EVE Search - Nidhoggur change on Sisi, good or not?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Nidhoggur change on Sisi, good or not?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Linas IV	Posted - 2007.11.03 01:16:00 - [1] Since i didn't read something about it here, i thought others might want to know aswell: The Nidhoggur lost one mid-slot and gained a low-slot currently on Sisi. Personly i dont know if i should be happy about this or not. As i stated before in the ships&modules Forum, i liked the ability to fit an good shieldtank on it and have enough cap to spare for remote-repairers/transfers. I think this ability is gone now. (4-slot shieldtank +SB isn't a good idea) In my opinion the slot layout wasnt the problem of the nidhoggur, it was the lack of cpu to fit it properly. What we now got is the same slot-Layout as the thanatos with worse stats; some lost versatility, but have the possibility to fit a better armor tank than before. Any opinions and ideas concerning this are very welcome. Ps: I think the mass increase on capitals on sisi was a bad idea, they move now even more just like a flying brick in space.
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 01:32:00 - [2] Edited by: Random Womble on 03/11/2007 01:32:54 Nid would probably be better off with old slot layout just a CPU boost especially as unless they dratically change the hel that is a shield tanker which just makes the change plain stupid and makes me wonder where CCPs brains have dissapeared to in the last few weeks perhaps all that alcohol has finally taken its toll. Its never going to be a brilliant shield tanker or armor but with no real bonus its probably better off with old config. Actually thinking more and more about the nid to hel diffrence now this change seems more and more stupid.
Angor The JORG Corporation Methods of Mayhem Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 01:40:00 - [3] My nid is fine, never had CPU problems to be honest. Not sure if that mid slot im not supposed to have is even making any difference but dont wana remove it i may never get it back lol. On a serious not, the nidhoggur is a better armor tanker/remote repair boat so lots of mids were good for cap rechargers. Gettin pretty sick of CCP changing all the ships I love... my alt is Gellente... enough said. _______________________________ [ 2007.06.07 21:07:22 ] FrankyWave > ransom me guys I am joining XElas !!!
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 01:44:00 - [4] Reason you have never had CPU issues is because you have never tried to shield tank it which it does ok (certainly much better than its ****ty armor tank) but needs a Co-proc while the armor tanked carriers dont require fitting mods the Hel (Minnie MS) does better at shield tanking as it has 7 Mids to the nids current 6 and im fairly sure even you would not try to armor tank a Hel.
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 01:59:00 - [5] Edited by: Random Womble on 03/11/2007 02:02:04 Edited by: Random Womble on 03/11/2007 02:01:51 Oh and i forgot to mention that this completely screws over those that trained for the capital shield booster (and tactical shield manip Lv5 is a fairly useless skill imho) to use on the nid, dont get me wrong my carrier pilot has an armor tanked nid but only because i have come across from training dreads first. I was going to train for a shield tank soon im glad i didnt. Another example of why this possible change has so little thought behind it.
Gor Kraon Minmatar Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 02:21:00 - [6] Only thing removing 1 mid will do is remove a cap mod (low slot one is better), EW mod (suck now) or sensor booster (suck now) from the nid. 5 slot shield tank is plenty: Cap shield, Amp, Amp, Invul, Invul, Em. Fill the lows with cap relays, CPU, and maybe a DCU. More cap, essentially same tank.
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 02:29:00 - [7] Edited by: Random Womble on 03/11/2007 02:33:39 you seem to have managed to make a 6 mid slot setup there for what will be a 5 midslot ship. Oh and you forget the extra relay will hit your boost ammount and you still have the whole shield tank CPU issue the change is aimed at making the nid only armor tanked which is probably not the right way to go anyway minmatar are meant to be about being able to do either and with their remote repping bonuses really should be able to choice being more cap and bad armor tank or ok shield tank and a few cap issues.
Gor Kraon Minmatar Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 02:41:00 - [8] Ops yeah, i did make 6 mids =/. The CPR issue is a non issue. Once you fit 3 fitting more really doesn't matter much. And with the amps you get a bonus to boost level even with CPRs. I suppose dropping the EM hardener is the best choice, but it leaves an ugly hole...
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 02:51:00 - [9] Also since the Hel is unchanged assuming all new carrier pilots would go armor tanked it makes the minnie carrier to mothership transition the only one where you have to train new skills that are not supercap or MS specific (clone vat skills and remote ECM burst) since hel still has 6/7/5 slot layout of shield tankyness.
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2007.11.03 05:17:00 - [10] Interesting change. The Niddy is now a Thanatos with a remote-rep bonus. Old Flag-Ship Set-Up (Max Personal Tank) 2x Smartie, 2x HNeut, 1x Cap Remote Rep 1x Cap Booster, 2x SBA, 3x Invul 5x Cap Flux 3x CCC Tank = 3889 Remote Rep = 375/s perma Cap Regen-Consumption = 22.3 New Flag-Ship Set-Up 1x Smartie, 2x HNeut, 2x Cap Rep 1x Sensor Booster, 4x CR 2x Cap Rep, Exp,Kin,Therm Hardeners, EANM Tank = 3176 Remote Rep = 750/s 4m39s Old Logistics Set-Up (Spider Tank) 1x Smartie, 2x HNeut, 2x Cap Remote Rep 1x Cap Booster, 2x SBA, 2x Invul, 1x CR 5x CPR 3x CCC Tank = 2348 Remote Rep = 750/s perma New Logistics Set-Up 1x Smartie, 2x HNeut, 2x Cap Remote Rep 5x CR 2x Cap Rep, 2x EANM, 2x CPR Tank = 2236 Remote Rep = 750/s perma Dual-Rep fit with max-tank = Role buff Max-Tank significantly lower = Combat nerf Max-Rep fit is weaker = Spider tank nerf Of course these set-ups are the two extremes and only t2 fitted but I'm hardly going to run through every set-up. Welcome to Thanatosville. Now can we have the Archon and Chimera dragged down here with them, or do they get to remain in their current state of relative godhood (5061 and 5186 max-tanks respectively)?

Kaathar Rielspar Minmatar Universal Exports	Posted - 2007.11.03 05:26:00 - [11] hahahha great stuff, a random nerf that actually works out for once. was going to train for capital shield boosters for the nid, now i dont need to bother. thx ccp really looking forward to seeing the patch notes for when all these random nerfs go in, assuming they're all listed ofc and not just stealth-nerfed ____________________
Angor The JORG Corporation Methods of Mayhem Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 05:28:00 - [12] Well to be honest, i probably would still armor tank the Hel, even though it has more mids, couldnt be bothered training TSM 5 for the shield booster. I would just use really good faction/officer hardeners as im use to 5 lows with the nid and seems as I probably wouldnt use it as a solo pawn mobile like every Nyx pilot out there, i'd make sure i was around at least 3 other carriers who were remote rep fitted for my support. But i have a Hel coming out of protuction on sisi soon so I'll play around with the setup see what suits me best. _______________________________ [ 2007.06.07 21:07:22 ] FrankyWave > ransom me guys I am joining XElas !!!
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2007.11.03 06:06:00 - [13] Edited by: Daelin Blackleaf on 03/11/2007 06:09:53 For me this has pretty much cinched it, the Niddy has become my Carrier of choice. > The Chimera is Caldari and therefore untrustworthy and liable to desert you. > The Aeon is Amarr and is probably carpeted with genuine Brutor chesthair. > Faction armor tank kit is cheaper > 750rep/s >>> 250dps even if you can't keep it going forever > The Nidhoggur is a giant Rifter/Hurricane lookalike and therefore full of that ebil Yarr atmosphere. Now I repeat, nerf the pencil pushers and the whip*****ers carriers down to these more respectable levels. I know getting the forms filled out in triplicate and allowing the holder in charge of the design-team to have his way with you are distasteful and boring tasks but you'll just have to man-up and take one for the team. [EDIT: and un-nerf the word C.R.A.C.K while your at it]
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2007.11.03 06:45:00 - [14] Originally by: Kaathar Rielspar hahahha great stuff, a random nerf that actually works out for once. was going to train for capital shield boosters for the nid, now i dont need to bother. thx ccp really looking forward to seeing the patch notes for when all these random nerfs go in, assuming they're all listed ofc and not just stealth-nerfed I hate you. Personally I don't see the point of this change, it doesn't really fix the actual issue with the Nid, which is grid/cpu. Whenever I armor tank nid I run low on grid, shield tank I run low on cpu. Comparing with other carriers, it turns out the Thanatos has more cpu and grid then the Nid. Also with this change the nid and hel lose their connection, with hel being suggested as a shield tank and the nid as an armor tank, slotwise. Not to mention that the "symmetry" of the tank style(2 races armor, 2 shield) over the 4 races gets blurred even further for minmatar. What would be a better fix imo is to boost cpu of the nidhoggur a fair amount. Like +100 cpu. If it needs a grid reduction to balance the cpu boost, something like 25-50k I wouldn't mind. A second fix would be the modules involved, the capital shield booster takes a lot of cpu compared to the amount of grid the armor variant takes. 2 Capital armor repairers take 40% of a carrier's average base grid and 20% of a carriers average cpu. A capital shield booster and a shield boost amplifier(2 capital reps equivalent) takes 49% of a carrier's average cpu and 12% of the grid. If the capital shield booster would take 125,000 grid and 230 cpu the values would match up much better, with a capital shield booster + sba taking 39.65% cpu and 20% grid. Secondary "issue" this solves is the fun combo of capital shield booster with a maelstrom(yes the shield boost bonus works ). -- stuff --
Porks GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.03 07:27:00 - [15] Not a bad change really. While you'd definitely still shield tank a naglfar, I always armor tanked my nidhoggur and it did fine most of the time. 2x Cap Rep, 1x Kin/Exp/Therm, 1x DC2 is looking pretty nice at this stage.
Linas IV	Posted - 2007.11.03 14:26:00 - [16] Personly i think a cpu boost would have been much better that this slot change. Maybe a cpu boost on the Naglfar would be good aswell.
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 14:33:00 - [17] Originally by: Angor Well to be honest, i probably would still armor tank the Hel, even though it has more mids, couldnt be bothered training TSM 5 for the shield booster. I would just use really good faction/officer hardeners as im use to 5 lows with the nid and seems as I probably wouldnt use it as a solo pawn mobile like every Nyx pilot out there, i'd make sure i was around at least 3 other carriers who were remote rep fitted for my support. But i have a Hel coming out of protuction on sisi soon so I'll play around with the setup see what suits me best. An armor tanked Hel really is not going to work well for you, Yes the tanks on MS are not that much better than the carrier tanks but all of them gets 1 extra tank slot (low if nyx or aeon med if hel or wyvern) which combined with officer/faction mods does make a fair difrence however an armor tanked Hel would have a worse tank even with the best faction/officer mods than a normal thantanos. If you want to do something intresting Nano it then have a small shield tank. As for the cost of faction tanks, on the nid its not really worth it they die too easily and on a MS it should not matter which is more expensive the ship is going to cost you either 15-20bil to make and alot of logistics or 30-35bil to buy if you can afford to get one you should be able to splash out for some expensive fittings.
Amy Wang	Posted - 2007.11.03 18:23:00 - [18] I think it is a step in the right diretion, but it cant be the last step. The Nid is still sub par compared to the others, but at least its good to see they are taking small steps one at a time to balance it. The next step (and probably final step) would be one of the following: a) change cap and armor/shield amounts to that of the thanatos so we get a solid armor tanking ship that doesnt cap out in record time OR b) leave cap and shield/armor distribution sub par as now but give it 6 med/6 lows this way it retains the shield tanking ability which pretty much is gone with the last slot change while being able to fit a decent armor tank as well I would prefer the first one but I guess lots of people that trained capital shield tanks will disagree, the second one benefits both and would finally bring the ship on par with its brethren
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 18:49:00 - [19] Having more slots than any other carrier is wrong and its not going to have its cap/recharge changed thats part of the racial elements, tbh the change now just makes it a sub par thanny it was fine as a shield tanker except for the CPU issue which was what people wanted fixed all ccp did was create more issues. As said before i have a nid pilot and yes i armor tank it but only because the character was trained for dreads first.
Linas IV	Posted - 2007.11.03 19:34:00 - [20] For me a 6/6 med/low slot layout would be simply awesome! Then it would be the first Minmatar Capital being really unique! But i dont think that something like this will happen in foreseeable future, because then the other race carrier Pilots would start complaining about the nidhoggur being the only one being buffed, during this time of nervs ^^ But now seriously, for me a Cpu-boost with 6/5 med/low layout would be enough for now.

Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.03 22:09:00 - [21] Originally by: Linas IV For me a 6/6 med/low slot layout would be simply awesome! Then it would be the first Minmatar Capital being really unique! But i dont think that something like this will happen in foreseeable future, because then the other race carrier Pilots would start complaining about the nidhoggur being the only one being buffed, during this time of nervs ^^ But now seriously, for me a Cpu-boost with 6/5 med/low layout would be enough for now. The Naglfar is pretty unique only dread with 4 weapon hardpoints and 5 highslots at the cost of extra training and a split weapons system with split damage which means it ends up being about on par with the rest of the dreads damage wise.
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2007.11.04 15:23:00 - [22] Originally by: Random Womble Having more slots than any other carrier is wrong and its not going to have its cap/recharge changed thats part of the racial elements, tbh the change now just makes it a sub par thanny it was fine as a shield tanker except for the CPU issue which was what people wanted fixed all ccp did was create more issues. As said before i have a nid pilot and yes i armor tank it but only because the character was trained for dreads first. How is it a sub par Thanatos? Sure it has lower total capacitor but the bonus it has is far superior to that on the Thanatos in almost any situation. The added speed, agility, and scan resolution are also well worth noting.
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.04 15:31:00 - [23] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf Originally by: Random Womble Having more slots than any other carrier is wrong and its not going to have its cap/recharge changed thats part of the racial elements, tbh the change now just makes it a sub par thanny it was fine as a shield tanker except for the CPU issue which was what people wanted fixed all ccp did was create more issues. As said before i have a nid pilot and yes i armor tank it but only because the character was trained for dreads first. How is it a sub par Thanatos? Sure it has lower total capacitor but the bonus it has is far superior to that on the Thanatos in almost any situation. The added speed, agility, and scan resolution are also well worth noting. Not really much point talking about those because conversly nid also has lower sensor strength (pretty key in and more so after the next patch the way things are looking), lock range (important again cant really remote rep if you cant lock far enough if atall but you can still assign fighters), cargobay, drone bay and less structure
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2007.11.04 17:42:00 - [24] Lets break down the differences 14% less range 12% lower strength 20% faster locks 10% less drone bay 14% more agile 20% more speed 14% lower capacitor capacity 8% less base effective HP 3% less cargo hold The last three are of little concern, either the enemy has the neut ability to surpass your cap recharge or they don't, the extra capacitor generally buys only a few seconds of running time when one has passed the peak. The same applies to HP, once your tank is broken you are dead, 8% more really doesn't matter. Cargo hold... -3%... oh noes! In total these stats are rather well balanced (I personally prefer the Nids stats for my uses but thats a matter of opinion), add the remote-rep bonus compared to the damage bonus and I would say that makes the Nid superior. Not massively better however, and exactly how the differences effect you are a matter of opinion, fit, and playstyle.
cpt rhodes Caldari Silver Eagles	Posted - 2007.11.04 22:01:00 - [25] Would be great if they implement this. I hope they do, it would make armour tanking so much better.
Jagerin Gallente AB INITO KIN-DZA-DZA	Posted - 2007.11.05 07:31:00 - [26] IMO Nidh need Chimera slot's & more CPU
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.05 12:14:00 - [27] Slots were fine just more cpu
Linas IV	Posted - 2007.11.09 12:05:00 - [28] Since no one posts anthing anymore about this topic, does this mean that others have accepted this change? I have not. I'm still pleading for more cpu, because its the better alternative to the slot change.
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.09 15:14:00 - [29] Originally by: Linas IV Since no one posts anthing anymore about this topic, does this mean that others have accepted this change? I have not. I'm still pleading for more cpu, because its the better alternative to the slot change. Not accepted it but there is nothing more to be said no other arguements to bring out that i can think of.
Tarnia Xavian	Posted - 2007.11.09 15:40:00 - [30] Sure hope no one has plugged in any tech 2 shield rigs.



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.