonus would do the job, but an 10% optimal bonus instead of the 7.5% tracking one would also be fine.
- At least, increase the Vargur's PG so it can have an effective artillery pve fit.
------------------------------------------
What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs. |
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 12:11:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Karyuudo Tydraad
Originally by: d026
Even the fact that the CNR is out of line makes the Golem pointles because it is still preferable to get CNR instead of a Golem.
You heard the man. Nerf the CNR!
That.
As said, the ibalanced ship here is the CNR.
Saying an advanced ship needs a buff to be inline with an earlier ship which is a bit imbalanced with all other ships in the same niche is a bit silly.
|
Sokratesz
Paradox v2.0
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 12:23:00 -
[30]
I've just been looking at the Kronos stats and it looks like it could do with a missile flight time bonus indeed - Cruises obsolete the explosion velocity and TP bonuses, while Torps simply lack the range.
Also, what is the esitmated price tag of these?
Paradox V2.0 is recruiting! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |