| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Capt Acid
Viziam
Amarr Empire
0
   |
Posted - 2014.03.20 20:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
Command ships or Marauder for PVE (Nighthawk of Golem)
First of let me just start with my simple question can a Nighthawk be around as good as a Tengu in L4's? And is the Golem exponentially better then the Nighthawk at running L4's. Also is the Nighthawk fun to fly?
Ok so about me.
So I am well on my way to fully skilling out my Tengu. I have HAMs and HMs as well as all other gear at T2 and all my missile skills and shield skills are at least l4 and most of the big ones are now at L5 most of my important engendering skills are also at L5 so my base skills are almost were they should be. But now I have a dilemma. I love my Tengu dearly but I need a new thing to strive for and I am torn as to what to train to next.
So here is the run down. Again I love my Tengu and just to let you know what sort of player I am even though I realize HAMs are far superior in DMG I fly HMs on my Tengu as I prefer the range and versatility. I also fly exclusively shield tank and the bulk of my weapon skills are in missiles with a dabbling in Projectiles and Hybrid. I also fly in High sec running l4 missions as they give the best challenge that can be had in my limited play time. (I wish I could fly in nul and low sec but I don't have the time right now although over the summer I intent to get out there) So that's me in a nutshell
Here is my dilemma should I go for a Nighthawk (I love its look, I love its slot layout, I love its bonuses and its potential to be useful in PVP as well as PVE) or the Golem (everyone says it's the best). Now I know the Golem is king and I don't mind being a little less effective or even significantly less effective but I don't want to be crucifying myself just for style points. but the crux of my question is can the Nighthawk be an effective L4 mission runner compared to the Tengu and is the Golem just exponentially better?
Any firsthand accounts and fitting advice would also be appreciated. Thanks for helping out a noob!
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
401
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 21:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
Search, "bastionnades" in YouTube, might influence your decision somewhat.
If in doubt...do...excessively. |
Batelle
Tymast Industries 150th
2307
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 21:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
the nighthawk is plenty fun I'm sure, but its also piece of junk (usually). As a battlecruiser, its slow and big-sigged. It has nice resistances. It has overly-good damage application on small targets. Its lack of range bonus and slow battlecrusier hull make hams unsuitable for most pve. It has a bigger reliance on kinetic damage bonus than the tengu (the golem has full selectability). It has only 5 launchers, meaning that despite its double damage bonus, it gets slightly worse damage on big targets than the tengu with fury HML, and even worse if you have command ship 5. It relies on using a flight of light drones to help makeup the damage difference. Its 5 low 5 mid layout makes it suited to passive shield tanking, which is still usually junk in most PVE. It has two rigs and 5 mids, meaning the tengu can catch up on the nighthawks application advantage, and the nighthawk is less versatile in how much gank/tank it can go. And with fury HMLs, it has about 47km range compared to the tengus 70km, which is a big deal on the slower ship.
Tengu is awesome, and has a dozen good configurations, does everything, best ship, etc. Noticeably less effective vs sansha/bloods.
Golem is awesome, with cruise missiles. Kills everything, gives no fucks. Torps are only good in certain kinds of anomaly running.
"CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
21
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 02:00:00 -
[4] - Quote
I love my nighthawk. I've flown it almost exclusively in level IV's for years now.
Command Ship V
5% ROF and 5% Heavy missile Implants
4x BCU
1x Drone Damage Aug
1x tech II missile ROF rig
I get about 800dps and plenty of tank. The only way i could sqeeze any more dps out of this thing would be to train heavy missile spec V and caldari done spec V.. which would only give me another 10-15 dps probably and not worth the 45 days training.
Too bad the nighthawk's slight dps buff came at the same time as the HML nerf... It could have been such a wonderful ship /sigh.
That being said:
shooting non-kinetic weak rats blows, hard.
this thing might as well be a BS as big and slow as it is
There are better ships to mission with. I often use a Rattlesnake, Tengu, or Paladin depending on mission and which clone I'm sitting in.
Vacuums suck. |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp
V.A.S.T.
343
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 06:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Claymore is better than the Nighthawk in just about every way imaginable, other than when shooting kinetic weak rats. Better DPS against everything that isn't weak to kinetic, better active tank, better passive tank, better slots, faster, better maneuverability. |
Gregor Parud
309
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
Using a CS for missions is pretty much terrible because they lack raw dps and while their applied dps will be better it's not enough to make up for it. Switch to a faction BS or a Marauder. |
Gregor Parud
310
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Claymore is better than the Nighthawk in just about every way imaginable, other than when shooting kinetic weak rats. Better DPS against everything that isn't weak to kinetic, better active tank, better passive tank, better slots, faster, better maneuverability.
Edit: And spider-tanking. If you have more than one, the Nighthawk is better than the Claymore for spidertanking purposes, both for its bonus which is more conducive to repping and its higher fitting overhead.
Yeah, Claymore just doesn't any sort of decent dps, at all, ever and nor does have it any meaningful range. Minor details though... |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp
V.A.S.T.
343
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:Chris Winter wrote:Claymore is better than the Nighthawk in just about every way imaginable, other than when shooting kinetic weak rats. Better DPS against everything that isn't weak to kinetic, better active tank, better passive tank, better slots, faster, better maneuverability.
Edit: And spider-tanking. If you have more than one, the Nighthawk is better than the Claymore for spidertanking purposes, both for its bonus which is more conducive to repping and its higher fitting overhead. Yeah, Claymore just doesn't any sort of decent dps, at all, ever and nor does have it any meaningful range. Minor details though...
Uh...what? Claymore has the same range as the Nighthawk, and unless you're shooting kinetic weak rats, will probably do more damage than the Nighthawk. Don't forget that the claymore can field a flight of medium drones to make up some of the difference from fewer effective launchers. |
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
23
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 21:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
Claymore is ugly though....
The best choice would be a Nighthawk Navy Issue... *hint* *hint* *wink* *wink* /drool
I really wish we had some Tech 2 navy ships :(
Or even Navy Issue Tech 2 ships would work for me.
Vacuums suck. |
Gregor Parud
314
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 21:19:00 -
[10] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:Chris Winter wrote:Claymore is better than the Nighthawk in just about every way imaginable, other than when shooting kinetic weak rats. Better DPS against everything that isn't weak to kinetic, better active tank, better passive tank, better slots, faster, better maneuverability.
Edit: And spider-tanking. If you have more than one, the Nighthawk is better than the Claymore for spidertanking purposes, both for its bonus which is more conducive to repping and its higher fitting overhead. Yeah, Claymore just doesn't any sort of decent dps, at all, ever and nor does have it any meaningful range. Minor details though... Uh...what? Claymore has the same range as the Nighthawk, and unless you're shooting kinetic weak rats, will probably do more damage than the Nighthawk. Don't forget that the claymore can field a flight of medium drones to make up some of the difference from fewer effective launchers.
I admit it looked like I was comparing NH with claymore there but I was more comparing CS in general with BS, there's just no valid reason to use a CS over, say, a Marauder if you have a choice. |
|
|
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp
V.A.S.T.
343
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 21:23:00 -
[11] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:
I admit it looked like I was comparing NH with claymore there but I was more comparing CS in general with BS, there's just no valid reason to use a CS over, say, a Marauder if you have a choice.
Oh yeah, in that case you're absolutely right. Doesn't get much better than battleships for L4s. |
Alcorak
Stealth Tactics and Reconnaissance Service
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
46
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 21:40:00 -
[12] - Quote
Golem all the way. 8 effective cruise launchers w/ 2 bonused target painters and u can hit just about anything very hard. Also pretty much invincible in highsec unless you do something abnormally stupid. |
stoicfaux
4241
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 01:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Capt Acid wrote:Command ships or Marauder for PVE (Nighthawk of Golem)
First of let me just start with my simple question can a Nighthawk be around as good as a Tengu in L4's? And is the Golem exponentially better then the Nighthawk at running L4's. Also is the Nighthawk fun to fly?
but the crux of my question is can the Nighthawk be an effective L4 mission runner compared to the Tengu and is the Golem just exponentially better?
Nighthawk doesn't get a missile speed bonus, so its missile range is severely gimped for level 4s, i.e. damage projection is important in level 4s.
Tengu is better than Nighthawk. Cruise Golem is "exponentially" better for high-sec level 4s.
WASABI: Warp Acceleration System Ancillary Boost Injected(Gäó)
|
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3129
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 02:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
Raven Navy Issue. Half the price and a lot less skill-intensive than a Golem.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |