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)
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.10 13:12:00 - [511] 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.
LVirus	Posted - 2006.07.10 14:53:00 - [512] i started to train for gallente cruiser 5, ill be flying a astarte in no time. btw, plz fix NH and VULTURE
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.10 14:58:00 - [513] 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.
LVirus	Posted - 2006.07.10 17:28:00 - [514] Originally by: Double TaP 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. targeting range?
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.10 20:10:00 - [515] up
Necrologic	Posted - 2006.07.11 01:54:00 - [516] Originally by: LVirus Originally by: Double TaP 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. targeting range? Yeah, that could do with a buff.
Vaugue	Posted - 2006.07.11 11:06:00 - [517] I flew a Nighthawk... I've since downgraded (oh wait upgraded !) to a Cerberus. Honestly I don't see how a T2 cruiser should out do a T2 Battlecruiser. It even states in thier FAQ's that thier is 2 grades of these ships. So why does the Nighthawk feel so gimped? Originally by: EvE-O FAQ's Quote can be found here Command ships are elite battlecruisers that are also feature two variants. One is a damage-dealing bruiser, with lower resistances. The other is intended for gang-support and equipped with higher resistances. Both of these types are designed to fill combat roles. The training i did however opened up a whole slew of other ships to me which i don't regret. Really though i was training for the Nighthawk before it even existed and would like to see it useful like the other T2 BC's . My whole career in this game has revolved around the BC and Gang Assist till now... ========================= Why use a forum to auction when you can sell it on Eve-Bay!
Gorgons	Posted - 2006.07.11 11:12:00 - [518] Edited by: Gorgons on 11/07/2006 11:12:33 Originally by: Vaugue The training i did however opened up a whole slew of other ships to me which i don't regret. Really though i was training for the Nighthawk before it even existed and would like to see it useful like the other T2 BC's . My whole career in this game has revolved around the BC and Gang Assist till now... Yeah, I'm also glad I trained BC lvl 5, that way I'll be fully pumped when the tier 2 caldari bc hits the market, well that is if ccp don't also ruin that ship BOOST THE NH ---------------------------------- It says Snippy. E-mail us with any questions. -ReverendM OMG! what does it say...
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.12 02:46:00 - [519] I think I will bump again!
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.12 02:46:00 - [520] Edited by: Double TaP on 12/07/2006 02:46:05 double post
Fan3Spoitoru	Posted - 2006.07.12 10:16:00 - [521] dev`s are lame they should resign.. prime reason .. they did an awful job with this ship. and many moire problem`s STAND AND DELIVER!!!
Akiman	Posted - 2006.07.12 10:30:00 - [522] 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?
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.12 14:43:00 - [523] 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.
Nekora	Posted - 2006.07.13 11:20:00 - [524] Originally by: Fan3Spoitoru dev`s are lame they should resign.. prime reason .. they did an awful job with this ship. and many moire problem`s Good god no, Who else would we get to do the job? Yes i will admit there are a few things i dont like but hey, Given the rest of the game and how well they have fixed most problems i would like to think we have a very competent team of devs looking after us. They just dont pay attention to what we want fixing first, Dev's seem to have a wholely diferent set of prioritys. (Something along the lines of "Hmm, Is that Ammar ship shiny enough? no? Lets rewrite the grapics engine to work with next gen graphics, and windows Vista")
Rexthor Hammerfists	Posted - 2006.07.13 11:32:00 - [525] Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 13/07/2006 11:32:27 its the targeting range of the vulture that is its main prob. having to fit 2 sensor boosters in a shieltanking ship to make use of its bonuses hurts. - Purple Conquered The World, We the Universe.
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.13 14:43:00 - [526] 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
Ecce Drihten	Posted - 2006.07.14 02:32:00 - [527] Bump- this still needs some looking into, and an answer.
Corn Meal	Posted - 2006.07.14 04:57:00 - [528] wow... this is still here and no real awnsers? ive long since moved on to the gal versions... fix it pls!!!!!!!!!!
Double TaP	Posted - 2006.07.14 05:05:00 - [529] 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.
TalanR	Posted - 2006.07.14 07:42:00 - [530] Edited by: TalanR on 14/07/2006 07:53:16 The nighthawk needs some love. I read also read allot about ppl want to change the shields but don't change it because they are good "enough" in comparison to the other BC's. Finally the caldari get a missile battlecruiser and they F*ck it up from the start. It does about the same dps as my heavy missile ferox with should be a gunboat. A RoF bonus should fix the ship. Alright it will use more ammo but it as a bigger cargo bay they the Raven so you can carry enough ammo. Sticky plz. (Because of the high response you can safely say this is a issue that need the be resolved, or at least a verdict from CCP to doom the Nighthawk if they decide not to do anything)
LVirus	Posted - 2006.07.14 11:14:00 - [531] Originally by: TalanR Edited by: TalanR on 14/07/2006 07:53:16 The nighthawk needs some love. I read also read allot about ppl want to change the shields but don't change it because they are good "enough" in comparison to the other BC's. Finally the caldari get a missile battlecruiser and they F*ck it up from the start. It does about the same dps as my heavy missile ferox with should be a gunboat. A RoF bonus should fix the ship. Alright it will use more ammo but it as a bigger cargo bay they the Raven so you can carry enough ammo. Sticky plz. (Because of the high response you can safely say this is a issue that need the be resolved, or at least a verdict from CCP to doom the Nighthawk if they decide not to do anything) shhh, dont tell anyone about cargo, it might aswell be a "bug" and they might "fix" it :(
Sanzuro	Posted - 2006.07.14 15:05:00 - [532] 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...
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.07.14 15:15:00 - [533] 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.
Shreven Bulks Meridian Arms Research Combine	Posted - 2006.07.14 16:01:00 - [534] I see the limited targetting range on the command ships as indicative of their intended use as part of a group. It looks like CCP wants us to use other ships to support the command ship (i.e.: remote sensor boost, remote rep/transpo) that is supporting the gang. The fleet com ships don't really seem ideal soloing ships, though I'm sure there are mission runners out there using them as we speak. BTW, you could almost think of the double optimal bonus the eagle and vulture get as being a damage bonus: you can use higher damage ammo inside the same optimals another ship would have to switch to a lower-damage ammo: you have a lot more room to play. Or: consider what you can do with T2 heavy neuts and null M. ;) Also, it already has the highest base targetting range of the fleet commands. I think the vulture is fairly well off, all things considered; it is the NIGHTHAWK That needs a little love, and all it needs is to switch out one or both of it's frig swatting bonuses for something more cerberus-like. A RoF bonus (rather than the target nav prediction bonus), and that ship is in good shape. A velocity bonus too, and it'd be downright fun to fly. Oh...and all the BCs need a minor agility tweak: more cruier-like, less BS-like, but that's been in a lot of other threads.
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.07.14 16:32:00 - [535] 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 - [536] 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!
Atma Darkwolf Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.15 16:10:00 - [537] 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.
Emily Spankratchet Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.15 16:33:00 - [538] 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
Denrace Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.15 20:43:00 - [539] 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 Yet your argument here is rendered hopelessly redundant by the fact the the other command ships were tanking like badasses also. (Aside from some stupid gankfitted Astartes with no tanks and daft Eos pilots..) The Sleipnirs seen so far have have huge tanks too, but an extra 400 DPS over the Nighthawk Den ________________________________________
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.07.15 22:03:00 - [540] 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!!

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.