EVE Search - sleipnir vs nighthawk cap comparison

All Channels

Ships and Modules

sleipnir vs nighthawk cap comparison

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Apertotes Nuevos Horizontes O X I D E	Posted - 2007.05.02 16:30:00 - [1] nighthawk missiles: 0 cap sleipnir projectiles: 0 cap nighthawk passive tank: 0 cap sleipnir passive tank: sucks nighthawk active tank: some cap sleipnir active tank: some cap nighthawk cap: 3000 sleipnir cap: 2625 can someone explain why the sleipnir, who needs more cap for its forced active tank, has less cap than nighthawk who can get along with no cap at all?
FawKa Gallente Old Farts Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.05.02 16:37:00 - [2] Originally by: Apertotes can someone explain why the sleipnir, who needs more cap for its forced active tank, has less cap than nighthawk who can get along with no cap at all? Eeeerr.. No?... It's CCP dude Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected])
Perry Amarr The X-Trading Company Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.05.02 16:45:00 - [3] Nighthawk: 3000cap / 666,67 = 4,5cap/s Sleipnir: 2625cap / 583,33 = 4,5cap/s next... ________________ Kali 2.0 Patchnotes; "Cleared old and useless Database entries": 1) All Amarr Ships have been deleted
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.02 16:47:00 - [4] Originally by: Perry Nighthawk: 3000cap / 666,67 = 4,5cap/s Sleipnir: 2625cap / 583,33 = 4,5cap/s next... I'd still rather have the nighthawk's cap there. For fairly obvious reasons. sgb
Perry Amarr The X-Trading Company Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.05.02 16:58:00 - [5] Im sure the Nighthawk pilots would like more speed and less sig, too. next... ________________ Kali 2.0 Patchnotes; "Cleared old and useless Database entries": 1) All Amarr Ships have been deleted
kill0rbunny Alpha-Hirogen The Pentagram	Posted - 2007.05.02 16:58:00 - [6] Hmm i fail to understand why you're whining about the cap those ships have. The thing I would worry about more is that nighthawk has 700m¦ to carry cap boosters while the sleipnir has only 475. Anyway, the sleip has great overall resistances while nh has a hole at em, sleip does also do more damage and is a lot faster, that should more than make up for the bit fewer cap it has.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.02 17:04:00 - [7] I think the point is the fact that the nighthawk doesn't actually need cap at all, wheras the sleip needs to fit mwd and active shield booster. Same with the claymore. sgb
Zeerover Caldari DeadSpace Exploration and Investigations	Posted - 2007.05.02 17:08:00 - [8] Ok this whine needs to stop right here. Sleipnir has a far superiour loadout that it's not even funny and you complain about the little cap? High slots: Nighthawk 7 with 6 lanunchers. Sleipnir 8 with 7 turret hardpoints. Drone Capacity: Nighthawk 25, Sleipnir 40. Armor resists: Nighthawk 60 10 53 79 Sleipnir 89 10 25 59 Shield resists: Nighthawk 0!! 60 62 70 Sleipnir 62 60 40 50 Signature radius: Nighthawk 285m Sleipnir 240m Max speed Nighthawk 140m/s Sleipnir 165 m/s ... Yet with all these aparent advantages you get you still find the time to whine about the one thing that isn't remarkably better with Sleipnir.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.02 17:38:00 - [9] Originally by: Zeerover Edited by: Zeerover on 02/05/2007 17:04:30 Ok this whine needs to stop right here. Sleipnir has a far superiour loadout that it's not even funny and you complain about the little cap? High slots: Nighthawk 7 with 6 launchers. Sleipnir 8 with 7 turret hardpoints. Drone Capacity: Nighthawk 25, Sleipnir 40. Armor resists: Nighthawk 60 10 53 79 Sleipnir 89 10 25 59 Shield resists: Nighthawk 0!! 60 62 70 Sleipnir 62 60 40 50 Signature radius: Nighthawk 285m Sleipnir 240m Max speed Nighthawk 140m/s Sleipnir 165 m/s ... Yet with all these aparent advantages you get you still find the time to whine about the one thing that isn't remarkably better with Sleipnir. You're missing some skills off that nighthawk shield thingy... sgb
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2007.05.02 17:58:00 - [10] Originally by: Zeerover High slots: Nighthawk 7 with 6 launchers. Sleipnir 8 with 7 turret hardpoints. I'd rather have 7 highs and then an extra mid or low on the sleipnir, then 8 highs Originally by: Zeerover Shield resists: Nighthawk 0!! 60 62 70 Sleipnir 62 60 40 50 you mean 25 70 71.5 77.5 for the nighthawk surely?? Crystal-Slave, that way?
Murukan Minmatar Chaos Reborn	Posted - 2007.05.02 17:59:00 - [11] Originally by: Zeerover Edited by: Zeerover on 02/05/2007 17:04:30 Ok this whine needs to stop right here. Sleipnir has a far superiour loadout that it's not even funny and you complain about the little cap? High slots: Nighthawk 7 with 6 launchers. Sleipnir 8 with 7 turret hardpoints. Drone Capacity: Nighthawk 25, Sleipnir 40. Armor resists: Nighthawk 60 10 53 79 Sleipnir 89 10 25 59 Shield resists: Nighthawk 0!! 60 62 70 Sleipnir 62 60 40 50 Signature radius: Nighthawk 285m Sleipnir 240m Max speed Nighthawk 140m/s Sleipnir 165 m/s ... Yet with all these aparent advantages you get you still find the time to whine about the one thing that isn't remarkably better with Sleipnir. And you're a tard! Caldari are so funny when defending their ships cause they really put together horrible arguements. Manlove by Zaphod Jones
Kamen SRBI Circle 0f Two	Posted - 2007.05.02 20:53:00 - [12] Attribute Name \| Sleipnir \| Nighthawk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- powergrid Output \| 1460.0 MW > 710.0 MW CPU Output \| 475.0 tf < 555.0 tf Med Slots \| 5.0 = 5.0 Low Slots \| 5.0 = 5.0 Shield Capacity \| 4324.0 HP < 4805.0 HP Shield recharge time \| 1250.0 = 1250.0 I am not so familiar with Sleipnir setups, but are you trying to tell me that nighthawk has a significant advantage towards being set up as a passive shield tank? Which of these facts make you believe that you can't passive shield-tank your sleipnir and gain a SIGNIFICANT advantage, given the fact that you use no cap whatsoever to fire your weapons, while nighthawk uses oodles of it and gets the SAME cap recharge as you do??? You can shutdown nighthawk's weapons with a bit of nos, while your weapons will still be online and tank working.
Lance Hawke Autopsy Inc	Posted - 2007.05.02 20:59:00 - [13] Originally by: Kamen Attribute Name \| Sleipnir \| Nighthawk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- powergrid Output \| 1460.0 MW > 710.0 MW CPU Output \| 475.0 tf < 555.0 tf Med Slots \| 5.0 = 5.0 Low Slots \| 5.0 = 5.0 Shield Capacity \| 4324.0 HP < 4805.0 HP Shield recharge time \| 1250.0 = 1250.0 I am not so familiar with Sleipnir setups, but are you trying to tell me that nighthawk has a significant advantage towards being set up as a passive shield tank? Which of these facts make you believe that you can't passive shield-tank your sleipnir and gain a SIGNIFICANT advantage, given the fact that you use no cap whatsoever to fire your weapons, while nighthawk uses oodles of it and gets the SAME cap recharge as you do??? You can shutdown nighthawk's weapons with a bit of nos, while your weapons will still be online and tank working. Missiles use cap now?
Ferocious FeAr Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.05.02 21:02:00 - [14] Why is this even a thread. The sleipnir can tank just as good as the nighthawk, it has the same slot layout. There is a reason why the nighthawk can carry more cap charges, it doesn't boost 1000+ every 4 seconds like the sleipnir does thus requiring more cap charges to make up for the lack of boost. Oh did I mention it outdamages the nighthawk? Yeah. Don't hate me, learn to love me
Kamen SRBI Circle 0f Two	Posted - 2007.05.02 21:08:00 - [15] Edited by: Kamen on 02/05/2007 21:04:41 Oops... I apologize... Confused it with vulture... Point taken... But then still let's take vulture as an example (rails eat caps): Attribute Name \| Vulture \| Sleipnir ---------------------------------------------------------------------- powergrid Output \| 1275.0 MW < 1460.0 MW CPU Output \| 545.0 tf > 475.0 tf High Slots \| 7.0 < 8.0 Med Slots \| 6.0 > 5.0 Low Slots \| 4.0 < 5.0 Capacitor Capacity \| 3000.0 Energy > 2625.0 Energy Recharge time \| 666.67 < 583.33 So now i'm gonna make another post and cry how Vulture needs better recharge. Or did I get something wrong again?
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.05.02 21:17:00 - [16] Seriously, neeeext!!!
Tista	Posted - 2007.05.02 22:02:00 - [17] Originally by: Kamen Edited by: Kamen on 02/05/2007 21:04:41 Oops... I apologize... Confused it with vulture... Point taken... But then still let's take vulture as an example (rails eat caps): Attribute Name \| Vulture \| Sleipnir ---------------------------------------------------------------------- powergrid Output \| 1275.0 MW < 1460.0 MW CPU Output \| 545.0 tf > 475.0 tf High Slots \| 7.0 < 8.0 Med Slots \| 6.0 > 5.0 Low Slots \| 4.0 < 5.0 Capacitor Capacity \| 3000.0 Energy > 2625.0 Energy Recharge time \| 666.67 < 583.33 So now i'm gonna make another post and cry how Vulture needs better recharge. Or did I get something wrong again? yes you are missing the ******* point, Vulture is fleet, Sleip is feild... so si'down stfu and eat ur pie! -------------------- "this is the templar fighter used by carriers" Originaly quoted by Shania Eria.
Kamen SRBI Circle 0f Two	Posted - 2007.05.02 23:28:00 - [18] Originally by: Tista ... yes you are missing the ******* point, Vulture is fleet, Sleip is feild... so si'down stfu and eat ur pie! Well I'm done eating my pie and let me now tell you with my full mouth to stop whining because I decided to compare vulture to a matari Command. Sleipnir and Claymore got the same exact state on EVERYTHING, except that Claymore has better resist than Sleipnir, extra med, 1 less low and more cp, less PG. Same exact state on everything else. As someone already said, I don't mind about vulture, you don't whine about Sleipnir and case closed! Matari have the best hac, caldari have the best command (if you say so), so be it. Every race has at least one best ship in the class and other ships don't compare to it. Gallente have at least 2 for each of the other races though, but it's ok :)
Apertotes Nuevos Horizontes O X I D E	Posted - 2007.05.03 09:09:00 - [19] yes, i know sleipnir is faster and smaller. but it also got less shield hp, less targetting range, and worse anti-jamm strenth. about resists, do not bring it up, since the bonus is the same on both ships, 75% to primary resist and 50% to secondary resist. the issue is that nighthawk can get along nicely without cap since passive tank is viable, but sleipnir needs cap cause the bonus it gets is for active tanking. also, it needs mwd cause guns have optimals and trackings and all that stuff. yet nighthawk has a bigger cap. that is what i dont understand. but please, if you are so heated up about me asking this question, close the explorer and watch TV instead of acting like an angry child.

Pages: [1] :: 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.