Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Denrace
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:38:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Denrace on 27/04/2006 17:38:26
How come that Tuxford only responds to threads about non-Caldari ships?!
People have been hammering on for months now about the Nighthawk and the problems it has.
Some guy posts about the WOLF (which is fine...) and presents almost NO evidence for it being gimped, yet Tuxford responds almost immediately?!
The arguments for boosting the Nighthawk have been throughly argued and presented in many threads with outstanding mathematical contributions from j0sephine and others.
Please Tuxford. Please.
Just respond to us about the Nighthawk and its problems.
I will hack off my left nut and mail it to you if you respond here.
Sincerely, Den
(An upset Nighthawk pilot)
________________________________________
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:41:00 -
[2]
He responds in new threds that's got new ideas, and that aren't flamed just yet.
We'll see if he responds in this one, but I'm afraid the OP is missing some essentials concerning the actual game balance stuff he's doing. I.e. you might need a new, clean, thred dedicated to all the arguments gathered, in order to get a response. New sig coming soonÖ Drone musing (MC-boards) |
Nafri
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:42:00 -
[3]
he once answered on the nighthawk, he said that the ship is basicly working like intendend and that 300 DPS are good
Summertime - Campingtime!
|
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:50:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Nafri he once answered on the nighthawk, he said that the ship is basicly working like intendend and that 300 DPS are good
I didn't say one way or the other whether I was going to do anything with it. All I said that its hardly fair to compare damage of a blaster and a heavy missile and completely ignore the range difference.
I know people don't like the damage output on the Nighthawk but I haven't replied to it because I haven't really looked into it and I'm sure as hell not going to comment on Nighthawk until I know everything about the situation.
I'll get to it in due time, I replied in the wolf thread because I knew everything about it. It had 5% falloff bonus, traditionally falloff bonuses are 10% I replied I was fixing this bug. Pretty simple innit. _______________ |
|
smallgreenblur
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:54:00 -
[5]
Bloody hell tux you are busy atm :)
Be nice to him guys, he's doing a load of really useful stuff. Just wait in line ^^
sgb
C6 is recruiting ... visit www.c6-eve.com or join channel c-6 for details. |
Astrum Ludus
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:56:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Tuxford Pretty simple innit.
Well...yeah...
|
DeathWarrior
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:58:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Denrace
I will hack off my left nut and mail it to you if you respond here.
Sincerely, Den
(An upset Nighthawk pilot)
Originally by: Tuxford I didn't say one way or the other whether I was going to do anything with it. All I said that its hardly fair to compare damage of a blaster and a heavy missile and completely ignore the range difference.
I know people don't like the damage output on the Nighthawk but I haven't replied to it because I haven't really looked into it and I'm sure as hell not going to comment on Nighthawk until I know everything about the situation.
I'll get to it in due time, I replied in the wolf thread because I knew everything about it. It had 5% falloff bonus, traditionally falloff bonuses are 10% I replied I was fixing this bug. Pretty simple innit.
*cough* Im Holding you to it.
Originally by: Tuxford I once tried to kick my brother when I had my pants around my ankle. Probably not my brightest moments. |
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 17:59:00 -
[8]
Originally by: DeathWarrior
*cough* Im Holding you to it.
Holding me to what, I committed to nothing _______________ |
|
Astrum Ludus
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:01:00 -
[9]
To that guy sending you his nut.
sounds nice for you...
|
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:02:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Astrum Ludus To that guy sending you his nut.
sounds nice for you...
OMG didn't notice that one _______________ |
|
|
smallgreenblur
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:06:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Astrum Ludus To that guy sending you his nut.
sounds nice for you...
OMG didn't notice that one
lol pwned
sgb
C6 is recruiting ... visit www.c6-eve.com or join channel c-6 for details. |
Sakira LeCastantas
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:06:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: DeathWarrior
*cough* Im Holding you to it.
Holding me to what, I committed to nothing
lol, pwned
My sig in Turbo-Mode
Sexyness Level 5 |
Sangxianc
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:19:00 -
[13]
pix pls
Do not deny yourself experience of that which lies beyond, behind the sun, in the world they call unpeopled. |
DeathWarrior
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:25:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Sangxianc pix pls
I smell jealousy
Originally by: Tuxford I once tried to kick my brother when I had my pants around my ankle. Probably not my brightest moments. |
dabster
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:27:00 -
[15]
*cough* minmatar carrier *cough* ___________________________ Brutors Rule! My Eve-vids; Click. |
Nafri
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:31:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Nafri he once answered on the nighthawk, he said that the ship is basicly working like intendend and that 300 DPS are good
I didn't say one way or the other whether I was going to do anything with it. All I said that its hardly fair to compare damage of a blaster and a heavy missile and completely ignore the range difference.
I know people don't like the damage output on the Nighthawk but I haven't replied to it because I haven't really looked into it and I'm sure as hell not going to comment on Nighthawk until I know everything about the situation.
I'll get to it in due time, I replied in the wolf thread because I knew everything about it. It had 5% falloff bonus, traditionally falloff bonuses are 10% I replied I was fixing this bug. Pretty simple innit.
ohh come on, let me tease them a bit
Summertime - Campingtime!
|
Foomanshoe
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:41:00 -
[17]
Tux, can you look into changing either the 10% nav prediction or the 5% precision bonus into a 5% ROF bonus?
I realize its not fair to compare damage of a heavy pulse absolution or a blaster astarte to a nighthawk, however, how bout comparing a nighthawk to a cerberus and then comparing a absolution to a zealot and a astarte to a deimos?
You might notice that the nighthawk does less damage then the cerberus while the absolution and astarte both do more damage then there HAC counterpart. _______________________________________________ Deadspace For Dead space!
Originally by: Oveur
To the nerfmobile!
|
Ibury
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:47:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Foomanshoe Tux, can you look into changing either the 10% nav prediction or the 5% precision bonus into a 5% ROF bonus?
I realize its not fair to compare damage of a heavy pulse absolution or a blaster astarte to a nighthawk, however, how bout comparing a nighthawk to a cerberus and then comparing a absolution to a zealot and a astarte to a deimos?
You might notice that the nighthawk does less damage then the cerberus while the absolution and astarte both do more damage then there HAC counterpart.
word!
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:53:00 -
[19]
CBC's should have equivalent damage to their counterpart HAC, tank far better and have a deacent (at least 5% rather than 3%) command bonus. Thanks!
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:58:00 -
[20]
Nighthawk just needs a launcher ROF bonus in place of the target nav or precision bonus.
Fix that and the ship is fine and can probably hold its own against the others. Yes it will still do less DPS than the other command battlecruisers but the Cerberus does way less DPS than most HAC and it can still hold its own as well.
Nighthawk is way too far behind the others in damage output right now, so I hope this gets fixed soon ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD |
|
Denrace
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 20:23:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Astrum Ludus To that guy sending you his nut.
sounds nice for you...
OMG didn't notice that one
My hewn left nut is en route to CCP headquarteres via Royal Mail.
Expect delivery in 3 to 4 days.
Den
(P.S thanks for the prompt reply) ________________________________________
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 01:23:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Tuxford I didn't say one way or the other whether I was going to do anything with it. All I said that its hardly fair to compare damage of a blaster and a heavy missile and completely ignore the range difference.
I know people don't like the damage output on the Nighthawk but I haven't replied to it because I haven't really looked into it and I'm sure as hell not going to comment on Nighthawk until I know everything about the situation.
Could you maybe just drop alot of the combat bonuses and give gang-bonuses so they're more-command, less "next step from HAC"?
Originally by: Dark Shikari Istvaan Shogaatsu's ego, when combined with a veldspar asteroid, would create 500 titans. Too bad he's never mined.
RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran |
Mack Dorgeans
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 04:44:00 -
[23]
Um, the field command ships require HAC skill as a prerequisite. Doesn't that make them by definition the next step up from HACs? If people want gang-bonus, higher-resistance command ships, they should get the fleet commands (which have their own problems best discussed elsewhere).
Frankly, I still get the impression most people would prefer the Nighthawk to be a Cerberus-like, or even Raven-like, T2 combat ship. To that end, missile velocity and ROF bonuses would sure look nice next to the kinetic damage and resistance bonuses. I also feel the grid stinks; it's only 75 more than the Cerberus -- not enough to account for similar setups with one more cruiser weapon mounted, particularly if it's supposed to use heavy launchers and not assaults -- and 290 less than it's predecessor, the Ferox. Targeting range is also weak.
The common misconception people have when training for the Nighthawk is that they will be able to fly a heavy-hitting missile ship like their beloved Kestrel, Caracal, Cerberus, and Raven. When they realize their mistake, they wish they hadn't bothered. Let's face it, most people want a T2 slugger, not a specialist frigate-killer that doesn't even do its job that well compared to much cheaper ships.
As for comparing DPS to the other field command ships, it's of limited value. I find it much more meaningful to compare DPS to the Cerberus vs. comparisons of the other field commands to their HAC counterparts.
Bottom line, three field command ships are battlecruiser HACs, one field command ship is not.
-------------------
CEO, Lead Scientist Camelot Innovations
Got Science? Seeking interns or experienced pros in research, mining, and production disciplines. |
Foulis
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 05:01:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Tuxford I didn't say one way or the other whether I was going to do anything with it. All I said that its hardly fair to compare damage of a blaster and a heavy missile and completely ignore the range difference.
I know people don't like the damage output on the Nighthawk but I haven't replied to it because I haven't really looked into it and I'm sure as hell not going to comment on Nighthawk until I know everything about the situation.
Could you maybe just drop alot of the combat bonuses and give gang-bonuses so they're more-command, less "next step from HAC"?
Yup, we obviously don't have a ship like that already *cough*FleetCommandShip*cough* ----
Cake > Pie - Imaran
Originally by: CCP Hammer Boobies
|
Kalaan Oratay
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 07:33:00 -
[25]
Unfortunately Tux made the mistake of replying to a thread called 'OMG! Tux read this! RABBLE!' and now everyone and their aunt is starting threads expecting the same thing.
---
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 07:40:00 -
[26]
I don't see what Tux is missing here, the Nighthawk is a horrible ship.
The Cerberus out DPS's it, the Deimos, Zealot, and Muninn hardly out damage the Astarte, Absolution, or Sleipnir.
Don't tell me the Nighthawk tanks well either, the freaking Sleipnir out tanks it and does way more DPS.
The Nighthawks problem has nothing to do with heavy launchers, yes we do need assault missiles for true short range combat in cruisers but the Cerberus has way more damage output than the Nighthawk, the Nighthawks bonuses do not fit the ships role well, what so ever.
Nighthawk IS A COMBAT SHIP, and it is completely lacking compared to other ships of its class.
If the Nighthawk is "working as intended" then you pretty much have to remove every damage/rate of fire bonus from the command battlecruisers and replace them with "tracking" and "optimal" range bonuses........ ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD |
twit brent
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 11:40:00 -
[27]
Edited by: twit brent on 28/04/2006 11:41:07 Brutix with frigate sized light neutron blasters will outdamage it without factoring in drones.
Edit: this is also with tech 1 ammo.
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 11:48:00 -
[28]
Didnt he say he will look into it? I dont think he meant that we provide whining and he provides quick hack to do what we want.
--- pwned |
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 12:36:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Jim Raynor Nighthawk IS A COMBAT SHIP, and it is completely lacking compared to other ships of its class.
Command ship. See the name COMMAND Battlecruiser. Yes?
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Kelador Stormwolf
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 12:54:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Kelador Stormwolf on 28/04/2006 13:01:44
Originally by: Jim Raynor I don't see what Tux is missing here, the Nighthawk is a horrible ship.
I think what he's missing is the time to look into the problem in depth. It may not be as simple as just tweaking the Nighthawk (and to some extent the Vulture), which could in turn have knock on effects on their balance wrt to other ships... i.e. rather than just throwing a bone to Nighthawks it might require a rebalance of all the command ships and possibly even those in the class 'above' and 'below' it before things are 'balanced'...
Also, the upcoming Kali expansion has a new Caldari tier 2 battlecruiser and there is a possibility that the Nighthawk may in future 'inherit' from that ship rather than from the Ferox.
Balance is a pretty strange concept anyway... I know this is just a game, but in many respects it's a simulated power struggle between different races. Each race should be striving to build the 'best' ships they are capable of devising with their current technology and production facilities. On the other hand, historically there have been many military vehicles that meet the design specifications and were only found to be lacking on the battlefield ;)
"I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it." |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |