EVE Search - Marauders: EVE's Most Inaccurate Ship Class Description?

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Marauders: EVE's Most Inaccurate Ship Class Description?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 243	Posted - 2012.04.21 07:16:00 - [1] - Quote Quote: Role: Marauder Geared toward versatility and prolonged deployment in hostile environments, Marauders represent the cutting edge in todayGÇÖs warship technology. While especially effective at support suppression and wreckage salvaging, they possess comparatively weak sensor strength and may find themselves at increased risk of sensor jamming. Nevertheless, these thick-skinned, hard-hitting monsters are the perfect ships to take on long trips behind enemy lines. Cue "what society thinks I do" image. Marauders are billed as, well, Marauders-- ships you can take behind enemy lines to wreak havok. Instead, what we get are ships that only really work for PvE, and even in this role they are objectively inferior to pirate battleships (which, incidentally, are also better "marauding" ships). I think this should change. If I had my way, Marauders would be reworked into ships that fit their description. This rework would require a couple of things: Axe the sensor-strength thing. Seriously. No ship that can be perma-jammed by a three day old newbie in an ECM Navitas is going to see extensive use in PvP-- not behind enemy lines, not behind friendly lines, nowhere. You don't need to buff sensor strength as you do for pirate BS, but not-gimping it would make Marauders much more useful. Gear these ships away from active-tanking ability and towards agility. Make them better at skirmish warfare. As it stands, these ships are bonused to active tanking and EWAR, only one of which is useful in small-gang warfare (and the "other of which" is rendered easily-counterable due to Marauders awful sensor strength). In small gang fights, mobility is life. Active tanking is either totally unecessary (if things go well), undesireable (if you take return fire from more than one or two opponents), or utterly worthless (if you actually get caught, active tanking only prolongs your death... slightly). Active tanking is for PvE. Ships that align like a depleted uranium bathtub are for PvE. Consider trading the "salvaging" bonuses for something support-related. Make these ships the hub around which a Marauding gang would revolve, somehow. Salvaging bonuses are only really going to be used for PvE, and in PvE scenarios these abilities are pretty much entirely eclipsed by the abilities of the Noctis. Some possible alternatives to the salvaging bonus could be: a fitting service, some kind of remote-repping ability / bonus, I don't even know. Something that benefits gang members and is more useful than a salvaging bonus. A mobile-warp disruptor carrying bay for supplying a gang with anchorable bubbles. Who knows? If you want a class of PvE-specialized ships, rename Marauders. Otherwise, I'd be excited if you made Marauders actually excel at marauding. As it is, they're unsuited for deployment in hostile space in pretty much every conceivable way (except their highslot-layout).
Aphoxema G Teraa Matar White-Lotus 278	Posted - 2012.04.21 08:33:00 - [2] - Quote You make excellent points here, but I think it's a lot less work to just change the description to something a little less glorifying and misleading. All modules "miss" like turrets instead of deactivating when out of range. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=98914
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 243	Posted - 2012.04.21 08:49:00 - [3] - Quote That would be a shame, since an actual Marauder class would be cool, but anything is better than the current situation! :3
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 5	Posted - 2012.04.21 08:56:00 - [4] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: If I had my way, Marauders would be reworked into ships that fit their description. This rework would require a couple of things: Axe the sensor-strength thing. Seriously. No ship that can be perma-jammed by a three day old newbie in an ECM Navitas is going to see extensive use in PvP-- not behind enemy lines, not behind friendly lines, nowhere. You don't need to buff sensor strength as you do for pirate BS, but not-gimping it would make Marauders much more useful. Gear these ships away from active-tanking ability and towards agility. Make them better at skirmish warfare. As it stands, these ships are bonused to active tanking and EWAR, only one of which is useful in small-gang warfare (and the "other of which" is rendered easily-counterable due to Marauders awful sensor strength). In small gang fights, mobility is life. Active tanking is either totally unecessary (if things go well), undesireable (if you take return fire from more than one or two opponents), or utterly worthless (if you actually get caught, active tanking only prolongs your death... slightly). Active tanking is for PvE. Ships that align like a depleted uranium bathtub are for PvE. Consider trading the "salvaging" bonuses for something support-related. Make these ships the hub around which a Marauding gang would revolve, somehow. Salvaging bonuses are only really going to be used for PvE, and in PvE scenarios these abilities are pretty much entirely eclipsed by the abilities of the Noctis. Some possible alternatives to the salvaging bonus could be: a fitting service, some kind of remote-repping ability / bonus, I don't even know. Something that benefits gang members and is more useful than a salvaging bonus. A mobile-warp disruptor carrying bay for supplying a gang with anchorable bubbles. Who knows? Obviously you have never flown a marauder in pvp, the kronos with a deadspace fit can solo tank with a fleet booster 5000-8000 depending on skills, implants, and boosters and with just 1 remote eccm and 1 personal eccm + the ganglink you can get 67 sensor strength. With your 4 mids on a kronos you fit a fed navy web, eccm, fit a booster and an afterburner, 3 nos will take care of the rest of your cap needs, even if you have to nos your buddy. it still does 900 dps which isn't bad. Also have you ever seen a vargur tank? These ships just require good pilots to use them right, anyone else just says they suck.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 243	Posted - 2012.04.21 09:04:00 - [5] - Quote LT Alter wrote: [quote=Ganthrithor]Obviously you have never flown a marauder in pvp, the kronos with a deadspace fit can solo tank with a fleet booster 5000-8000 depending on skills, implants, and boosters and with just 1 remote eccm and 1 personal eccm + the ganglink you can get 67 sensor strength. With your 4 mids on a kronos you fit a fed navy web, eccm, fit a booster and an afterburner, 3 nos will take care of the rest of your cap needs, even if you have to nos your buddy. it still does 900 dps which isn't bad. Also have you ever seen a vargur tank? These ships just require good pilots to use them right, anyone else just says they suck. Yes, by all means, let's balance all ships based on what they can do while deadspace fit with Legion armor bonuses. Let's also fit afterburners on our small gang PvP ships, because throwing a 5b isk, easily-jammed bricks around hostile space makes a lot of sense. I know you don't like the fact that I called out your bad blackops BS idea, but that doesn't mean you have to come **** on me every time I post.
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 5	Posted - 2012.04.21 09:12:00 - [6] - Quote Throw 5 bil at a 1 bil hull is fine with me, anybody who want's to be successful with a marauder does it. I'm not shitting on your post's because of that bud, I'm shitting on the sheer stupidity of them. You need to back up your statements for anyone to take them seriously. Know the topic you are posting about, don't use guesswork.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 244	Posted - 2012.04.21 09:40:00 - [7] - Quote LT Alter wrote: Throw 5 bil at a 1 bil hull is fine with me, anybody who want's to be successful with a marauder does it. Because Marauders suck? I don't need to deadspace fit my pirate BS to field it successfully. I'm just pointing out that there is a whole class of ships that claims to be designed to fit a specific role, yet finds itself objectively inferior in that role to a host of other generalized ships. Does that seem right to you? If you want a more fact-based argument, I could show you a comparison of the Vargur to the Mach, or the Kronos to the Vindicator (hint, both the pirate ships are vastly superior skirmishers than their "behind enemy lines" equivalents).
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 5	Posted - 2012.04.21 09:59:00 - [8] - Quote You need to spend some isk on a pirate BS to make it reach it's full potential. You can fit a kronos t2 for maybe 1000-2000 dps tank, which is still more than most other battleships could dream for. If you deadspace dual rep a vindicator you can get a 6000-7000 dps tank and still do 1200 dps. The kronos doesn't have the dps but it has more tank. The point is that the kronos is most utilized with a deadspace fit, when you do this it truly becomes the marauder it is meant to be. Now lets say they buff this ship, now if you deadspace fit it what do you have? Now it's full potential is that much higher and that is when it becomes overpowered, simply making it as good as it is with a deadspace fit now with a t2 fit will just make me and my 10 bil one unbeatable.
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 5	Posted - 2012.04.21 10:09:00 - [9] - Quote I know these threads are coming from the ship balancing of inferno. But the common interpretation I'm seeing in all of all of them is that they are balancing them, not buffing them or nerfing them. That may sound like the same thing but it isn't, rather than make a ship better the idea is to make them play a different single role but not multiple and all roles of it's class. Think about this on both the threads we are posting on.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 244	Posted - 2012.04.21 10:19:00 - [10] - Quote Well really, to reach their "full" potential, any ship in the game must be officer fit, right? You say you can T2 fit a Kronos to tank 1-2k dps. Congratulations, you can tank 3-6 drakes. Or 1-2 tech 2 fit, tech 1 battleships. Or 2-3 Talos. Active tanking is seriously inferior in 99% of PvP scenarios (the other 1% being the subject of famous youtube videos involving deadspace/officer fit ships with multiple bonus T3s positioned in advance, drugs, and in-fight cap booster deliveries). This is especially true "behind enemy lines," where odds are that if you get tackled, you're gonna get dogpiled by a gang 10x the size of your own, and your local tank isn't going to make the tiniest shred of a difference. My point with this thread (and the other one) is that T2 battleships are bizarrely-implemented ships whose bonuses and stats don't jive at all with their stated roles. Marauders are ostensibly PvP ships designed for fighting in hostile space, yet their attributes leave them almost totally unsuited for PvP. Blackops battleships are supposed to be sneaky, behind-enemy-lines cloaky gang support ships, but can't move around cloaked and can't even carry enough fuel to keep themselves running for more than a couple of days in hostile space. It's just kind of dumb.
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 5	Posted - 2012.04.21 10:52:00 - [11] - Quote Active tanking is the only way to pvp in any marauder honestly, also I see a problem with point of views here. My main point of view is from High sec and low sec in gangs no more than thirty, where as you are a member of goonswarm who I hear loves the 250 man maelstrom alpha fleets. Where an active tank would instantly die. In my world, an active tank is viable. In yours, it might as well be a shuttle with a capital sized rep and a triage module.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 244	Posted - 2012.04.21 11:12:00 - [12] - Quote LT Alter wrote: Active tanking is the only way to pvp in any marauder honestly, also I see a problem with point of views here. My main point of view is from High sec and low sec in gangs no more than thirty, where as you are a member of goonswarm who I hear loves the 250 man maelstrom alpha fleets. Where an active tank would instantly die. In my world, an active tank is viable. In yours, it might as well be a shuttle with a capital sized rep and a triage module. We also have to deal with things like bubbles, and occasionally PvPing off of undocks, so yes, active tanking battleships are pretty much worthless in hostile space... which is why I was suggesting the ships be changed to work there, since that's what they claim they're "for."
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 5	Posted - 2012.04.21 13:21:00 - [13] - Quote You don't have to pvp on undocks in low or high sec. I try to keep things off station as much as I can. The marauder would be useful when taking on a small force behind enemy lines that doesn't have nearby back up. Most fleets are hesitant when engaging a marauder, it has 3 utility highs and any one of them could hold a cyno generator. Also with 170k ehp and a 8000 dps tank it's not dieing any time before whatever it wants coming through that cyno comes through. Also, a vargur can get a tank above 20k dps if you can pocket change for 40 or so bil. For about 10bil with a faction and deadspace tank it can tank 10k or so dps I believe.
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 65	Posted - 2012.04.21 13:47:00 - [14] - Quote Goddess forbid that descriptions have a bit of roleplaying and thematic content. Where is it written that "behind enemy line" means behind the cyno jammed system with a blob in it? Let go of the preconception that everything must be a reference to what we player do/are and it makes more sense than you realise. In short: No change needed. It is accurate and to the point.
Celeritas 5k Connoisseurs of Candid Coitus 36	Posted - 2012.04.21 16:32:00 - [15] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Active tanking is for PvE. False.
Tobiaz Spacerats 270	Posted - 2012.04.21 17:41:00 - [16] - Quote If it was really supposed to be a ship that could go deep into risky territory and 'maraud' away, it should have things like a natural +1 warp core stabilizer per level, or have the T3 bubble nullifier ability (because seriously, do null-sec tacklers even use interceptors anymore these days? Their killboards are all dictors and hics). CCP, fix the forum's image tags http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á visit at http://bit.ly/wdatt
masternerdguy Inner Shadow NightSong Directorate 351	Posted - 2012.04.21 18:02:00 - [17] - Quote [Golem, Golem - The New Drake] Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Stasis Webifier II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Warp Disruptor II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I Torpedo Launcher II Torpedo Launcher II Torpedo Launcher II Torpedo Launcher II Medium Energy Neutralizer II Medium Energy Neutralizer II Medium Energy Neutralizer II Large Ancillary Current Router I Large Core Defense Field Extender I Warrior II Hornet EC-300 Warrior TP-300 Things are only impossible until they are not.
leviticus ander CATO.nss 146	Posted - 2012.04.21 19:15:00 - [18] - Quote https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=88528
HELLBOUNDMAN Among the Shadows Seekers of the Unseen 48	Posted - 2012.04.21 19:34:00 - [19] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Quote: Role: Marauder Geared toward versatility and prolonged deployment in hostile environments, Marauders represent the cutting edge in todayGÇÖs warship technology. While especially effective at support suppression and wreckage salvaging, they possess comparatively weak sensor strength and may find themselves at increased risk of sensor jamming. Nevertheless, these thick-skinned, hard-hitting monsters are the perfect ships to take on long trips behind enemy lines. Unfortunately, I think this description describes its ability to get behind NPC enemy lines and wreak havok on them, but not so much getting behind pvp enemy lines. However, even when you factor them as being purely pve centric ships, they still suck. My tengu can pull just as much dps as a golem using javelin torps and do so with better tank, more effective dps, more speed, more sensor strength, and better scan res. Quote: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=88528 He started that specific thread because he wanted Marauders to be better at what their initial design was for. While CCP did set pirate faction ships above t2 ships in effectiveness, their effectiveness is supposed to be more towards a balanced approach, where as Marauders should be the over kings of pve combat, to be outperformed by no other ship, unless that ship has a significantly higher isk put into it, such as a fully dedspace fitted pirate bs. I'll state what the best parts of balancing marauders in pve would be to me, as listed in that thread. 1) Npc ewar immunity - this is so they can be the kings of pve without effecting pvp 2) remove rep % per level bonus for a resistance % per level bonus, thus making them better buffer tank ships(cause they're hard to fit stable) 3) Give them a 150% tractor bonus, which means with t2 tractors they hit 60km 4) Bonus towards salvager cycle time per level Ther rest of the buffs they could use are specific to the ships themeselves such as web range, target painter % bonus, drone bw and bay, etc. etc.
Wolodymyr Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation 126	Posted - 2012.04.22 01:20:00 - [20] - Quote Aphoxema G wrote: You make excellent points here, but I think it's a lot less work to just change the description to something a little less glorifying and misleading. "Marauders are primarily expensive grinding machines that are used to kill vast swarms of inferior pirate ships and salvage the wrecks directly. This makes them a very lucrative investement but they are not very usefull against ships piloted by other capsuleers." I'd like to see the salvaging tractor beam carebearing bonuses get replaced by something that would actually be used in combat, like neuts or something.
Markus Reese Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION 135	Posted - 2012.04.22 01:40:00 - [21] - Quote Something wrong here... lets see if I can put my finger on it... An awesome post by a GOON! Must be a spy. +1/signed for maurading mauraders.
LT Alter Mostly Wrong Decisions 6	Posted - 2012.04.22 05:43:00 - [22] - Quote I just give up, everyone posting about the ships don't even fly them. At least not properly.
Ioci Bad Girl Posse 130	Posted - 2012.04.22 05:48:00 - [23] - Quote We could call it the "trailer edition" because we know how accurate those are of EVE gameplay. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg-_HeVNYOk Save Derpy!
HELLBOUNDMAN Among the Shadows Seekers of the Unseen 48	Posted - 2012.04.22 06:02:00 - [24] - Quote LT Alter wrote: I just give up, everyone posting about the ships don't even fly them. At least not properly. I flew a golem for a while. I loved it....at least in Gallente space. However, when I moved to caldari space I knew it wasn't going to work, so I traded it for a tengu. Of course, while I was in Gallente space there were many times where I had to get into a different ship because the Golem underperformed. It was either a guristas mission where the ewar became a problem, or it was a mission where the sheer size of the golem meant that it was being hit too hard, thus unable to tank the mission. Like I've seen someone else post, the anti amarr mission "smassh the supplier" was completely undoable in the golem because it got hammered and had to war out pretty much the moment it began to engage targets.
Astroniomix EliteTroll 56	Posted - 2012.04.22 08:17:00 - [25] - Quote LT Alter wrote: I just give up, everyone posting about the ships don't even fly them. At least not properly. It's not marauders that people are missunderstanding. It's active tanking. The point isn't to hero tank the enemy fleet. The point of an active tank is to buy time to bring down/scare off the other pilots. Active tanks are great for engaging small/medium sized gangs in small groups/solo.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 248	Posted - 2012.04.22 08:35:00 - [26] - Quote Yeah, when I'm "behind enemy lines," I love being 100% reliant on gigantic cap booster charges, because replacing them when you're 40 jumps into the middle of nowhere is super convenient. Luckily it's not a problem, because you can carry so many. Oh wait...
Astroniomix EliteTroll 56	Posted - 2012.04.22 08:49:00 - [27] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Yeah, when I'm "behind enemy lines," I love being 100% reliant on gigantic cap booster charges, because replacing them when you're 40 jumps into the middle of nowhere is super convenient. Luckily it's not a problem, because you can carry so many. Oh wait... Blocade runner alt.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,11s, ref 20251012/1139
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.