| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Double TaP
   |
Posted - 2006.06.13 01:35:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Double TaP on 13/06/2006 01:42:04
Well bumping this thread even though ive only read a couple pages. Don't really care about targeting to much, and neither should anyone else, but props to j0sephine for putting those numbers out there. Been flying this thing for a while, and dealt with it, but when i really though about its bonuses "wow thanks for letting my extremely slow, crappy agility, t2 version of the battleships little brother, become an antitackling ship." I think the bonuses for nighthawk should go as follows:
Battlecruiser skill bonus: 5% bonus to heavy missile precision per level and 5% bonus to all shield resistances per level.
Command Ship Bonus: 5% bonus to Heavy Missile Kinetic Damage and Heavy missile RoF per level.
That seems about right.
Edit: Went back and read some more and people really shouldn't mesh the fleet command ships with field command ships. Way different skill reqs. Any offensive bonuses that the fleet command ships have should be made into defensive ones. But seeing as the field command ships require the HAC skill set and then some, they really otta do more damage. Oh wait, they all do! EXCEPT FOR THE NIGHTHAWK.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 00:18:00 -
[2]
bumpidy boo.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 01:54:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Imode
10 isk says the new Caldari tier 2 BC outdamages the Nighthawk :D
lol. i wouldn't be surprised if the ferox outdamaged it with dual 150s tbh.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 01:56:00 -
[4]
Also, since there is another very long thread on BC agility. I think they ought to keep Command Ship agility the way it is. I mean they are both meant to be in gangs, and they are heavy tanking and the FCS are heavy hitting (except for the nighthawk) so why make them fast. That takes away what the HACs have ont he FCS's. but anyways. back to the important stuff; fix Nighthawk Damage with the bonuses i listed above.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.15 03:08:00 -
[5]
bumpus maximus.
this thread shall never die. not until we are safe in the knowledge that the NH will not remain in its current form.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.15 03:08:00 -
[6]
bumpus maximus.
this thread shall never die. not until we are safe in the knowledge that the NH will not remain in its current form.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.15 12:04:00 -
[7]
I think the devs are afraid to change it because its one of those balance things, and thats why they wont do the "quick fix". But after 11 pages of mostly "OH GOD FIX THE SHIP" you would think that maybe it could become a quick fix. I mean anyone with eyes can see its gimped just by comparing it to the other FCS and their HAC counterparts. I still love j0sephines math on the first page.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.16 16:46:00 -
[8]
Bump.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.17 01:36:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Xendie
doesnt ALL Command ships have crappy range?
nighthawk 50k
Vulture 60k
Absolution 50k
Damnation 50k
Astarte 55k
Eos 55k
Claymore 45k
Sleipner 45k
looks like Caldari got the longest range with the Vulture and minmatars the suckiest with 45k
nighthawk dont need range boosted the minmatar ones need it more to get up inline with the other commandships imho
I wish the guy would change the title of the thread because most people dont really care about targeting range on this ship. Its the crappy bonuses. We want:
Caldari Cruiser Bonus:
5% missile velocity per level
5% shield resists per level
Command Ship Bonus:
5% Rate of Fire for Heavy missiles
and 5% Kinetic Damage per level.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.17 14:28:00 -
[10]
Come on, patch teusday. Fix its bonuses then. Pleaseee
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.17 14:41:00 -
[11]
Lovely,
# The Vengeance laser optimal range bonus has been changed to a laser damage bonus. Also, its armor and power output have increased, while sheilds have been decreased. A new low power slot rounds out the changes.
# The Wolf projectile optimal range bonus has been changed to a projectile damage bonus. Also, its falloff bonus has been increased to 10% to balance it with other ships of the same class.
# The Jaguar projectile tracking speed bonus has been changed to a projectile damage bonus. It also has a higher power and cpu output and a new medium power slot.
Why can't you fix the nighthawk as well. good christ.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.17 15:53:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Ishmael Hansen
Originally by: Double TaP
Lovely,
Why can't you fix the nighthawk as well. good christ.
So caldari don't get a dps ship and keep it's useless niche ships, cept raven the pve king and scorpion ew, tho the rook can be a pretty uber solo pwnmobile.
And no ones really asking for uber dps on it, we all know blaster can and will do more damage. But its supposed to be taking down bigger ships. Its a battlecruiser. not a Frigate Swatter. So, to reinstate the bonuses tux, since aparently the 3 months of sub i spent training for this thing up to its release arnt all that imporant to yall:
5% (10% if you want to make precisions useful) heavy missile velocity and 5% shield resists per level Battlecruiser
5% heavy missile RoF and 5% Kinetic Damage per level.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.17 21:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Sadist
WTB astarte that does 1300DPS with rails. 
What a stupid statement.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.17 22:31:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Nekora
Two questions about the Field Command Ships,
If they are not supposed to be a more powerful assault ship, Why do they require assault ship skills?
If they are supposed to be anti frigate ships, Would it not make more sense to give the Absolution, Astarte and Sleipnir a Tracking bonus instead of a second damage bonus?
You sir, have just summed up everyones thoughts in this thread. Now why wont they change it in the upcoming teusday patch?
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 04:30:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Mack Dorgeans
Edited by: Mack Dorgeans on 17/06/2006 23:39:52
Edit: Someone asked me to rename the thread to remove the targeting range title and make a note in the original post that the main concern with the Nighthawk especially is with its bonuses. All the opinions have pretty much been covered in here at one point or another, but the majority seem to want the Nighthawk to do DPS more in line with the Absolution, Astarte, and Sleipnir.
Some want all command ships to be for gang bonuses, rather than some being BC-sized HACs. I disagree with that sentiment, preferring that one per race be the true command ship and the other be focused more on combat prowess. After all, HAC skill is needed to fly one, logistics the other.
There are various other problems with the command ships, like the targeting range mentioned in my original post below, agility and speed (as with the BCs they're based on), etc.
If you manage to read through this whole thing from start to finish, well then you need something better to do with your time.
Thanks its very much appreciated.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 14:30:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Nekora
I think this has got to the point where everyone agrees that something needs to be done to balance the ships (although there is still argument over wether this is boosting the Nighthawk or Nerfing the absolution, astarte, sleipnir) and several people have pointed out the Vulture can not make use of its full range bonus without sensor boosters, Although i think that most people are less concerned about that. The problem we have now is to bring this to the attention of someone in CCP, or if they already know all this (which i would hope is the case, since it is obvious to anyone who has flown them) getting some sort of comment on what is going to be done about it. Personaly i would settle for a "Yes, we know, we will look at it later" type comment at this point...
Alls that would do is quadruple the length of this thread. The fact is that it requires the HAC skill tree, they are supposed to be battlecruisers with big tanks and mroe damage, and all of them are. Except for the Nighthawk. (I'm only talking about the field command ships)
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 15:33:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Deathbarrage
I never see a missile boat doing more DPS then a turret boat yet their effective DPS never suffers from it
Yes, because they usually have missile dps bonuses. you dont seem to know what the problem is at all. dont reply to something of which you have no idea what you're talking about.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 20:42:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Deathbarrage
Originally by: Double TaP
Originally by: Deathbarrage
I never see a missile boat doing more DPS then a turret boat yet their effective DPS never suffers from it
Yes, because they usually have missile dps bonuses. you dont seem to know what the problem is at all. dont reply to something of which you have no idea what you're talking about.
*looks at the 5% kinetic missile damage per lvl on the nighthawk*
oops sorry you're right Nighthawk doesn't have a damage bonus....?
I said DPS bonus. There is no RoF bonus. There is no velocity bonus which helps with range. The cerb shoots out missiles faster than 6 launchers on the nighthawk can keep up. It also has about twice the range.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 00:46:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Deathbarrage
Originally by: Double TaP
Originally by: Deathbarrage
Originally by: Double TaP
Originally by: Deathbarrage
I never see a missile boat doing more DPS then a turret boat yet their effective DPS never suffers from it
Yes, because they usually have missile dps bonuses. you dont seem to know what the problem is at all. dont reply to something of which you have no idea what you're talking about.
*looks at the 5% kinetic missile damage per lvl on the nighthawk*
oops sorry you're right Nighthawk doesn't have a damage bonus....?
I said DPS bonus. There is no RoF bonus. There is no velocity bonus which helps with range. The cerb shoots out missiles faster than 6 launchers on the nighthawk can keep up. It also has about twice the range.
Ah right well afaik a damage bonus adds to the dps, making it a dps bonus, but hey I guess I'm just stupid
It has less damage bonuses than a t1 cruiser. Need we continue this?
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 04:23:00 -
[20]
what i meant earlier is that the CARACAL, not the NH have the same damage bonus. And thats it. The only thing damage-wise the nighthawk has on that t1 cruiser is 1 launcher. And people still dare say this isnt a problem?
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 15:38:00 -
[21]
Originally by: de1337
Well i have my missile skills maxed and, 5% missile speed to my implants, and dps isnt a problem as im hitting every 5 secs just the range, the launcher type needs to be changed into a shorter range if dps is gonna be upped
You're not hitting every 5 seconds. Because I have my missile skills maxed as well, and with 2 BCS and Heavy Missile specialization 4 My RoF is only 6.8seconds or so. There needs to be RoF bonus, and a velocity bonus. It needs to be:
10% Missile Velocity and 5% shield resists per level Battlecruiser.
5% RoF and 5% Kinetic Damage per level Command Ship.
If they really want to make it even, they could give 2 RoF bonuses and no kinetic damage bonus and let us pick our missile type. Just move the Missile Velocity Bonus up to the Command Ship Bonus and make the battlecruiser bonus 5% RoF as well.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 15:39:00 -
[22]
Originally by: bringdapain
Nope but you can get the resis's up to 80-90 for all and 9K sheild with a permentant med shield booster on, if you are already hitting the other CBC's 70KM before they are hitting you.
Im not saying bonuses shouldnt be changed but the standerd range on it is a joke for a missile ship
If they want to keep the targeting range how it is on the Nighthawk, thats fine, because its about same range as other Field Command Ships. But because its a t2 ship, it still needs a velocity bonus, so t2 ammo has an actual purpose on it.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 17:08:00 -
[23]
Originally by: de1337
Originally by: Double TaP
Originally by: de1337
Well i have my missile skills maxed and, 5% missile speed to my implants, and dps isnt a problem as im hitting every 5 secs just the range, the launcher type needs to be changed into a shorter range if dps is gonna be upped
You're not hitting every 5 seconds. Because I have my missile skills maxed as well, and with 2 BCS and Heavy Missile specialization 4 My RoF is only 6.8seconds or so. There needs to be RoF bonus, and a velocity bonus. It needs to be:
10% Missile Velocity and 5% shield resists per level Battlecruiser.
5% RoF and 5% Kinetic Damage per level Command Ship.
If they really want to make it even, they could give 2 RoF bonuses and no kinetic damage bonus and let us pick our missile type. Just move the Missile Velocity Bonus up to the Command Ship Bonus and make the battlecruiser bonus 5% RoF as well.
maybe you should get some 5% implants and officer mods then too eh???
No officer mod increases your rate of fire more than a t2 bcu does. It only improves damage. Besides, doesnt it make you sad that you do less damage than all the other FCS's, and you're the one with the officer mods and implants!
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 19:32:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Ganandorf
Basically, you want to get a raven of command ships, since as we all know a raven does way less dps then most other BS's yet pwns them all? imo nighthawk is fine if you're putting equal DPS on a nighthawk it'd be so overpowered, imagine a raven with 1100 DPS, 9k shield and 80% resistance across the board
/emote looks through the thread for the person who said that missiles should do blaster dps. oops cant find it. but hey, yea i want a raven command ship. it does do less dps than a mega. and if i get webbed and up close to an astarte with 6 or 7 blasters, im probably ******. but im not sure if i can break a skilled ferox pilot's tank. the fact is IN COMPARISON, the FCS's all do about 140-150% the damage of their HAC counterpart. The nighthawk does LESS damage than a cerb, at about 90%. If you dont see a problem with that, than I don't think you ever will.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 21:51:00 -
[25]
Originally by: SavageThrash
Edited by: SavageThrash on 19/06/2006 21:06:44
ok with a rof bonus and kinetic missle bonus, you would get about 350 dps with decent everyday joe skills, now 2 rof bonuses would be approx 400 dps. thats where its at :)
To look at it overall though, all thats needed is a rof bonus. although 2 would be sweet it would prolly be a little overpowered. considering that you can choose ur dmg type.
tbh i dont see how 400dps is overpowered. thats if your numbers are right. no doubt you would need a bcs or 2 for sure. but dont forget about a velocity bonus. The raven, the cerb, and the caracal all have a 10% missile velocity bonus. This is badly needed on the nighthawk to make the t2 ammo useful. But put this on the test server:
Battlecruiser skill bonus: 5% heavy missile Rof and 5% shield resists per level.
CommandShip skill bonus: 10% heavy missile velocity and 5% heavy missile RoF
Just put it on the test server for pete sakes so we can dual some of the other command ships and maybe a tier 1 bs or something. If it seems over done replace the 2nd RoF bonus with kinetic missile damage bonus. But its not a cerb, its a battlecruiser that should be doing 150% the damage of cerb.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.19 23:40:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Necrologic
Originally by: Double TaP
Originally by: SavageThrash
Edited by: SavageThrash on 19/06/2006 21:06:44
ok with a rof bonus and kinetic missle bonus, you would get about 350 dps with decent everyday joe skills, now 2 rof bonuses would be approx 400 dps. thats where its at :)
To look at it overall though, all thats needed is a rof bonus. although 2 would be sweet it would prolly be a little overpowered. considering that you can choose ur dmg type.
tbh i dont see how 400dps is overpowered. thats if your numbers are right. no doubt you would need a bcs or 2 for sure. but dont forget about a velocity bonus. The raven, the cerb, and the caracal all have a 10% missile velocity bonus. This is badly needed on the nighthawk to make the t2 ammo useful. But put this on the test server:
Battlecruiser skill bonus: 5% heavy missile Rof and 5% shield resists per level.
CommandShip skill bonus: 10% heavy missile velocity and 5% heavy missile RoF
Just put it on the test server for pete sakes so we can dual some of the other command ships and maybe a tier 1 bs or something. If it seems over done replace the 2nd RoF bonus with kinetic missile damage bonus. But its not a cerb, its a battlecruiser that should be doing 150% the damage of cerb.
Good stuff.
If we don't see a fix to it's bonuses really damn soon there will be no point in flying one over the tier two missile bc that's coming out in a couple months.
yes, especially if it can tank as well as the t1 ferox. then it will probably be just as good at 0.0 ratting as well.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.20 00:00:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ab Initio
Originally by: Ishmael Hansen
quoting Jenstruant Fogg here, thx for the help,
Enyo with:
4x Neutron Blaster II (Void)
4x Officer Damage Mods
Hit 400+ DPS iirc
So why would 400 dps would be overpowered for a NH, let's not forget bout trainning times for both ships.
ps. - I hate the frig lobby :P
Just FYI. If you're going to make comparisons. Probably more relevant not to use the best damage mods in game to prove your point. Unless you plan on doing the same on the NH.
Hes right ^^. but something tells me that if you fit 4 Estamels BCS's the dps wouldnt be much higher 
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.20 04:18:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Necrologic
Originally by: Glarion Garnier
Would be logical if Nighthawk bonuses would be put in line with the ones like Astarte (ok ship btw.) Sleipnir, Absolution.
Nighthawk bonuses solution:
-Make cruiser sized rocket launcher. Heavy rockets
-Give Nitghawk bonuses to Heavy missiles and Heavy Rockets ROF , then give Heavy rockets additional Rof or dmg bonus to fix them as the weapon of choise
bonuses:
1 shield resistances tho I rather had shield booster bonus like Sleipnir (why caldari should have gimped tanking)
2 5% Heavy Missile and heavy rocket ROF ,
3 5 % to Heavy missiles kinetic dmg and 10% to Heavy Rockets kinetic dmg per command ship lvl
something like that.
so with allmost maxed skills they would have short range weapons dmg output bit lower when compared to astarte (10-15%)
I just started training Caldari cruiser 5. I hope Its not totally wasted skill training.
and fix the siq and agility issues of Command ships. + increase locking ranges of all command ships with 25% or so . Vulture could use even more as it has poor dmg.
Why should NH be a specced heavy rocket ship? Do any other race's field command get their full bonuses to only their short range guns? Didn't think so.
QFT
also there is another problem with that idea. it would take forever to impliment. while changing the bonuses on the other hand they could do in... i dunno sometime in the next couple hours before the patch 
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.20 20:32:00 -
[29]
yes, equal damage at 70km would be overpowered. But no ones asking for equal damage with blasters. were asking for an ungimped ship that does what the other command ships do. 150% the damage of their hac counterpart. Its bullcrap. The nighthawk needs a velocity bonus which all the other missile ships got, and it needs a RoF bonus, or even 2 RoF bonuses. But at its current state its ridiculous.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.20 23:56:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Necrologic
bu-ump
lol was in the middle of doing that
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 04:49:00 -
[31]
one last bump before i go out of town
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.21 15:31:00 -
[32]
Originally by: FireFoxx80
Even NightHawks are dropping to rediculous prices now due to nerfage. Saw one on market for 139m the other night.
!? 
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.25 01:22:00 -
[33]
back from outta town. still no word on things?
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.25 04:59:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Talenor Darcaneth
I may not be the guy you were talking to, but you had a question, and I will answer.
Originally by: Nekora
So, dont want to release your uber tank setup? Guess we will just have to settle for practical figures based on the ship then.
hmmm, now I want a show of hands from all of you experts who actually fly a Nighthawk.....Ok, thats what I thought: almost none. Its obvious that many of you have not a clue about it, just speculate while training for it, yelling around trying to get it better by the time you get into it. -.- Lets start with the first part: it is a COMMAND SHIP, you need skills and experience to use it. How many of you have ever actually thought of its main strength, which is passive tanking? Passive, no active mods except if using command mod = absolute freedom from nos/cap regen, which allows full rack of t2 fury heavies and no worries. If any of you want, ill show em a ss of a ship, no implants all skills, with 13,287k hp, 80%+ resists to all types, 525sec regen, and shield harmonizing link, and still has one med slot left!.
high: 6x t2 heavy 1x harmonizing link
mid: 2x mag scattering amp 2 with EM shield comp. V/ 2x large xtender 2/ 1x take your pick: booster/recharger or another passive hardener, whatever you want, maybe even a non-tank item maybe??
low: 4xpdu 2/ dmg control (aint active cap wise if u ask me)
Aint possible you say? No way for fitting? I can even add a large T2 booster to those xtenders and warfare link if i sub in a reactor control 2 instead of dmg control or pdu's.
Like what I said before, if you dont fly one, dont talk like you know what you're doing until you have the skills and are piloting one. This may not be my pvp/pve setup I always use, that changes on the situation b/c I can, being I have no dmg type and cap lifeline weakness. I dont walk around telling a gunner how to shoot, I explain to people how to actually use caldari warfare strategy and the secrets of the passive tank. Go ahead, plug those numbers into a tank calc, nice huh? Now add in a gist large booster that acts like it doesnt use cap, or make that hp regen smaller b/c of a mid slot recharger....
The only fix the NH needs is agility and dmg via its already existing bonuses, 10% to all heavy and light dmg would make me happy, maybe switch target navi prediction to 5% heavy RoF and 5% precision to 10%? Missiles had an advantage of dmg type choice if i remember in the past, would love to see us have our racial bonus again and not nerfed to just kinetic. I fly a NH b/c of what it can really do in a pvp battlefield from experience, and love it for its specialization and being a pure Caldari strategy based ship. Everyone wants to be a chief before learning how to be a sqaw -.-
Happy Hunting
--------------------------------
Lone Wolf Hunter of the Cascades
Thats great bud. Im sitting in mine right now and I got about 16k shield and all resists above 80. Nighthawk is great tank. And so are all the other command ships. Nighthawk damage sucks though. And you cant argue that it doesnt. You cant, or I will accuse you of actually never really flying the ship. So what purpose that post had eludes me. It needs a RoF and a Velocity bonus. Not a precision and and prediction bonus. IT SHOULDNT BE AN ANTI-FRIGATE SHIP.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 15:17:00 -
[35]
bump
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.06.27 15:53:00 -
[36]
screw heavy rockets for the moment tux. please tell me i can use this ship.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.01 08:21:00 -
[37]
**** 15 pages. call it a hint tux.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.02 04:44:00 -
[38]
how is a tech 1 battlecruiser going to make the nighthawk obsolete. do you not know what these FCS are capable of tanking? The fact is that its a ship that is supposed to do a lot more damage than an HAC, and its missile based. As it stands right now, it sucks. and the problem is that i see absolutely NO reason not to fix it.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.04 15:34:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Nekora
i Still Stand by changeing the 5% precision per level to 5% ROF per level to bring the bonus in line with EVERY OTHER Field command ship. the ship has pleanty of range already so a velocity bonus just seems silly, and we have pleanty of ships cappable of pinning frigates without another one.
You forget that the velocity bonus is to actually make t2 missiles work, and to hit smaller things. If they're going to make the Nighthawk a railboat, I honestly wouldnt mind that, as long as they promised not to gimp the t2 tier 2 bc. But if its going to stay its missile battlecruiser heavy assault ship, it needs
5% resists
5% Heavy Missile RoF (not lights)
10% Heavy Missile Velocity
5% Heavy Missile (Heres the tricky part. Either Kinetic Damage, or another RoF bonus. I don't think another RoF bonus would be overpowered, so I wish they would test it on the test server at least.)
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.05 01:27:00 -
[40]
A velocity bonus doesn't cancel out the penalties of t2 ammo. You're either gimping your cap or gimping your speed. Most missile boats have a velocity bonus, its only natural. And personally I would like to see 2 RoF bonuses on the test server so I can do some dps calculations.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.05 22:17:00 -
[41]
bump
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.06 17:39:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Nekora
Would prefer a 5% Damage and a 5% RoF bonus, saveing on ammo and hence cargo space, and cost of T2 missiles. And also increce alpha strike - Altough i will admit that has limmited effect. Any reasons you would prefer two RoF bonus as to one Damage and one Rof?
You have the 5% RoF bonus and the Velocity bonus as well. 2/4 of the nighthawks bonuses are retarded. The kinetic damage one is debatable, but I ultimately think 2 RoF bonuses would be best, and would be what seperates it from the cerb. It would ultimately mean more dps OVER TIME, and ability to choose damage types, but the heavy missiles would be hitting for less. Even then, the dps is going to be crap compared to the other FCS, and the nighthawk is a slowboat, so they are going to dictate range. I just would like to see it on the test server, just so they recognize there is a problem, because I do not want to see this pushed back to kali, which im pretty sure it is. Its really a gamebreaking problem for me atm. But oh well.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.06 19:03:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Double TaP on 06/07/2006 19:03:53
double post
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.06 19:04:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Denrace
My ideal Nighthawk would have:
5% Bonus to all heavy Missile Damage
5% Bonus to Shield Hitpoints
5% Bonus to Heavy Missile ROF
5% Bonus to Kinetic Missile Damage
Then..
>> Add more powergrid
>> Add 1 more launcher hardpoint
The shield HP bonus is unique and would help the passive shield tanking part of a NH/Cerberus, which proves so popular.
The ROF and dual damage bonuses let it do some nice DPS, with not much of a range with no velocity/flightime bonus to counter the increased DPS.
Sounds much more fun....
Den
hehe sounds like fun, but although we want some big changes made to the bonuses, we dont want anything that radical. just a FIX from the CRAP that it is now. but a high damage low range missile boat that maybe uses say heavy rockets, would be fun, but save it for the t2 tier 2 bc thats going to be a missile boat. makes a lot more sense since the heavy rockets arnt out yet. so im still going with what i stated above
5% resists
5% RoF
10% Velocity
5% Rof
All for heavy missiles only.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.08 00:17:00 -
[45]
hmm. if 2 RoF bonuses uses too much ammo, youd have to reload to often which isnt practical. The Nighthawk could get the same bonus as the kestrel maybe, with 1 RoF bonus. So it would be
5% bonus to shield resists
5% bonus to heavy missile RoF
10% Missile Velocity
10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage and 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage per level.
That would be balanced imo. Kinetic would still be dealing more damage, but you wouldnt be gimped and wasting a bonus if you went with another damage type.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.08 00:49:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Double TaP on 08/07/2006 00:52:10
Originally by: Necrologic
Edited by: Necrologic on 08/07/2006 00:39:23
Originally by: Double TaP
hmm. if 2 RoF bonuses uses too much ammo, youd have to reload to often which isnt practical. The Nighthawk could get the same bonus as the kestrel maybe, with 1 RoF bonus. So it would be
5% bonus to shield resists
5% bonus to heavy missile RoF
10% Missile Velocity
10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage and 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage per level.
That would be balanced imo. Kinetic would still be dealing more damage, but you wouldnt be gimped and wasting a bonus if you went with another damage type.
That would do except for the slight problem that that is 5 bonuses. The kestrel has 2, 5% to kinetic and 5% to all, giving 10% kinetic and 5% the rest. It would have to loose the rof bonus to have that one, and honestly i'd prefer 2 rof bonuses.
Yea but look at the way I wrote it. Looks like 1 bonus to me
Edit: you could even make it look like 1 bonus by lowering the kinetic to 5% by saying "5% bonus to heavy missile damage". that way youre not reloading every couple seconds. although i prefer the way i stated it originally.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.08 05:22:00 -
[47]
ah **** tuxford, please fix my ship 
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.08 14:36:00 -
[48]
Yes, and the vulture doesn't do any damage, and it doesn't need to.
The t1 merlin, isnt a missile boat, so why is the hawk? Because some people use missiles and some people use hybrids. Its okay if they make the nighthawk a missile boat, and its okay if they make it a rail platform. The problem is that right now, its just a floating pile of jet black crap. The problem with making the nighthawk much of a rail platform is that its maneuverability and speed is so bad im not quite sure how its going to pull it off. It cant very well do anything if all the ships it goes against dictate the range. Thats why i think its fine as a missile boat. It doesn't move around much, it just hits what it can whenever they get in range. The problem is that it hits about the same as a caracal. If you're going to make it a rail platform, which I wouldn't be against, but is going to cause a lot of the missile users who trained for it to whine, you're going to have to make it a pimped up Eagle. A ship that does about 150% the damage of the eagle. If you're going to just leave it how it is as a missile boat, and change the bonuses, well than ******* do it soon.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.08 15:26:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Ishmael Hansen
Originally by: Double TaP
Yes, and the vulture doesn't do any damage, and it doesn't need to.
The t1 merlin, isnt a missile boat, so why is the hawk? Because some people use missiles and some people use hybrids. Its okay if they make the nighthawk a missile boat, and its okay if they make it a rail platform. The problem is that right now, its just a floating pile of jet black crap. The problem with making the nighthawk much of a rail platform is that its maneuverability and speed is so bad im not quite sure how its going to pull it off. It cant very well do anything if all the ships it goes against dictate the range. Thats why i think its fine as a missile boat. It doesn't move around much, it just hits what it can whenever they get in range. The problem is that it hits about the same as a caracal. If you're going to make it a rail platform, which I wouldn't be against, but is going to cause a lot of the missile users who trained for it to whine, you're going to have to make it a pimped up Eagle. A ship that does about 150% the damage of the eagle. If you're going to just leave it how it is as a missile boat, and change the bonuses, well than ******* do it soon.
Can we make it 150% damage of the Thorax, the eagle damage would be crappy.
hehe the thought of ever seeing a blasterhawk seems very wrong for some reason. how about we just fix the missile bonuses?
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.09 16:30:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Necrologic
I've been getting a bunch of pvp experiance in this thing as i'm trying to find a way to make it useful. So far i'm failing. The only thing i've killed is a rifter, and only because he sat on a gate and didn't jump while i unloaded the 4 or 5 vollies it took (no precision). PLEASE fix this thing!
lol welcome to the club. the only thing thats made this ship worth anything is that it can tank reasonably well. but the damage problem is rather pestering especially since tux or anyone else hasnt said anything. i mean i feel for the man, he shouldn't have to respond to every "tux plz fix this" but this is 17, about to become 18, and still climbing pages long so theres probably an issue. id really like to see this fixed. or something said about the being fixed. because so far i have no indication that anythings going to be done.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.10 13:12:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Ishmael Hansen
is this thread dying?
well the problem is that everything that needs to be said has been said. several times. the only thing we can really do is hope that it gets fixed soon, occasionally bumping the thread to keep it visible.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.10 14:58:00 -
[52]
Originally by: LVirus
i started to train for gallente cruiser 5, ill be flying a astarte in no time.
btw, plz fix NH and VULTURE
Well the vulture isnt too bad off. It can tank like nothin else. It should'nt have very much firepower, none of the fleet command ships should. But the field command ships that require the HAC skill tree should. Like the nighthawk.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.10 20:10:00 -
[53]
up
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.12 02:46:00 -
[54]
I think I will bump again!
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.12 02:46:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Double TaP on 12/07/2006 02:46:05
double post
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.12 14:43:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Akiman
hey but when i see a nighthawk in my inty i just flee without looking behind.thats an uber small ship insta popper.and she has precision bonus it should improve lost dps cause of signature radius?
do you think we would've complained for 18 pages if it did? im glad our nighthawk scares your inty away. the astarte and absolution scare away battleships. wtf do we want an uber frigate popper for? a caracal should scare away your inty, because i can do the same job, well actually a better job because the caracal can actually move around, killing intys.
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.13 14:43:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Double TaP on 13/07/2006 14:43:52
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 13/07/2006 11:32:27
its the targeting range of the vulture that is the side issue.
having to fit 2 sensor boosters in a shieltanking ship to make use of its bonuses hurts.
Fixed that for you 
|
Double TaP
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 05:05:00 -
[58]
i guess il try recon ships or something. hopefully tux will feel refreshed when he gets back from vacation and maybe give us some word on this ship.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 15:15:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Sanzuro
I know only one way to fix vulture-like ships. and this way leads to wing command. right, it must have limited firing abilitis but good tanking and best "warfare" abilities. vote for it...
?? The Vulture fulfills it role well, it just need a better targeting range to actually use some of its bonuses.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.14 16:32:00 -
[60]
Read the first couple pages again though. jOsephine ran some numbers by everyone. The targeting range of the Vulture does need a slight boost. You can't fit blasters on it. Its not a viable setup at all. But yes, I do agree, its a minor thing. The Nighthawk needs its Bonuses completely changed.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 14:41:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Double TaP on 15/07/2006 14:41:12
Hey everybody!!
Originally by: CCP Hammer
That Nighthawk has a hard tank doesn't it? I think I'll link to the archive of this fight next time I see a thread about the Nighthawk. (In all serious though we were taking a look at it's bonuses for possible tweakage)
Edit: I think they need a little more than "tweakage", but at least we know they know and they care!
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 22:03:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Atma Darkwolf
heh... not helping the thread at all here, but it's SO nice to see a CRAPPY missle boat for once.
YAY..
Too bad they WILL fix it.. everyone knows CCP luvs them missles, and anything capable of firing them should destroy anything that can't.
not only did you not help the thread, you showed what little you know about ship balance and pvp!!
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.15 22:09:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Emily Spankratchet
Edited by: Emily Spankratchet on 15/07/2006 16:34:27
Whilst not disagreeing with some of the arguments here, I was impressed by the way nighthawks have been performing in the alliance tournament so far. A number of the matches that I watched ended up with a nighthawk tanking four other ships for minutes until it finally *****ed.
Edit: Oh, good grief, stupid profanity filter. For *****ed, read buckled. Or something
Yes as denrace stated, no one is saying the Nighthawk can't tank. But it doesn't tank any better than the other field command ships. It's dps is unfortuntely completely fubar'd. Like has been stated earlier, it needs a huge boost in that area. And 1 RoF bonus is not going to cut it. In order to give the 140% boost in damage over the cerb, the bonuses should be something like:
5% Resists
5% Heavy Missile Rate of Fire
10% Heavy missile velocity
10% Kinetic and 5% EM, thermal, and explosive damage per level.
These orders can be changed around, but the thing would gobble up ammo with 2 RoF bonuses, and just adding one doesnt help the damage enough. Plus both of the frigate killing bonuses suck.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.18 05:07:00 -
[64]
did you look at the last page buddy?
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.19 02:20:00 -
[65]
Originally by: HippoKing
Originally by: Ecce Drihten
Why are we on page 6? This still has not been fixed... so it needs to go back to page 1!!
I want my nighthawk fixed as much as anyone else, but bumping is counter-productive
Especially when if you look at the last page, I quoted CCP HAMMER saying "were looking at the bonuses". The thread has served its purpose. They're working on it. The fix wont be for a couple months most likely, but they are doing something at least. Even if they dont totally fix it.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.19 19:10:00 -
[66]
well the fact is that we are not even sure heavy rockets are coming out, and if they do whether they will come pre-gimped to bloody hell or not. personally, the idea of heavy rockets is appealing to me if they do it right, but i dont care atm, i want heavy missiles to work on the nighthawk. new bonuses. thats all we need.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 14:36:00 -
[67]
Of course! I passive tank it. Works well.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 18:59:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
Originally by: SavageThrash
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
Originally by: SavageThrash
The caldari tourny should have shed some light on this issue, i belive it was ISS vs stain fight? I forget which but i do remeber seeing the nighthawk tanking like a mofo while shooting an ishkur was it? Some small gallente frig, yet while it tanked the other ships for several minutes it was not able to kill 1 frig. embarrassing, 2 useless bonuses 4tw 
Sorry mr.Clueless Corp muppet.
The ishkur had shield maintenance drones, bumping the shield back to 100%, while he was shooting explosive missiles.
Now shush.
Yes i know he had shield matience drones but thats still not the point, if you cant break a frigs tank that has some shield rep drones on it how to you expects to break anything else's tank? the drones dont due an incredible amount eaither. With full shield and ANY type missle even if it doesnt get a dmg bonus i would expect it to take out a little more then the shield in one volley 0.o
Do you know what he had fitted?
Do you know what skills he had?
Do you know how much drones can repair a shield of an assault frigate when your shooting explosive missiles on it?
Did you notice the ishkur tank was getting beaten up before he got repaired?
Are you going to stop to wish for a "i win. 1 volley frigate ship"?
Shesh seriously Savage........
Stop using crappy examples for your nighthawk underpowered crusade.
For the record, this is my underpowered nigthawk crusade. But the tournament is a horrible of example of anything that has to do with pvp balance, so dont even try and relate it to anything.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 21:16:00 -
[69]
damage output is more than laughable. its depressing.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 04:46:00 -
[70]
That was me ^^
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.25 05:38:00 -
[71]
The problem with the NH is ship bonuses. I like heavy missiles, they work fine. Sure, I'm looking forward to Heavy Rockets, but they are in development, and we dont even know if they devs are going to gimp them to hell like they did the NH, so lets just focus on the main problem. THe ship bonuses. I suggest something drastic and different, because quite frankly thats what it needs:
5% bonus to shield resists
5% bonus to heavy missile RoF
10% Missile Velocity
10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage and 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage per level.
But people please quit coming in here and bumping. CCP Hammer said they are looking at bonuses, so its going to be changed, even if its not changed to what it should be, anything will be good. So sleep my children, wait til kali is closer, and then we bring the thread back so they dont forget.
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.07.25 17:00:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Oh yes, third old thread being bumped today...
/me requests forum filtering options
sigh. look at the dates on the past several pages...
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.08.02 20:35:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Armi Tage
a 7th misslepoint would probably suffice
wouldnt that be nice
|
Double TaP
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.08.06 16:58:00 -
[74]
Seen a lot of Nighthawk threads lately so thought I would bring this one back to discuss what people want the actual bonuses to be. Tux has said hes going to remove the TNP bonus most likely, but personally I would like to see the Guided Missile Precision bonus changed as well. So imo I think they should let us test a couple different bonuses on the test server, instead of jsut deciding and implementing. What I would like to see would be
5% resists
5% heavy missile rof
and then for the command ship bonus i would love to see kestrel bonus
10% kinetic and
5% em, thermal, and exp damage per level.
The 5% kinetic bonus is the most annoying thing in the world. With no velocity bonus this would have limited range, and if the new assault rockets come out with short range, they will have to be very short range to work on the nighthawk.
So what do other people think?
|
| |
|