| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Chill5
Ambivalence Co-operative
Black Thorne Alliance
0
   |
Posted - 2012.10.18 11:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
If heavy missiles get a 10% damage nerf will the Nighthawk become too inefficient as a lv4 grinder?
As a Nighhawk driver (with over a year's worth of training to optimise the Nighthawk), I sincerely hope not. |
Chill5
Ambivalence Co-operative
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 04:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Cedo Nulli wrote:Risien Drogonne wrote:
WAY too many people confuse the terms "viable" and "optimal".
When your trying to make your isk by L4 missions ... you dont want viable .. you want optimal. Anything to shorten the time spent on the next most booring thing after mining in highsec.
This^^
I've probably spent way more than a year on training skills to optimise the Nighthawk for tank and gank (and supporting skills), so my question is related to the effectiveness of the Nighthawk after the nerfs - not any concern about the tank (tank and gank almost maxed) .
Missioning is a bread and butter activity, so anything that slows missioning down is going to annoy. With 3 BCUs I get about 550dps, so anything less is going to be of dubious worth. After spending so much time training the extensive skills required to get the most out of the Nighthawk (let alone the original training just so I could fly it), I feel that this nerf may be a game-breaker for me.
Just not happy about about this nerf at all. |
Chill5
Thirsty Spacers
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 07:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
Have you ever witnessed the passive tank of the Nighthawk at work? Tengu doesn't even come close to the tank on the Nighthawk.
The reason why not many people fly the Nighthawk is because the training time is so long. Which is why i'm unhappy about it being indirectly nerfed. |
Chill5
Thirsty Spacers
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.20 09:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Zhilia Mann wrote:Veryez wrote:Zhilia Mann wrote:Chill5 wrote:The reason why not many people fly the Nighthawk is because the training time is so long. Which is why i'm unhappy about it being indirectly nerfed. This is absurd. I've had CS 5 since before T3s were released and I still find precious little use for the Nighthawk despite loving the hull. Training time has nothing to do with it. The fact of the matter is that the Tengu is hands down better in almost all circumstances. It's not as absurd as you think, t3's are great ships for newer players. The training time is very minimal and you can be very effective in a very quick time. I understand full well that T3s are good for newer players and that training time is a consideration on that side of things. My point was that T3s -- and the Tengu in particular -- are so good that even older players who have full access to ships that require extensive training time -- like the Nighthawk -- still choose to fly T3s on a regular basis. This is more obvious in some cases than others. T3 OGBs are definitely broken. The Tengu roflstomps the Nighthawk/Cerberus more than the Proteus vis-a-vis the Astarte and Lachesis, which is more pronounced than the Legion versus the Absolution/Sacrilege/Zealot/Pilgrim. The Sleipnir remains competitive in some areas with the Loki. The Nighthawk case is pretty clear cut though. Unless you absolutely have to have a therm/kin passive tank or you absolutely have to have that tiny drone bay, the Tengu is better suited -- training time be damned since it isn't even a relevant consideration to the choice in the first place.
You need to walk a mile in someone else's shoes, dude. But let's not stray from the topic.
|
Chill5
Thirsty Spacers
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.22 10:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
What if I tell you that players aren't supposed to breeze semi-AFK through L4s and complexes similar to them in difficulty?
lvl4s are bread and butter. They SHOULD be easy for skilled pilots. lvl4s oil the wheels for pvp, exploration, lvl5s, and WH activities. you know, challenging stuff.
Making my bread and butter activities harder and more time consuming will make me angry, nothing else.
Nighthawk is just sufficient for lvl4s as far as DPS goes, but it makes up for it with a zero-stress uni-tank. And that is why I fly one
|
Chill5
Thirsty Spacers
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.22 15:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
BobFenner wrote:Chill5 wrote:Barrogh Habalu wrote:
What if I tell you that players aren't supposed to breeze semi-AFK through L4s and complexes similar to them in difficulty?
lvl4s are bread and butter. They SHOULD be easy for skilled pilots. lvl4s oil the wheels for pvp, exploration, lvl5s, and WH activities. you know, challenging stuff. Making my bread and butter activities harder and more time consuming will make me angry, nothing else.
Nighthawk is just sufficient for lvl4s as far as DPS goes, but it makes up for it with a zero-stress uni-tank. And that is why I fly one Just for your Information, Lvl 4's have no bearing whatsoever on WH's. People in WH's make WAY more ISK than Lvl 4 missions. 
They do have a bearing if you don't live in a WH. Or maybe you have an occasional WH habit, like me.
|
| |
|