Marauder Balance Pass

The math does suggest that a 10% buff may be a good place to start. But may also have to be done on an individual basis. 10% would put Kronos about in line with Megathron, however the Paladin got about a 24% nerf when compared to Apocalypse as an example.

But without knowing the criteria on why the marauders were nerfed by devs from the beginning, it’s hard to say what a fair buff would be. Judging by the Bhaalgorn, we can maybe say some buff is warranted. It would be good to hear the more experienced fitters, such as yourself and Imustbecomfused and many others, weigh in on this, but I’m also aware these forums are not always highly trafficked either it seems. :grimacing:


I added the suggestions for the increase to power grid. 10% across the board for all Marauders and an additional 10% for the Paladin (for a total of 20%).

What does everyone think of the idea of a Bastion II module? (we do have Siege I and Siege Ii for Dreads) Maybe make Marauders V a prerequisite.


oh oh maybe the t2 will have the dmg bonus!!!?? :stuck_out_tongue:

The basic idea that said ship can effectively run each role its designed to participate in, so how ever much pwr grid and cap or cpu or whatnot really is unique to the ship and or skill set. I think the Vargur has little issues with cap or fitting, - cant get the smartbomb to fit yet, but to fit a variation of fits for various roles, either pvp or pve. I know you all are better at the math in Eve than me, so Id leave the numbers up to the pros. Id be happy to see the paladin and kronos and golem perform as well as the vargur does. I have been raping c4 sites down to 8 min fastest time with two vargurs in the frontier barracks. which Im pretty impressed with. Still, it lacks a little when you get out to 30 km plus, unless in bastion of course. and thats the thing, when I run sites, Im 90% of the time, NOT in bastion lol.

So if the others can get close to that and Ill post my Vargur fit, it literally is the cream of the crop for me at this moment for isk income. and I do enjoy it very much! Vargur can solo and duo c5 sites as well, I mean thats what it should be able to do. Its needs cap, tank, resists, and powergrid and cpu to fit the guns, neuts nos and smartbombs. for pvp, ■■■■ triple shield asb on the Vargur…? yea, it can do that. Can the Golem? can I triple rep the armor tanking marauders? Not that youd need to, just pointing out there is a slight difference between them. hopefully though, ccp wont just nerf the Vargur… to fix the balance issue.

this is the vanilla cookie cutter

[Vargur, 3]

800mm Repeating Cannon II_2, Republic Fleet EMP L
Corpus C-Type Heavy Energy Nosferatu_2
800mm Repeating Cannon II_2, Republic Fleet EMP L
Bastion Module I_2
800mm Repeating Cannon II_2, Republic Fleet EMP L
Corpus C-Type Heavy Energy Nosferatu_2
800mm Repeating Cannon II_2, Republic Fleet EMP L
True Sansha Large EMP Smartbomb_2

Federation Navy Stasis Webifier_2
Large Cap Battery II_2
Gist X-Type X-Large Shield Booster_2
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field_2
Large Micro Jump Drive_1
500MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive_1

Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer_2
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer_2
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer_2
Tracking Enhancer II_2
Tracking Enhancer II_2

Large Capacitor Control Circuit II_2
Large Capacitor Control Circuit II_2

Gecko, 1a
Federation Navy Hobgoblin, 2i

EMP L, 14668
Nanite Repair Paste, 700
Republic Fleet EMP L, 14720

The variations are specific to wh effects or class and I wish to keep them private.


+1 each to both ideas.

It’s been about 4 years since bastion module was introduced. It appears to have not broken the game as some doomsayers had predicted. Now may be a good time to explore the idea of a T2 version.



No, I don’t believe they should nerf the vargur. I think there is still an argument that all the marauders could use a buff.


TL;DR - Buff marauders as per OP, and give a damage boost through possibly a T2 bastion module.

If I was on the fence before on a damage buff, I may be over the fence now.

The above thread was created by CCP Ytterbium when the previous marauder update in 2013 was being discussed. I was away at the time, but some of you may remember it.

He states that the update was indeed intended to help bridge the gap between battleships and capitals. In light of events of the last 4 years tho, I would disagree of the devs intent on comparing marauders to pirate BS’s. I personally think pirate BS’s should be compared to buffed navy BS’s as per this thread:

According to Eve wiki, marauders are a 115 day train, dreadnoughts are 106 day train, and pirate BS’s are a 6 day train. Pirate BS’s should not be in the same league as marauders. Sorry pirate BS fans. Marauders current prices encroach upon the cost of a capital, and has a longer train time than dreads, but marauders are to capitals as T2 frigs are to battleships. The gap between marauder and capital would maybe require 2-3 new ship classes to fill it. Something which the devs seem to have little interest in creating at this time.

So since the devs already opened the Pandora’s box by creating bastion and turning marauders into basically mini-dreads, it may be about time to look into how marauders can fill out that role more.

After doing a bit more math, a well blinged marauder could possibly tank two other marauders. A 50% increase in damage output may not be out of line. I dare say maybe 100% could be in order as well considering dreads get a 700-800% boost. Perhaps if the damage was added to only T2 version of bastion, maybe give the T2 restrictions that it can’t be used in high sec.

Also, the devs really did take the community’s input into account in the previous update. So if anyone else feels that a marauder buff should be investigated, it would be good to add your arguments to the case. The devs were going to buff fitting stats at first. And then due to community pressure, decided to remove tanking buff. Then after more pressure, reinstated tanking buff. Then finally remove fitting buff, but boost hit point stats, as example.

The devs also took the entire laundry list of changes and implemented them in one pass. So if anyone has a reasonable wish list to add, it would be best to have it all in one go… :sweat_smile: :sunglasses:


Here’s my proposal for a Bastion Module II:

All existing requirements as Bastion Module I, in addition:
• Additional requirement of Marauders V, Graviton Physics IV

All existing attributes, in addition/modified:
• Maximum Velocity Bonus: -25%
• 10% bonus to Large Energy, Large Hybrid, Large Projectile and Heavy Missile, Cruise Missile and Torpedo damage



I would still argue for a higher damage boost, but I understand that I don’t have as much experience as many here. And as I said, I wouldn’t turn a damage buff down. :rofl:

Edit: I like the added movement as well.


I didn’t want to go overboard. A slight damage buff of 10% still places it below the maximum damage of Pirate hulls - especially since Marauders have nowhere near the same drone bay or bandwidth. The big thing is the revision of the velocity penalty - which gives it the ability to actually maneuver around instead of being fixed in place.

1 Like

I do hope that this does prevent warp still… otherwise we can have warping in bastion mode ships…

1 Like

As you say there is a disparity between marauders and capitals, considering price points. And a gap exists between them.

I feel the better route to go with t2 bastion is actually more pvp/role orientated.

Look at the name “Marauder”. It means to go behind enemy lines and pillage, loot, plunder and in general disrupt operations. What we have now doesnt really do that (unless you role play killing npcs as disrupting supplies, but a rattlesnake does the same thing).

So, i propose a new role for marauders in conjunction with a t2 bastion.

Capital lockdown.

T1 Bastion remains the same (it works and is balanced).

T2 Bastion retains the tanking bonuses (maybe a +5% bonus over t1), but loses the range bonuses and gains the ability to jam cynos in a 30-50km range.

This would allow it to be used to warp to a capital ratting or gating, lock it down and tank its damage while also preventing it from lighting a cyno. Allowing your gang to come in and kill it without having a fax or 20 other supers dropped on you immediately.

This creates a new role for marauders thats shifts them away from PVE roles or solo YOLO roams. It gives them a role that is actually needed in the current cap heavy meta. Which goes along with their tanking abilities. Marauders fit correctly can tank a capital, especially if in a gang, they could drop a web or application mod for buffer mods/resists to tank the alpha and not bleed armor/structure.

Damage bonuses can be applied by upping the role bonuses if CCP decides its needed (most marauders can get respectable dps considering their tanking abilities, more dps isnt necessarily going to fix them or make them more desirable when comparing to caps).

This would warrant marauder’s high price tag and gives them a reason to be expensive. A 1.8b battleship locking down a 1.5b carrier seems be a fair trade.


Yes I do believe the warp lockdown would still be part of the T2 version:

Only a minor damage buff and a little ability to move locally for minor repositioning is being requested.

There was discussion in another thread of perhaps making a new line of marauders. The Hyperion does not have a T2 variant. And all such tier 3 BS’s are amazingly tanky. Perhaps T2 versions of these ships bonused for tackiling capitals would fill out nicely, and/or with a bonused T2 bastion.

But even if the devs were to take the route of a new line of marauders or not, either way, your idea of expanding the roles of marauding definitely deserves exploring IMHO.

1 Like

What would jam the cynos? are we talking a new module or a role bonus with a scripted point? thats an interested idea actually if you ask me.

would this jam cynos on other class ships? or only carriers, or carriers / dreads? or caps? idk whatnot

Changing a ships bonus because of some personal ‘issue’ with Role Play is definitely a poor basis for change. There are a number of ships that have little relation to the ships they supposedly come from and changing them based upon this rather than any real game play issue is just plain horrible.

You are giving the golem another low slot not because it needs it and i dont honestly think you even care about the golem or you would have suggested some better benefit than a ‘tacked-on’ low slot. You are giving the golem another low slot so you can get what you really want and that is a buff to the turret variants.

The main downside to the bastion module is that you cannot move for a specified period of time, take that away and it is no longer a ‘bastion’ module but rather a ‘mildly inconvenient’ module with a strapped on damage buff.

I proposed that it would be part of the hypothetical t2 bastion module.

You sacrifice the range bonus, gain a slightly better resist bonus and ability to block any cynos in a 30-50km radius.

T1 bastion would remain the same so as not to disrupt the PVE playstyle. T2 bastion would open up new roles for marauders as a way to lockdown caps, or prevent lazy hunters dropping a nyx on your solo marauder by ramming you with a tanky t3.


I like it. I like that there could be two various roles depending on a module you fit, which gives access to either the role bonus or module bonus… pretty ingenius idea if you ask me. :slight_smile:

A few thoughts. who would afk long enough to let a battleship hull get a tackle on their carrier? I mean, instead of using a t3, covert, cloaky, interdicter fit, they are nice to holding down targets. but the battleship hull, slow, fat, valuable d scan id tag… just seems like it would be secondary tackle, rather than hunter scout role? who wont see a t2 battleship on intel while ratting, … unles its a trap. it could always be a trap. lol.

this could be really interesting game pley, me thinks.

1 Like

Would this ability make more sense on a smaller ship then?
Like a second T2 E-war frigate with this specific trait? Or a module for dictors/HICs, that can’t be equipped with the warp sphere launchers and warp disruption field generators at the same time. You can either super tackle or cyno jam.
Which one sounds more reasonable?

tbh im not qualified to make that determination bud… but Ill share my opinions on it :slight_smile: I like the idea t2 bastion can prevent cynos within the vicinity… not sure why you would nerf the range on the guns though, as the ship wont be able to move… I think the range should stay. I think the dmg increase should be on both bastion though, the t2 having the better bonus. I think the t2 battleship is a good idea to start with for tackling carriers or dreads. They just wont be alone and will require a faster ship to actually initiate the tackle or to get eyes on the unsuspecting target. the idea that the marauder will be the actual tackle makes sense… it would be a class above heavy tackle… like an armor tech three, for example, I consider a heavy tackle.

cant make battleships warp like an interceptor but cant make interceptors tank like a battleship, unless speed tanking fighters? neuts?

so yea to add a new meta to the game, cyno jammers on battleships which get second warp to suspecting target: capital ships. I think the HIC has enough roles and the EWAR frig is just that… not a cyno jamming role that locks you in place to hold a valuable and heavy target. … I think marauders are perfect for this role.

So maybe, an idea, when t2 bastion is active, no cynos within 100km may be lit … or 1000km, or what, system wide?

To answer your question though at the end there, I wonder if the marauder cant do both… as a new role and new meta.

thing is, is how do you get a scout and a t2 battleship into position and close enough to unsuspecting target without being spotted?

These will help players to be creative with weird and retarded ideas, because the same ol same tactics are old and worn and even now Im becoming aware of them. so new ideas will come, new roles, new tricks or ganks… sandbox?

1 Like

Not system wide, that definitely would be OP. On grid effect only, barely within the average combat range of the battleships, I would say.

Cloaky frigate to recon, position it X km from the target and in a way when the target will be between the recon and the battleship. Then the battleship warps to X km to the recon frigate and hopefully lands right on the target.