EVE Search - Vulture/Nighthawk Targeting Range Question

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Vulture/Nighthawk Targeting Range Question

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Ecce Drihten	Posted - 2006.06.17 04:13:00 - [331] 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 Take a closer look at the vulture. The reason problem is that it has 2 OPTIMAL RANGE boni to medium turrets. This is useless when the ship can only target 60km. Either the target range needs to be extended to take advatage of the boni or they need to be changed to something useful.
Ishmael Hansen	Posted - 2006.06.17 08:53:00 - [332] I fly Cerberus and I'm 1d from BC lvl 5, should I start trainning for gallente cruiser 5 next or amarr? Is NH getting any love or is it staying the crappy and cheaper version of the cerb? :(
Manyanga	Posted - 2006.06.17 14:02:00 - [333] this thread needs a bump
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.17 14:28:00 - [334] Come on, patch teusday. Fix its bonuses then. Pleaseee
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.17 14:41:00 - [335] 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.
Ishmael Hansen	Posted - 2006.06.17 15:23:00 - [336] 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.
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.17 15:53:00 - [337] 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.
SavageThrash	Posted - 2006.06.17 18:48:00 - [338] In response to the minny having a very low targeting range, they are mostly close range ships and dont get range bonuses :)
Ishmael Hansen	Posted - 2006.06.17 20:36:00 - [339] I started trainning for the cerberus when it was the less loved and cheaper hac, thinking, I would stick to caldari and get cheap hacs, once I finished trainning they started costing 240m. With the NH I thought, eventually they will be fixed, bet they won't :(
Sadist	Posted - 2006.06.17 21:24:00 - [340] Originally by: Meridius Originally by: Hamatitio I dont know, it just seems like caldari got shafted in the FCS category. Astarte / Absolution do like 1300 DPS, we have 2 things that can snipe frigates. Hopefully it will be another cerberus thing though, where they truly do start to shine beyond DPS. WTB Absolution that can do 1300DPS WTB astarte that does 1300DPS with rails. --------------- VIP member of the [23] Quote: - Numbers alone do not win a battle - No, but I bet they help.
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.17 21:26:00 - [341] Originally by: Sadist WTB astarte that does 1300DPS with rails. What a stupid statement.
Nekora	Posted - 2006.06.17 22:29:00 - [342] 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?
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.17 22:31:00 - [343] 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 - [344] 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.
Nekora	Posted - 2006.06.18 09:54:00 - [345] 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...
Grey Area	Posted - 2006.06.18 11:19:00 - [346] Originally by: Tuxford Vulture's targetting range seems a bit low. As for the Nighthawk's damage output then I don't think the comparison with Absolution and Astarte are exactly fair. Heavy missiles are a long range weapon, neutron blasters are a short range weapon. Sadly there is no cruiser size short range missile but that will hopefully be added sometime in the near future. Tux, can't you see the flaw in that statement? There are two problems with calling the Heavy Missile a long range weapon... 1. Defenders 2. Flight time If a player or NPC has even one defender launcher fitted, then the longer the range the engagement is at, the more missiles will be lost to it. In terms of PVP, the substantial flight time of missiles means that you can never sensibly strike a killing blow as your target will have warped out - and there are no long range scrambling methods to prevent that. OK - so you get a friend to scramble - the point is, long range TURRETS don't need to do that, so there is definitely an imbalance. Any chance of giving us a warp scrambling missile? Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
000Hunter000	Posted - 2006.06.18 11:46:00 - [347] Hm this thread still alive huh? Well i can afford to wait a little while longer, the cerb used to be the crap HAC out there and now it seems to be the uber pwning mobile deluxe, so who knows, in 6 months or so perhaps the roles will have changed yet again and the nighthawk will be the ubah Hax0r BC we all hoped it would be
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.18 14:30:00 - [348] 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)
Deathbarrage	Posted - 2006.06.18 14:58:00 - [349] 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. ----------- To those few folks out there who can fly these, are you finding any trouble getting adequate targeting range on the Vulture or Nighthawk? The Vulture, in particular, seems undernourished for baseline targeting range, considering it has two optimal range bonuses. It also has 10km less baseline targeting range than the Eagle. That makes no sense whatsoever. Shouldn't those ships be at least equal? A 60km baseline targeting range (75km with L5 long-range targeting skill) is the same as its parent ship, the Ferox, yet the Ferox doesn't have the potential gun range of a Vulture. Looking at the Moa and Eagle, I would expect the Vulture to get an increase to targeting range vs. the Ferox. As it is now, are Vulture pilots blowing more than one slot on targeting range modules? As for the Nighthawk, I personally think it should have a missile velocity bonus, but I guess as long as it's spec'd for precision/frigate killing, it ends up not needing as much targeting range as say a Cerberus. I never see a missile boat doing more DPS then a turret boat yet their effective DPS never suffers from it
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.18 15:33:00 - [350] 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.
Deathbarrage	Posted - 2006.06.18 15:56:00 - [351] 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....?
Nekora	Posted - 2006.06.18 18:01:00 - [352] Originally by: Deathbarrage I never see a missile boat doing more DPS then a turret boat yet their effective DPS never suffers from it Most people dont have a trouble with the theoretical dps being lower as long as the practical DPS is balanced, But it is not. Even ignoreing the damage ballance with the other field command ships. Which has been a poor argument at best due to the lack of hard numbers. The Ship itself does not have a comparable improvement over its HAC counterpart. Just read the thread and you will find many people pointing out the Nighthawk has less (10%) firepower than the caracal, while the Absoulution has more (50%) firepower than the Zealot, astarte has more (40%) firepower than the deimos and the sleipnir has more (40%) firepower than the vagabond. Which I, and others are most annoyed at.
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.18 20:42:00 - [353] 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.
Deathbarrage	Posted - 2006.06.18 21:05:00 - [354] 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
Ishmael Hansen	Posted - 2006.06.18 22:05:00 - [355] I think the point is, we just want the NH to get in line with the other races command ships, no point in having a ship with less damage then a caracal with all the other races doing 40/50 % more damage then their hacs. Just lame imo. The absolution tank is just sick also, so no point in saying it can tank good. NH atm is a crappy, crappy ship for the skill requirements needed and comparing to all the other races commands. "hey, lets form a gang" "what do we have?" "we hate tacklers we need damage" "should I take my NH" "nah, it's crap, take a caracal instead, more dps and it aligns faster"
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.19 00:46:00 - [356] 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?
SavageThrash	Posted - 2006.06.19 00:53:00 - [357] I belive you ment to say cerb not caracal?
Nekora	Posted - 2006.06.19 02:19:00 - [358] that was probably my fault... i had said caracal instead of cerb a few posts back... These little slip ups tend to be infectious
Ishmael Hansen	Posted - 2006.06.19 04:07:00 - [359] Yeah, it does. I was doing the math afterwards and yeah, it was cerb. But we got to keep this thread alive, only squadron command missing to be able to fly the crappiest command ship in eve. I don't wanna go and train amarr :(
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.06.19 04:23:00 - [360] 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?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.