EVE Search - Why the Nighthawk is sub-par ... thread number 4 billion this topic

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why the Nighthawk is sub-par ... thread number 4 billion this topic

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.02 05:34:00 - [1] Originally by: Foulque Comparing a T2 ship to it's actual T1 cousin might be a good idea. I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with the Nighthawk but you're numbers are completely pointless with the different slot layouts of the ships. Lol, I wouldnt go there.. Ferox has even more grid than a drake (1075) The reason the drake and nighthawk are compared is because they use the same weapon and have hte same niche. This way people cant say "but the hml's take less grid than guns" when the drake (hml boat) has a higher grid than the nighthawk. So the point is.. Give it some more grid to reduce the need for an rcuII on any decent fit. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.02 12:57:00 - [2] Edited by: BiggestT on 02/01/2009 12:57:48 Originally by: Lydia Browm Sorry if I am the only one who realises this, but isn't their a mod in the game that boosts GRID and SHIELDS ? Nighthawk looks more like a passive tanker than a Active tanker sooooo fit some PDU's T2 and you have you extra GRID and improved your SHIELDS, quit whining, or give me low slot mods that bost grid + Armor amount. Adapt or die quit whining. You win some you lose some, NH may be sub-par, Falcons above -par , as i said you win some you lose some. Epic fail detected. You need an rcu because the grid given by a pdu is still not enough to allow for even a semi-decent fit. You obviously dont fly a nighthawk or even any caldari ship else you'd know this. Nothing worse than ignorant trolls.. edit: I'd prefer a balanced nighthawk over my falcon anyday, coz a balanced nighthawk would actually be FUN to fly EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.02 13:37:00 - [3] Edited by: BiggestT on 02/01/2009 13:39:21 Originally by: Lydia Browm Ishtar needs CPU, not happening. Ill post in a few misn after some EFT Warrioring The ishtar does not need cpu, now ur just trolling. It fills its role fine and I never see any threads about it or any complaints whatso-ever. I bet fitting a co-pro wld fix your problems. Even if a nh fits an rcuII it still doesnt have enough grid to fill its role properly. I really dont understand people that ignorantly argue against others for no for-seeable reason other than trolling. Edit: that fit has no mwd (an mwd is essential for normal pvp not just range control. If you dont know this then I suggest you stop posting untill you learn) or dcu, it fails hard. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.02 13:41:00 - [4] Originally by: Lydia Browm Originally by: BiggestT Edited by: BiggestT on 02/01/2009 13:38:10 Edit: that fit has no mwd or dcu, it fails hard. Fails hard because? Put a DCU on and reduce tank so it's more likely to fail. And you need a MWD because ? read the edit again. dcu is essential, similar to an invuln but free's a mid. Also adds to survivability when tank breaks so that you can get out or get better use of friendly armour rr when ur in trouble. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.02 13:50:00 - [5] Edited by: BiggestT on 02/01/2009 13:51:10 Originally by: Lydia Browm Sticking a DCU on is like saying, I know i'm going to fail! So i'll just stick a module on thats gonna make me last for less time because i'm taking away from my tank. Face it if your tank is broken your dead regardless. Why do you need to dictate range? You have no optimal + You should be in a gang. OMG you think fitting a dcu is nerfing your tank? LOL You're not looking any better. I used to think the same about dcu's myself, untill I actually used them on shield tanking ships and realised how useful they are. Hint: A dcu is going to give you similar resists to that second invuln but (as i said and you failed to comprehend) frees a mid and gives better resists to structure and armour. In the days of rr, I fail to see how utilising armour rr to better effect if your tank fails is a bad thing. Sure it may sound like planning to fail, but its actaully planning to live. And PLEASE read the post preperly. I said its useful NOT just for range control, but pvp in general, if you dont know what im talking aobut, I suggest you go fly one without a mwd and figure out why its needed. fake edit: Oh yeah and your nh fails coz a drake wld probably get better dps than that setup. EFT whoring is bad mkay Face it, the nh needs a grid boost, this isnt just the odd person saying its the majority. Your the only person ive ever seen thats trying to argue against (for a reason I dont really understand other than for the sake of arguing) a nh grid boost. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.02 14:10:00 - [6] Originally by: Lydia Browm The reason I'm arguing is the NH has been out over a year now, no-one complained before so why now. Just leave it as be. just because you have a ship gimped in one ship class doesn't mean it's the end of the world. If every ship you had was gimped yeah, i'd understand but you win some you loose some. The nighthawk used to be a good boat even in spite of these flaws due to a lack of competition. The introduction of tier 2 bc's (drakes), meant that its role could be done for much cheaper for only a slight performance loss. As such, the nighthawks flaws become much more pronounced in light of its cost, hence it should be viable in a slightly different niche (ie gang mod). @ Wishpool, the reason the nighthawk is popular is because it fluked being a good misison running boat. Hence it is expensive due to supply/demmand. Note that the drake is also good for pve and pvp due to its cost efficiency. The nighthawk (and all CS) were designed as pvp boats. All have an ability to mission run if needed, nighthawk just happens to excel at it. Mission running IS NOT their role (thats marauders). I think its a joke that all the other races get pvp cs' and we get a pve cs, and I doubt that its CCP's intention at all. Note that i have no problem with any other ships fitting, as they all have their roles and sacrifices are allowable. But considering the nighthawks lack of a niche and cost efficeincy i think it needs a grid buff. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.03 00:52:00 - [7] Edited by: BiggestT on 03/01/2009 00:52:57 Originally by: Colonel Xaven Originally by: ArmyOfMe then for the love of god tell us what a commandship is then.. please inform us of the role commandships should have http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Nighthawk Originally by: Naomi Knight So why the other 3 field command ships are way better than their battlecruiser variants, even when they fit a command module? Because every race has its pros and cons. That's EVE and otherwise it would be boring. Take fitting a NH as a challenge, be creative. Or just use another CS if they are so way better. Or use a Drake, it's cheaper Nerf Falcons, boost nighthawks, omg my blasters don't have range, nerf rails, nerf amarr, I need more slots and so on... Seriously. Everyone Ive ever talked to who can fly the nighthawk reckon it needs more grid to pvp effectively. Posting lame insults like "you need to fly a different ship if you fail" proves nothing but your elitistideals or that your trolling, or no doubt highlights your inexperience. I and many others have used this in pvp and pve, theres just no point flying it over a drake as it cant fit a gang mod and still be worth flying. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.03 01:37:00 - [8] Originally by: Colonel Xaven Having stated that one race's ship is not as good as another race's is clearly a reason to beg for slots / cpu / grid / speed / bonus whatever? Following your logic means boosting / nerfing half (?) of all ships in game so that all races are equalized. No need to crosstrain anymore. Everyone has the same abilities. No surprises - same damage, same tank abilities, same speed etc. Bring the numbers. Kinda boring, isn't it? Anyways, the NH isn't going to be modified yet. But feel free to make more posts about it to underline the "need" of, falcon like. But really, it is fun to discuss with you, people. Kinda lot of rage posts, but fun. Oh look everyone hes trying to sound mature and as if he knows so much more than us. Now whos offending who here? You're basically using the tired "every race needs a bad ship" approach which is a terrible argument. You're also trolling now, putting words in my mouth. Your saying that i want half the ships in eve nerfed/boosted. I really hate it when people argue agaisnt the majority just to be different or to try and deny a completely non-threatening boost. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.03 01:58:00 - [9] Originally by: SirMoric Maybe the Nighthawk is sub-par, but we have the Falcon to compensate. See what I just did?? It's the splendid about EVE, not all ships are alike and each race gain some and also loose some. Otherwise we could just go and play WoW. rgds Although this statement sounds ok, the goal of CCP is to achieve perfect balance. As each ship class has its role, and each race is fundamentally different by design, this is by no means a goal for monotony. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.03 02:58:00 - [10] Originally by: Colonel Xaven Ok, ArmyofMe, since your going to be angry it seems I try to give you some answers. Flame on then. Q1: Function of a command ship? A1: Giving bonus to gang / fleet > tank > dps. Yes, there are other CS which are way better. Race's pros and cons. (Drake's function: Being bait > tank > dps ) Read my above post, it explains why a nh shld be equally good at pvp. Also Id like to see a good nighthawk fit that fits a link that isnt beaten by a raven in terms of mission performance. Such a fact is contradictory to the nighthawks role if it is indeed designed for PVE which you so eagerly insist. Quote: Q2: NH only for PVE? A2: No, you misread / I mistyped. NH is able to PvP, too. Solo is possible aswell. Not best, ok, so what? It is not a good choice in pvp at all. Its slightly better than a drake if you fit no gang mod (in which case your niche is already taken by the cheaper ship). If you fit a gangmod its worse (so theres no damn point spending so much more isk on the bloody thing if its outperformed by a 30 mill ship). Quote: Q3: What's the point of not having stated that NH is not as good as other CS? A3: ... too late for such a question. Dodging the question.. Quote: Q4a: Shouldnt ships of the same class be somewhat equal? A4a: No, no and no. And that exactly is the difference in your way of thinking and the way game designers think. They want you to be flexible, they want you to crosstrain etc. This is where I think you're wrong. CCP do intend each ship to be as good as eachother in their class. The different race fundamentals mean that each will be slightly different but none should be considered "better" or "worse". This is their goal that they've stated many times iirc. Quote: Q4b: Are you saying that its quite ok that the nighthawk sucks in pvp compared to the others? A4b: Yes. Arazu sucks aswell compared to other recons. Now what? Boost Arazus? Endless story. Arazu does not suck. And if you think so, then argue for a boost, or a slight change to other recons or a metagame shift to compensate (change good, nerf bad mmkay). Quote: Q5: So how many nighthawks have you seen flying around doing solo pvp? A4: Not many because i.e. a Vagabond does a way much better job for that. But I haven't seen a BlackOps in small gangs, too. Guess why? This just highlights that black-ops are also in need of a buff. And blackops IN GENERAL are not seen, while the other 3 cs are much more common in gangs compared to the nighthawk imo. This just means that black-ops as a whole are broken (was CCP's intention upon their introduction) but to have 1/4 CS broken justifies for a buff imo. Why are you so against a slight pwg increase? It would in no way make the nh an omg over-powered ship, it simply brings it up to par. I think your just arguing for the sake of arguing like we see happen so much on these forums. Quote: Q6: Or did you just call us to dumb to find good fittings for the nh to make it able to compete with other commandships? A6: I've never called someone dumb. But yes, that was exactly my intention - I strongly want a NH for soloing because command ships are perfect made for that. You keep putting words in ppl's mouths, stop trolling if you want to be taken seriously. And yes, you have been eluding to all of us being ignorant nubs who have no idea upon how to fit our ships. EVE history t2 precisions

BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.03 03:20:00 - [11] Originally by: Colonel Xaven BiggesT, I'll make it short if you allow, it's 4am here: I do not insist of NH as PvE only ship. I've stated that more than once. If you want to have a tank / dps ship, yes, the Drake is the better choice. And cheaper. I just didn't get the question which I've not answered. Sorry. In the way of equal ship abilities: Fine, we have our opinions. I respect yours. Please respect mine. CCP will make its own way anyways. I've seen Arazus very often in gangs, now theyre very rare. Dampning nerf. Someone called for it? Dunno, I dont care, I don't fly them. But from what I heard it was a good ship. I've seen your bob friends doing a great job with 2 Black Ops (Panther, Widow, forgot names) + covert ops gang in Tribute. They used it as it was intended - and did very well (hard to say, but yeah...). Black Ops don't need a buff imho, its just horribly expensive coz nobodys uses them (Because it's not tank+gank-intended? Who knows..) Last point: I just used sarkasm. I'm sorry that you define that as trolling and I didn't intend to say anyone in here is a nub. The opposite is the case. I think it's absolutely ok to have another opinion. I hope you you don't think it's not. Gn8 soldiers. fair enough, agree to disagree EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.06 01:29:00 - [12] Considering those implants you cld get a much better fit. You can tank around 630 pretty easy with passive, u cldnt run 3 bcs but ur dps wldnt be that bad. Nighthawk shld have a buffer, if you want active the sleip is better period. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.09 16:09:00 - [13] Too bad pdu's arent really useful enough without the grid bonus. With the grid bonus's i'd still prefer an rcuII as it means I can upgrade my tank, rigs, utility slot w/e. Now if the shield buffer bonus was a little extra.......... EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:57:00 - [14] Edited by: BiggestT on 09/02/2009 14:04:17 Just posting to confirm that the nighthawk will NOT be recieving a boost. This is subject to the below: A) Its popular. Due to excelling in PVE it is by far the most popular command ship when looking at numbers sold. Due to this alone it is the most expensive (le sigh). B) Its price has gone up by 12.5% since about 3 months ago (edit: from 175mill approx to 200mill approx). This is likely a result of i) the missile "nerf" (even though my raven still runs missions the same as it did pre-qr with same fittings...) means the nighthawks precision bonus appeals greatly to the player base after sig radius matters much more for missiles. It may also be a result of ii) demmand > supply after the pos exploit was revealed (and thus less components are available for t2 ship production). Note that these are simply assumptions as theres no definative answer to the price rise. So sadly, based on those figures, there will be no change. IMO Balance is not important to CCP, popularity is. (+2 le sigh) EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Intergalactic Jesters Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.04.15 13:54:00 - [15] This thread is still alive? Pretty sure its time to give up and just fly bs's, drakes or vultures.. EVE history t2 precisions

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.