EVE Search - I like the Nighthawk as it is

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

I like the Nighthawk as it is

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sergeant Spot Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.06 09:51:00 - [1] As the title says, I like the Nighthawk "as it is" I don't use it as a primary damage dealer, I use it for support. Unlike the Eagle, if a small fast target gets in close, it can still be hit. However, I do have a suggestion for improveing the Nighthawk that will leave me with my anti-frig missile ship I like so much, and probably satisfy others. Delete: The Nighthawk Kinetic Damage Bonus Add: Bonus: 20% reduction in T2 Missile penalties per Level of Commandship skill. (Perhaps have this apply only to Fury missiles???....) I'm actually not picky, and am satisfied with the ship "as is", but if it is going to be changed, I'd like it to still be a "kill small fast targets" ship rather than a primary damage dealer like SO MANY other ships. snip This type of comment has no place in a signature, please remain courteous - Pirlouit
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.06 09:55:00 - [2] I think you are pretty much alone in you assessment that the Nighthawk is fine. I'd not fly it, if I ever managed to cram my ego into a Caldari ship. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
HippoKing Caldari The I-Win Button	Posted - 2006.08.06 09:58:00 - [3] Oh well. Tux has said the TNP bonus will probably be replaced, so I think we've won already I want my solo pwn-mobile, k? Normal HippoKing service resumed; world no longer ending.
Necrologic Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.08.06 10:07:00 - [4] After it gets changed just load precision or fit tps and it will do what you want still.
Sergeant Spot Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.06 10:09:00 - [5] Originally by: HippoKing Oh well. Tux has said the TNP bonus will probably be replaced, so I think we've won already I want my solo pwn-mobile, k? No big worry here, I'll adapt to whatever happens, and I'm sure I could find "something" to use much higher DPS for. But I recently had the idea of letting the Nighthawk use Fury missiles without penalty (assuming Level 5 skill), and figured it might let me have my cake and eat it too. snip This type of comment has no place in a signature, please remain courteous - Pirlouit
Awox Awox Inc.	Posted - 2006.08.06 10:36:00 - [6] Edited by: Awox on 06/08/2006 10:38:01 Agreed. While you're at it give the Sleipnir the same bonus for projectile ammo. Imagine running around with Quake or Hail with no penalties. :D Edit: We should leave the Gallente an Amarr out of this. - nerf 0.5+
Ross Ice Gallente adeptus gattacus Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.06 10:45:00 - [7] Originally by: Awox Edited by: Awox on 06/08/2006 10:38:01 Agreed. While you're at it give the Sleipnir the same bonus for projectile ammo. Imagine running around with Quake or Hail with no penalties. :D Edit: We should leave the Gallente an Amarr out of this. mmmmm... Voooiiid
Xendie Chosen Path Center for Disease Creation	Posted - 2006.08.06 10:50:00 - [8] Originally by: Ithildin I think you are pretty much alone in you assessment that the Nighthawk is fine. I'd not fly it, if I ever managed to cram my ego into a Caldari ship. lol would be hard to fit in any ship. Quote: Nertzius > having fun being incompetitent?
Waxau Liberty Rogues Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.06 10:53:00 - [9] Edited by: Waxau on 06/08/2006 10:53:59 Waxau remembers the cerb after RMR....... Waxau clearsthe market of Nighthawks before they reach 500 mil rofl Btw - i like the NH too, but compared to other races, it sucks. And its good that caldari dont have a pwnmobile for once, but theres gotta be a compromise.
Ishmael Hansen	Posted - 2006.08.06 11:13:00 - [10] I fly the NH, 12 days for Sleipnir, can't hardly wait. Fix the NH plz, it's space crap.

Roxanna Kell Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.06 11:33:00 - [11] Originally by: HippoKing Oh well. Tux has said the TNP bonus will probably be replaced, so I think we've won already I want my solo pwn-mobile, k? god knows how many threads i monaed in, i guese it works
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.06 12:18:00 - [12] Why is the community so dps obsessed? The nighthawk performs a different role then the other field command ships. Thats it. Accept it. Having variety is s good thing. Not a bad thing. It makes things interesting. Mind control and tin hats
Waxau Liberty Rogues Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.06 13:33:00 - [13] Yeah, but at the same time, whats the point in having a ship which performs a certain role when other ships which cost 100th the price do a job just as good? The only good thing about the NH is its tank, and its not the best. But it does the job i guess. Just not at popping frigs. My eagle can pop frigs 10X better. My brutix can even pop frigs faster. Its not so much dps obsessed, but would like it to be on par with the other command ships. It may perform a certain role, but the other command ships dont, and if they do...then they do theirs better than the NH:P But thats again, already been discussed. Glad to hear its getting changed tbh
HippoKing Caldari The I-Win Button	Posted - 2006.08.06 14:00:00 - [14] Originally by: Laboratus Why is the community so dps obsessed? The nighthawk performs a different role then the other field command ships. Thats it. Accept it. Having variety is s good thing. Not a bad thing. It makes things interesting. Take whateve race you fly. Gallente? Would you be happy if the astarte suddenly lost its damage and falloff bonus for tracking gun and sig? Normal HippoKing service resumed; world no longer ending.
Roxanna Kell Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.06 14:49:00 - [15] not only that, there is a vulture as a support ship, nighthawl is field command not fleet command therefore it should do uber damage.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.06 14:58:00 - [16] No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and...
Roxanna Kell Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.06 15:00:00 - [17] Originally by: Maya Rkell No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and... \ jsut like the absolution damage is brought up with the zealot?
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.06 16:37:00 - [18] Edited by: Double TaP on 06/08/2006 16:38:08 Originally by: Maya Rkell No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and... Why nerf 3 things and depress hoardes of people when you could just boost one and make a lot of people happy. BTW I hope they get rid of the TNP and the missile precision bonus. edit: btw to OP, there are soooo many caldari ships that are good at killing small fast targets, the cerb being an awrsome example. Or for about 2% of the price you could buy a caracal.
Liet Traep Minmatar Black Lance	Posted - 2006.08.06 16:46:00 - [19] grabs his khumaak and threatens to bash the brains out of anyone who thinks about nerfing his absolution. References to absolutions aren't needed in this thread. Tis is about giving the nighthawk some love not about ruining anyone elses ship.
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.06 16:59:00 - [20] Originally by: Liet Traep grabs his khumaak and threatens to bash the brains out of anyone who thinks about nerfing his absolution. References to absolutions aren't needed in this thread. Tis is about giving the nighthawk some love not about ruining anyone elses ship. see maya?

Roxanna Kell Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.06 17:08:00 - [21] Originally by: Double TaP Edited by: Double TaP on 06/08/2006 16:38:08 Originally by: Maya Rkell No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and... Why nerf 3 things and depress hoardes of people when you could just boost one and make a lot of people happy. BTW I hope they get rid of the TNP and the missile precision bonus. edit: btw to OP, there are soooo many caldari ships that are good at killing small fast targets, the cerb being an awrsome example. Or for about 2% of the price you could buy a caracal. exactly mate, with maxed skills on my cerb i can volley any t1 frig, i never even laod up precision. and ceptors take 1-3 volleys dependign on if i got them webbed or not, as long as they re not going faster than 6k
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.06 17:53:00 - [22] Originally by: HippoKing Oh well. Tux has said the TNP bonus will probably be replaced, so I think we've won already I want my solo pwn-mobile, k? QTF All the other races get the bigger HAC that CCP once said wouldn't exist, we want one too damnit.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.06 17:54:00 - [23] Originally by: Sergeant Spot As the title says, I like the Nighthawk "as it is" I don't use it as a primary damage dealer, I use it for support. Unlike the Eagle, if a small fast target gets in close, it can still be hit. Once that fast frig gets hit by a 90% web, I don't think your eagle pilot will have THAT much of a problem blowing him straight to hell with some Anti-matter M.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.06 19:02:00 - [24] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 06/08/2006 19:02:59 Originally by: Double TaP Edited by: Double TaP on 06/08/2006 16:38:08 Originally by: Maya Rkell No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and... Why nerf 3 things and depress hoardes of people when you could just boost one and make a lot of people happy. Because they're brokenly powerful. And not used for command. They're CBC's, not HAC Mk II's. It's not about "ruining" any ship - HAC's allready do a LOT of damage, and backed by the seriously better tank of the CBC and true command capacity they'll still be very nasty and worthwhile ships.
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.06 20:02:00 - [25] Originally by: Maya Rkell HAC's allready do a LOT of damage Ever flown an Eagle? Anyway, in terms of DPS: Astarte > Deimos Absolution > Zealot Sleipnir > Muninn therefore, it SHOULD be: Nighthawk > Cerberus instead of Nighthawk < Cerberus It's really as simple as that. The same thing is true of the Fleet Commands, but that's an issue for a different thread. Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.06 21:09:00 - [26] Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2. I don't.
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2006.08.06 21:14:00 - [27] Originally by: Laboratus Why is the community so dps obsessed? The nighthawk performs a different role then the other field command ships. Thats it. Accept it. Having variety is s good thing. Not a bad thing. It makes things interesting. listen to the man, thats true. simply true. my gun is bigger than your tank (or vice versa) as the only name of the game is just sucky.
Outa Rileau	Posted - 2006.08.06 21:56:00 - [28] what's wrong with HAC MK II I don't think there's anything wrong with it... not game ruinning... i still got my trophy raven ♥ ------------------------- Getting Sig Removed / Rank 8 / SP: 762039 of 2048000
Abyss Jack Serial Chill3rz	Posted - 2006.08.06 22:02:00 - [29] nighthawk need a boost, even if it will coast 300mil+ once . You can't balance all prices, but it can't be that gallente CS own the NH in a 1v1 -me points raven vs blasterthron, raven win mmkay- This bonus for anti frig is nonsence, cerberus with assault launcher t2 and precision can do this job much better imao.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.06 22:32:00 - [30] Originally by: Outa Rileau what's wrong with HAC MK II Because it's a Command Battlecruiser? Because it should COMMAND, not gank! We have enough ships for ganking.

Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.06 22:39:00 - [31] Originally by: Maya Rkell Originally by: Outa Rileau what's wrong with HAC MK II Because it's a Command Battlecruiser? Because it should COMMAND, not gank! We have enough ships for ganking. See thats the crap argument that every tries to use. But you're getting fleet command and field command mixed up. The fleet command (nighthawk, sleip, astarte, absolution) all require the HAC skill tree. You think they are uber solo pwnmobiles of doom, but thats not true. Battleships hit and do full damage to the Field Command ships because they are battlecruiser sized, all the HAC's are pretty much nimble and able to dictate the fights they are in. Even the caldari masshogs. Originally by: Laboratus Why is the community so dps obsessed? The nighthawk performs a different role then the other field command ships. Thats it. Accept it. Having variety is s good thing. Not a bad thing. It makes things interesting. Yea its interesting in the sense that when you see a nighthawk you know not to be worried. And maybe we are dps obsessed because thats the game mechanic that the whole combat system revolves around. When you decide to fight another player you dont instance into a mario party mini game, you do DAMAGE to each other.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.06 22:43:00 - [32] No, it's not a "crap argument". It's a point of view. I'm arguing that CCP's design of them is wrong. 5% bonus per level to one sort of command modules. One on the Field BC. Three and a cap use bonus on the Fleet BC. REAL command abilities! I don't think they're anything except what they are...I'm fully aware of their current capacitys. I just disagree that having a CBC with better firepower than a HAC is a good idea.
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.06 22:57:00 - [33] Originally by: HippoKing Take whateve race you fly. Gallente? Would you be happy if the astarte suddenly lost its damage and falloff bonus for tracking gun and sig? Francly, if those boni were on a battleship, I'd be super happy. If I got a bonus, that made my rails track as well as a blaster 1 size category lower... I'd be delighted. Actually getting hits improves damage more than a boni in a hypothetical situation. Mind control and tin hats
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.06 23:20:00 - [34] Originally by: Maya Rkell No, it's not a "crap argument". It's a point of view. I'm arguing that CCP's design of them is wrong. 5% bonus per level to one sort of command modules. One on the Field BC. Three and a cap use bonus on the Fleet BC. REAL command abilities! I don't think they're anything except what they are...I'm fully aware of their current capacitys. I just disagree that having a CBC with better firepower than a HAC is a good idea. Then you need to make a new thread proposing thought-out changes to field command ships. If they were made with your idea I wouldn't be whining, but they were, and the nighthawk is horribly gimped in its current status.
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest	Posted - 2006.08.06 23:55:00 - [35] Originally by: Maya Rkell No, it's not a "crap argument". It's a point of view. I'm arguing that CCP's design of them is wrong. 5% bonus per level to one sort of command modules. One on the Field BC. Three and a cap use bonus on the Fleet BC. REAL command abilities! I don't think they're anything except what they are...I'm fully aware of their current capacitys. I just disagree that having a CBC with better firepower than a HAC is a good idea. Another reason why I am glad your not a dev. See... they can be good command ships just like battleships can be good battleships. Command ships, however, can be good combat ships while the battleship can be a good mining ships. Its about player choice. Shoehorning the command ships into your idea is really bland and only fits into your vision of EVE... which I am glad I don't live in. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Waxau Liberty Rogues Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.07 00:06:00 - [36] Command ships in short are a Veteran option for those bored of BS's. They provide just as good a tank, and good enough damage. All except the NH. No one wants to have a NH that can pop frigates well. We can use a 15k ship to do that. Why spend 160 mil to pop frigs? I like the idea of being one of the few in eve in a NH (that you randomly see in empire and low sec). Same when i come to the Vulture. The difference is, is that the NH is not 'cool' to fly. I feel like im laughed at by the Covetor pilots
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.07 01:20:00 - [37] Originally by: Maya Rkell Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2. I don't. It requires HAC L4. I'd say that's a very clear statement that Field Command = Super-HAC. Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
DarK STK Scientific	Posted - 2006.08.07 01:32:00 - [38] Originally by: Maya Rkell No, it's not a "crap argument". It's a point of view. I'm arguing that CCP's design of them is wrong. 5% bonus per level to one sort of command modules. One on the Field BC. Three and a cap use bonus on the Fleet BC. REAL command abilities! I don't think they're anything except what they are...I'm fully aware of their current capacitys. I just disagree that having a CBC with better firepower than a HAC is a good idea. Bit hypocritical of you if you ask me, not that I'm shocked. People whinged about interceptors being damage dealers, rather than intercepting, you said that they were fine and that they were as CCP intended. This was confirmed by TomB and you had yourself a little happydance over it. Practically everyone argued that CCP were wrong, but you had a cry. Now you're doing exactly the same. One moment CCP know what they're doing(when it suits you) and the next minute they're wrong. You whine isn't even relevant to this thread. This thread is about the Nighthawk being a piece of **** in comparisson to the other field command ships. It is not about whether or not maya is happy with their role and purpose and whether or not they are as CCP intended. Now I've just ruined the thread by just mentioning the word "interceptors" in the presence of maya. Happy days.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.07 02:44:00 - [39] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:52:49 Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:48:43 ... I was right on interceptors. A ship class I don't really even FLY anymore. Any problems you have with this, take it up with Tux. I'm not the one making changes, I was just right on my reasoning on why they were not going to alter the inty or add a 4th AF bonus. And yes, shock, I agree with CCP on some things and not on others. Moreover, this is entirly relevant, since HAC's were brought up for comparison. People want to make the NH a better DPS dealer than the Cerb, I disagree. I'm NOT saying it's fine at present. I'm not asking you to agree. I'm making a point. This is a point which has been made by a lot of other people in the past. If you don't like it, then I'd suggest a better response then "because that's why it should be". Nikolai, and Interdictors are super interceptors because they require inty skill? No. Kaylana Syi, so you're saying that HAC's don't have tanking and weapon bonuses. That CovOps don't have probe bonuses. That ships don't have FUNCTION RELATED bonuses. Well, a Command Ship's function is to COMMAND. Ships DO, and Command ships should have Command bonuses. This isn't "bland", this is making a T2 ship fill the role for which it was created. I'm not suggesting that they be BAD combat ships. Unless you want to call a ship which can equal a HAC in firepower, tank better AND use command modules "bad". Because I'd be perfectly happy to fly one.
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.07 03:05:00 - [40] Originally by: Maya Rkell Nikolai, and Interdictors are super interceptors because they require inty skill? Well, let's see. They're very fast, and damned good and annhilating frigates...so yes, you could call them that. That's not their ONLY use, just like Super-HAC isn't the ONLY use of Field Commands, but they've definitely been designed to work in that role. Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!

welsh wizard	Posted - 2006.08.07 03:26:00 - [41] Edited by: welsh wizard on 07/08/2006 03:28:05 I think it should just get the same bonuses as the Cerberus. With its extra launcher it would then be a bit more damaging than its HAC counterpart, like all the other Field CS's. Alternatively nerf the damage on all of them. edit: Yes I am bitter.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.07 04:00:00 - [42] Nikolai Nuvolari, No, they have FAR more common more with destroyers and AF's than interceptors. They don't even share the speed-as-a-defence with them, have drastically higher ranges, and so on. And you'd STILL be able to use them like a HAC...with the same damage and better tanking. I'm not suggesting they be ANY worse in general combat than a HAC.
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.07 04:38:00 - [43] Originally by: Maya Rkell No, they have FAR more common more with destroyers and AF's than interceptors. And Field Commands have far more in common with battlecruisers than HACs. Doesn't mean they don't function well as a heavier version of HACs. Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Sarafi The 2nd Coming	Posted - 2006.08.07 05:04:00 - [44] BLASPHEMY!
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.07 05:39:00 - [45] You use the name Command as an argument Maya, but even thats a shaky one. The name isn't just command, its FIELD command. Now with FLEET command ships, whats your purpose? To provide assistance for probably 100+ people, and to help with focus fire on targets. Small gang warfare, which is what I think CCP intended the FIELD command ships, is a totally different (and quite frankly about 112342342 times as fun) ballgame. Small gang warfare is about putting a bunch of different solo combat ships together and utilizing them properly. I run a gang assist module on my nighthawk, hell after cybernetics V im gonna buy that implant that gives 5% more shield hp, but the thing is also supposed to be useful for the combat part to. Which the absolution, the astarte, and the sleipnir are all very good at doing. The NH on the otherhand, is disgustingly underpowered damage wise. And you know what bonuses I would love to see on it Maya? 5% resists 10% Kinetic Damage 5% RoF for heavy launchers and 5% EM, therm, and exp damage per level That completely borks its super frig killing abilities that you can do with a caracal, cerb, recon ships, etc (ignoring the HORRIBLY unbalanced t2 ammo that we know they will fix) and also its range, which it lacks in a velocity bonus, which also in turn affects its time from bay to target hurting its ability to alpha strike. But hey thats minmatar thing. The NH will just be in the fight, useful, and important though.
Abyss Jack Serial Chill3rz	Posted - 2006.08.07 08:34:00 - [46] bc skill: 5% resist per lvl 5% kin dmg per lvl CS skill: 5% rof per lvl 10% missile velocity per lvl is that so hard to realize? thats the right way. Im also not often in this forum tab, but this command ship needs realy some love.
Waxau Liberty Rogues Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.07 08:50:00 - [47] Totally agree. The fact of the matter is that all the command ships except the NH have bonuses which arent role specific. Like for example the astarte : Command Ships Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid turret falloff per level This isnt meant for popping frigates. Or not designed to in regards to bonuses. Yet its quite adapt at killing frigates. Yet the nighthawk with its bonuses to damage vs small craft (eg frigs) does just a bit better (if at all) at killing frigs than the astarte. Its unique role has been matched in a universe that has no use for it. There technically is a use for the ship in popping frigs. But sadly, its use is not practical, due to the other command ships. Ignore for the fact that the cerb is seen as a really good ship for now. Just notice the difference in the NH compared to the cerb, and the deimos to the Astarte. Whether you like the ships or dont, the astarte is significantly stronger than the Deimos. However, i dont see that being the case with the NH and Cerb. I dont think anyone is asking for the nighthawk to be uber-pwn-ure-ass command ship which is better than all the others. Just would like it to be on par with its class.
Darkrydar Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.07 09:42:00 - [48] Edited by: Darkrydar on 07/08/2006 09:43:29 Originally by: Maya Rkell Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2. I don't. Except for the fact that its about as fast as a battleship. HAC's combine speed+firepower+tank. Yes, command ships out dmg (mostly) and tank them, but have you ever looked at them? The have huge sig radius and are very slow. Add: I shouldn;t have even posted. I forgot you RP Eve's Contrarian.
Glarion Garnier Solar Wind	Posted - 2006.08.07 10:41:00 - [49] Originally by: Maya Rkell Kaylana Syi, so you're saying that HAC's don't have tanking and weapon bonuses. That CovOps don't have probe bonuses. That ships don't have FUNCTION RELATED bonuses. Well, a Command Ship's function is to COMMAND. Ships DO, and Command ships should have Command bonuses. This isn't "bland", this is making a T2 ship fill the role for which it was created. Yes command ships indeed allways need to have this command bonus on top of other bonuses like it pretty much is now Since they are the hardest ships to train -> pretty much the high-end of eve ships. But I think that instead of just having fleet command ships with that 3 x 3% bonus the field commands should have 1 x 3% bonus on top of their current design. And perhaps Field command ships could all have bit more leader related boost (locking range upped to 100km after all they are leader ships) and to keep on topic . yes NH is lacking in dps
Glarion Garnier Solar Wind	Posted - 2006.08.07 10:47:00 - [50] Originally by: Abyss Jack bc skill: 5% resist per lvl 5% kin dmg per lvl CS skill: 5% rof per lvl 10% missile velocity per lvl is that so hard to realize? thats the right way. Im also not often in this forum tab, but this command ship needs realy some love. that 10% velocity skill is to much Cerb territory. And to keep things in balance I would not install it. instead: bc skill 5% resist per lvl 5% kin dmg per lvl for heavy missiles and assault rockets CS skill: 5% rof per lvl for heavy missiles and assault rocket launchers 5% target navigation prediction for heavy missiles and assault rockets (heavy rockets) or 5% dmg to all types of missiles for heavies and assault rockets (heavy rockets)

welsh wizard	Posted - 2006.08.07 12:29:00 - [51] Edited by: welsh wizard on 07/08/2006 12:30:44 Originally by: Glarion Garnier Originally by: Abyss Jack bc skill: 5% resist per lvl 5% kin dmg per lvl CS skill: 5% rof per lvl 10% missile velocity per lvl is that so hard to realize? thats the right way. Im also not often in this forum tab, but this command ship needs realy some love. that 10% velocity skill is to much Cerb territory. And to keep things in balance I would not install it. instead: bc skill 5% resist per lvl 5% kin dmg per lvl for heavy missiles and assault rockets CS skill: 5% rof per lvl for heavy missiles and assault rocket launchers 5% target navigation prediction for heavy missiles and assault rockets (heavy rockets) or 5% dmg to all types of missiles for heavies and assault rockets (heavy rockets) What the hell do you mean to keep things balanced? If the Nighthawk had exactly the same bonuses as the Cerberus it would be slightly more damaging with its extra launcher. Just like all the other field command ships. We're getting shafted here. No-one wants 100mil+ frigate killing ship that only does it marginally better than other ships (apart from Maya). It's so glaringly obvious that you don't want this ship to be good because you don't fly it. You either bring the NH inline with the other Field CS's or you nerf the others. It's that simple.
Waxau Liberty Rogues Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.07 12:41:00 - [52] signed with blood.....wait....this is..chris' blood
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.07 12:53:00 - [53] Originally by: Darkrydar Edited by: Darkrydar on 07/08/2006 09:43:29 Originally by: Maya Rkell Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2. I don't. Except for the fact that its about as fast as a battleship. HAC's combine speed+firepower+tank. Yes, command ships out dmg (mostly) and tank them, but have you ever looked at them? The have huge sig radius and are very slow. Add: I shouldn;t have even posted. I forgot you RP Eve's Contrarian. Hardly. I agree with just as much as I disagree with. And even WITH the sig radius, CBC's have a considerably better tank. What the field command ships DON'T do is... command. And they are CBC's. If you want to keep them as present, they need the name and skill preqs changing. welsh wizard, yep... in-line. Where that line is drawn, well, I disagree with the "consensus". But something DOES need to be done.
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.07 13:11:00 - [54] Originally by: Maya Rkell Originally by: Darkrydar Edited by: Darkrydar on 07/08/2006 09:43:29 Originally by: Maya Rkell Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2. I don't. Except for the fact that its about as fast as a battleship. HAC's combine speed+firepower+tank. Yes, command ships out dmg (mostly) and tank them, but have you ever looked at them? The have huge sig radius and are very slow. Add: I shouldn;t have even posted. I forgot you RP Eve's Contrarian. Hardly. I agree with just as much as I disagree with. And even WITH the sig radius, CBC's have a considerably better tank. What the field command ships DON'T do is... command. And they are CBC's. If you want to keep them as present, they need the name and skill preqs changing. welsh wizard, yep... in-line. Where that line is drawn, well, I disagree with the "consensus". But something DOES need to be done. maybe the field commands should get a name change and drop the ability to fit gang assist modules ? then the role would fit (and NH can get the damage increse). ------------------------------ at least fit ECCM before you start crying how overpowered ECM is.
Waxau Liberty Rogues Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.07 15:29:00 - [55] Well tbh i think they're fine how they are overall. They CAN command if they like. But not as well as a fleet command. Which i consider fine. My corp mate uses an Astarte and has a command module on it. I'll be putting a command module on my NH when i can use em. And when i can use a vulture, hell im putting more than one on that. And many others are doing just the same. In solo they may not, but in gangs, they deffinately are. The only thing broken atm with command ships is the NH's damage. No doubt whiners will find another problem, but thats the only problem atm. And has apparently already been stated that it'll be fixed. So i see no problem, and no reason to keep going on and on and on about it. If its not broken, dont fix it. They made that problem in SWG - and those who've played it have seen how that turned out. Wax
Estan Drake	Posted - 2006.08.07 15:40:00 - [56] The squeeky wheel gets the grease. Caldari are just spoiled since most of their ships arn't forced into narrow roles but can do just about anything great with low SP requirements. And since the number of caldari *****ers far outstrips any of the other racial ship's pilots, we can just assume all caldari ships will continue being solopwnmobiles.
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.07 17:03:00 - [57] Originally by: Estan Drake The squeeky wheel gets the grease. Caldari are just spoiled since most of their ships arn't forced into narrow roles but can do just about anything great with low SP requirements. And since the number of caldari *****ers far outstrips any of the other racial ship's pilots, we can just assume all caldari ships will continue being solopwnmobiles. lol. yea this has nothing to do with game balance. by the way if the nighthawk is going to have same bonuses as cerb it would need a 7th missile point. but i dont think it should, i think its range should be significantly shorter and have no velocity bonus. 10%kin and 5% to the other. a rof bonus and a resist bonus.
Alasse Cuthalion TAOSP	Posted - 2006.08.07 18:26:00 - [58] Edited by: Alasse Cuthalion on 07/08/2006 18:26:04 Yes the Nighthawk is a better tank than the Cerb. But is it really worth several months of training and hundred(s) of millions of isk to fly a big ass slowboat like the Nighthawk to kill ****ty frigates when there are perfectly good Caldari alternatives that aren't such a massive skill investment? No thanks! Personally, I believe that big ships should hit big things hard. I really don't care much for this "omg cbc's shouldn't be super hac!!!" talk, at the moment the Nighthawk just doesn't make any sense. Either nerf the rest of the CBC's and give them other 'specialist' bonuses or get on with it and bring the Nighthawk in line.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.07 19:00:00 - [59] Hugh Ruka, change the name, change the skills and so on and sure. Attack BC's or whatever. Note that at NO point in this thread have I said the NH is fine. It's not. Regardless of other changes, it needs boosting.
Merin Ryskin Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.07 19:51:00 - [60] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 07/08/2006 19:52:09 Originally by: Maya Rkell I'm NOT saying it's fine at present. PS, you ARE going to link where CCP said "no change to the other 3 field commands", right? Because afaik, they haven't said that and no serious discussion with them has been had on the point. The absence of discussion IS the proof. Anyone with a bit of common sense knows the default assumption is that things will remain as they are, unless otherwise stated. And since there isn't even the vaguest rumor of official attention to changing the other three field commands, it's a safe bet they're going to stay exactly as they are for the indefinite future. Not only that, but we HAVE seen official word explicitly stating that the Nighthawk is underpowered, and will probably be getting a bonus change to bring it up to the level of the other three. And of course the assault missile changes will also help its DPS significantly. Like it or not, Nighthawk 2.0 WILL out-damage the Cerberus. So it's pretty clear that equality is going to happen by boosting the Nighthawk to match the uber-HAC power of the other three field commands, not by nerfing the others down to Nighthawk level. ============================================ Solution: change the 10% TNP bonus to 5% rate of fire. Add a 7th launcher hardpoint to match the tier-2 battlecruiser. Now the DPS order between the three ships is fixed. The 5% explosion radius can stay or change to 10% velocity, either one would be useful I think.



Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.