Bastion module upgrade

Communications Center General Discussion
63

While not being 100% how I would fit it… this will do…

If you make that unbumpable in bastion mode, you just switch the MJD with an MWD to counter a possible bump attempts while playing station games or hugging a gate.

In Bastion Mode with drugs alone (not even using asklepians) that thing will tank round about 4k (almost 5K while overheating) dps until it runs out of cap charges.

With bastion being inactive it still is tanking close to 2K dps and even if you manage to neutralize it´s capacitor by the time it drops out of bastion it still has 81k+ EHP. Having a cap booster fitted however it still will be able to repair a cycle here and there. A single cycle is round about 40K EHP added.

At the same time it can potentially hurl 1.5K dps into your direction (I ll go into why that matters further down).

So… assume you engage that near a Station. He sits unbumpable right at the undocking point. While he is in Bastion mode you need to have 5 ships with 1K dps+ (as if that is not broken enough already…).
In other words… you are not ever going to break his tank, while he is sitting there in bastion mode, without neuting has capacitor completly dry.

As soon as he notices that this is your game plan (which will already be quite obvious by your the choice of the ship you engage him with in the first place), he turns his basion module red, disengages his turrets and starts cap boosting and keeps his armor topped up. Which with the repair amount in bastion mode is not going to take a lot of cycles and won´t be very heavy on his capacitor. He can pretty much just sit there and while his capacitor goes down, He just needs to pulse his cap booster 2x and his rep 2 times to fully repair his armor 2 times, which is already 2x as much as any single subcapital ship will deal in the maximum timeframe of 60 seconds until his bastion module turns off.

So now Bastion goes inactive and he becomes bumpable. By now he already reloaded his cap booster and has 5 x 800 cap available and still has easily 60K EHP left for you to chew through at full armor.

Now you have 60 seconds to push out of docking range, while he can as well pulse his cap booster and MWD to counter your bump and pulse his repairer once. And unless being completly incompetent will happily sit out the 60 seconds until he can dock, being perfectly able to maintain in range.

So to defeat him you would a) need to completly neutralize his cap b) deal at the very list 1K dps and have a ship with enough mass and velocity to give him a proper bump, to get him outside of docking range. c) You need to be able to tank 1.5K DPS yourself or he will shred you into pieces.

Keep in mind if it looks like you could possibly get a good enough bump in, he always also has the option to activate the bastion module again and to try to counter you again. A minute later.

Now with the current way bastion works. After engaging him you have time to start pushing him out of docking range, before his bastion module goes inactive, with no option for him to dodge / counter your bump attempt, which is pretty much your only hope of killing him, with anything but a completly overwhelming force.

But you can not balance ships around the possibility of 1 v X scenarios, even if 1 v 1s are not that common, and as powerful as marauders already are, your only hope is bumping them out of range or dropping at least enough ships to deal round about 5K dps to drop him before he can dock.

This kind of reckless power creep is one of the things that over the years has made PvP in EvE so dull and only leads further away from strategical fights to boring N+1 fights.

This is already totally broken. And making them unbumpable in bastion mode will only add to that already way overpoweredness.

2 Likes
64

@Darth_Schweinebacke gave us one reason why mass penalty is not on bastion, to be able to bump them. But was that really the devs’ true reason? It all still seems a bit murky.

I finally found some talk about bastion mass in this old thread when they were iterating through different versions of bastion before it was released:

Specifically this quote from dev:

If that makes sense and is still relevant, then it’s likely that bastion will not ever get the mass change. I don’t wormhole, so not my area of knowledge… :man_shrugging:

65

But it doesn’t.

66

No, I doubt that the devs actually were thinking about the bumping part. The fact actually released that module already is one of many changes / additions that CCP has lost their sense for balance.

If you ask me, all the rebalancing they did over the past years was a complete waste of time. There are so many ships that are completly out of line and far too strong for their classes.

The way I see it PvP in EvE these days is mostly quite boring, because most of the time it´s simply a matter of dps vs EHP / tank, there is not a whole lot of room for actual strategy for gangs and even worse for large fleets. It´s basically just… bring dps and logis (and bring more than the other side). And in larger subcapital fights (if they actually still happen) even logis are not worth a whole lot for most of the fight as fleets just stack enough alpha damage to just 1 shot ship after ship.

While this might be fun for a few times it kinda get´s boring very fast and is not very interesting gameplay.

Now If I had anything to say, I would completly rework the whole system from scratch with the goal to

a) Make engagements last longer (especially small scale fights)

b) Make electronic warfare and utility ships viable for all sizes of battles

c) Remodel the whole ship roster to allow a larger diversity within fleets. Requiring large fleets to be broken down into more different parts.

That way you move away from fleets with 1 person broadcasting targets and everybody just pressing f1. More diversity of ships and roles in fleets means you also need more people to actively help coordinating your fleet.

d) Generaly remove the ability to just easyly 1 shot ships.

After that I would go ahead and remodel concord as well. Take away the instakill magic and turn ganking attempts into actual fights. Give all ships a lot more EHP, without boosting active tanks or damage output of ships and ganking, becomes harder to achieve by instakilling things, but rather can be turned into a prolonged fight, that the targets as well as the attackers can enjoy.

For all I care CCP could give freightes, Industrial ships etc. a giantic buff in EHP, but in return makeconcord rather a support force for “defenders” rather than the magical super bullet they are. This way you can eliminate the one sided ganking in high sec, into piracy that all sides can possibly enjoy.

Anyway… I ll stop here as I am already straying far off from the actual topic :slight_smile:

1 Like
67

this

definitely needed

what do you propose ?

  • damage cap on every ship so you can’t be alpha’d in 2s ? good by artillery, good bye using large guns on small target.
  • each successful shot from a turret on a target reduces its signature radius for 5s, depending on the size of the turret (S=0.5, M=1, L=2, XL=8) ?
  • bigger ship models to make fleet people spread a bit more and thus less optimum distance ?
  • double the hull HP of every ship ? This would make DC absolutely required on EVERY ship. you also need to reduce the res gain from DC on the hull, eg to 20%

I wonder which freighter pilot will enjoy getting shot at by a T1frig without the ability to retaliate anyhow.

68

I find artifical caps rather silly, so I would go down the route of increasing the Hitpoints of ships… massively… all across the board.

If you don´t just place all the HP into the structure but keep the balance between shield / armor and structure it does not effect, the viability to fit or not fit a DCU.

Try reading again. I am not saying remove concord, I am saying tune them down in their power. It´s easy enough to balance. And even if the frig pilot would somehow manage to survive long enough to take down a freighter with several millions of EHP while getting shot by npcs and any player just passing by being allowed to freely engage… he would deserve the kill.

Concord could also be setup to not just gank you with full power, but rather their battle force could scale over time. The initial force could react almost instantly, but with their strength tuned down to the point where even a t1 frig could engage. And over time you add more ships to concords battleforce until the criminals die.

The prolonged engagement however in any case would put more power into the hands of anti pirates, gives them time to react to criminal acts in high sec and also gives people who get engaged in high sec time to call in help. And honestly I don´t see how just getting shot down within 20 seconds is any more fun for the freighter pilot.

Anyway… as I said this would require a whole rework of all ships and how combat generally is taking place and is never going to happen. Which I find sad, because personally I find PvP where it´s all about who can stack enough attack power to 1 shot targets, rather boring.

Anyway… as this is off topic and laying out a whole workable concept to make a fundamental change like that would require weeks of work, I am not going to engage further into this here. Especially as CCP does not have the balls to make changes on that dimension anyway and people will still be stuck with the shitty n+1 warfare. So I am not going to waste my time any further on it.

69

does not make it engaging for the freighter pilot.
You just don’t get it. You can’t make freighter pilot find engaging to be shot at. They are designed as ship which can’t do a thing, which warp slow as ■■■■, take one year to align.
Their design is to annoy the players.
They cost 800M.
Who in the ■■■■ would find it fun to use a 800M ship, that is NEEDED to move high volume stuff, who can’t shout, who can’t move faster than a dead turtle, to fight a ship dedicated to killing him ?

There is no “fun” in being ganked in Eve. People are risk adverse, they don’t engage unless they have 241.1224% chance to win.

70

Dying doesn’t necessarily have to be “engaging” to a player. The freighter pilot is assuming several risks when he undocks. If he’s careless enough to get tackled by a frigate and eventually lose his ship, that’s really his fault for not preparing and planning contingencies.

EVE is a social game, he could easily have asked in local for help, asked his friends, corpmates, flown with allies to provide cover, dozens of different things. But if he chooses to be completely anti-social, refuse to reach out to the rest of the community, and try to live a life entirely isolated, that’s his fault.

Sucks, but them’s the breaks. I don’t care how expensive your ship is. Just because someone spent a “lot” (let’s be real, 800m is really nothing) of ISK on something, does not mean they’re entitled to ignore the basic PVP nature of the game.

71

CONTEXT !

Stop cherry picking words out of my post.

OMG that’s the lamest excuse I ever heard. After “but she was suggestive !”.
The one at fault is the one committing the action. ALWAYS.
Putting fault on the victim is a complete retard move.

completely out of topic.

72

Here’s all your “context”.

Getting ganked doesn’t have to be engaging. Getting ganked doesn’t have to be “fun”.

Getting ganked is a risk freighter pilots take when they refuse to take proper precautions and go out on their own.

I’m not taking words out of context, I’m taking the core message of your post, and challenging it. Nothing about the game, nothing about ANYTHING in the game, not even CCP’s own official statements, have ever said that getting ganked is supposed to be either fun or engaging. Just that it is part of the game.

Yikes. Oh boy. Not only is this analogy hilariously wrong, just yikes.

This is EVE. Please stop trying to marginalize the trauma of rape victims by trying to claim that a cheap freighter getting ganked is an equivalent.

1 Like
73

Please do not marginalize the trauma of actual victims by pretending that losing a cheap freighter to a gank is anything close to an equivalent.

1 Like
74

No that’s out-of-context quotes. The CONTEXT is why I wrote those.

You cherry-pick because your take my words out of the reason I wrote those, thus you make me write things I did not write, because the thing you make me write enable your useless speech afterwards.
You thereby are a liar, and off-topic.

75

Please do try and explain the “context” then. Because all you have said is that it’s not “engaging” or “fun” to be ganked. My response is that getting ganked is not supposed to be “engaging” or “fun”, so there is nothing wrong with the circumstances as they are set out.

76

You are again taking my words out of the context.

no. Just read the post I made, and the post I was answering to. I won’t lose more time explaining obvious things to you.

77

Ok, so you are refusing to explain what you mean when you say “Context”, even when asked to explain it. Good to know that you’re nothing more than just a troll. :slight_smile:

78

can’t be more blind that one who doesn’t want to see.

79

Welcome to Anderson’s mind.

2 Likes
80

Really now. You are losing it, aren’t you.

81

Thanks for taking the time to share that information. A long post worth reading is rare.

And thanks to others that stayed on topic and shared their opinions.

Seems this idea may be a bit ridiculous with current balancing. As I like marauders as they are I would hate to see them nerfed in other areas to add such a feature.

1 Like
82

Heh!

I want an improved bumping mechanic - I want to be able to bump a Titan, by flying a Cruiser, into another Titan to slice the second one into two pieces as shown in Star Wars: Rogue One.

An example how a fly can knock off an elephant.

BTW. Moments which dumpster any good movies with hundreds of millions dollars budget and ruins entire franchises. Why? Because at cinematography academies don’t teach physics!

1 Like