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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Compendium	Posted - 2009.01.05 23:28:00 - [121] The only way I'm even able to compete against other command ships is to use an active tank. It has the cargo hold for plenty of cap boosters, so I take advantage of it. T2 HML x 6 with scourge furys T2 200mm autocannon with barrage s (just for the pewpewness and adds like 20 dps at close range) T2 warp disruptor T2 invuln T2 photon scattering field dread guristas large shield booster medium electrochem cap booster T2 damage control T2 ballistic control x 4 core defence operational solidifier x 2 T2 hobgoblin x 5 3% PG implant 3% heavy missile damage implant 3% missile ROF implant Command ships level 5, nearly perfect missile skills, perfect shield skills, etc. My tank averages about 623 and dps averages at 670. In order to do dps even close to good enough I have to have 4 ballistic controls. Faction shield booster for better tank and to actually fit it. Electrochem due to fitting requirements. Powergrid implant needed because I don't have adv weapon upgrades to 5 yet. The solidifiers are needed to get the tank above 600 dps to be in line with armor tank command ships. If I take the disruptor off, the tank gets over 800. HAMs are hopeless with this ship for a decent fit. No way to get any dps worth something trying to fit the gang link. Passive shield tank on this fit gives almost no dps and a poor tank. This ship is broken. I spent a lot of time flying and researching fits with this ship. I have to have implants, faction/named modules in order to fit everything. Even with perfect skills (near perfect missiles), it still can't match the tank or dps of a six month character hopping into any other field command ship. How silly. I have perfect gunnery skills with the sleipnir, and it's 50% better with dps and tanking than my nighthawk with absolutely no fitting issues. In addition, kinetic HAMs are not damage bonused. The nighthawk is in serious need of a buff now. The only reason this ship does so well in missions is because level 4s are easy. I use a separate nighthawk for missions. The vulture has an absurd amount of powergrid in comparison.
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.01.06 01:29:00 - [122] 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
Norwood Franskly Minmatar Fleet of the Damned Dark Trinity Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.06 02:24:00 - [123] That active tank fit is fail it has no gang link, no mwd and it's only using a large booster (even if it is faction). Sleipnir fits an XL booster, gang link, mwd and injector, beating that active tank in every way. The only viable NH fit I can see is to go full buffer and have crap dps. May as well suck it up and get a vulture, you get bonused gang links then.
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2009.01.06 02:29:00 - [124] Originally by: Norwood Franskly That active tank fit is fail it has no gang link, no mwd and it's only using a large booster (even if it is faction). Sleipnir fits an XL booster, gang link, mwd and injector, beating that active tank in every way. The only viable NH fit I can see is to go full buffer and have crap dps. May as well suck it up and get a vulture, you get bonused gang links then. Alas yes :(. Heck I even trained teh Dammantion instead of the NH even tho the Damnation is not in the same category (different command).
Karl Luckner	Posted - 2009.01.06 02:31:00 - [125] Edited by: Karl Luckner on 06/01/2009 02:34:43 ...just to realize you should better get into a Damnation or Claymore because they can actually fit 3 bonused links that are useful. Edith: @ Compendium: even with that absurd amount of PG (as you put it) the Vulture has to decide between buffertank and upgrading from 200mm to 250mm rails.
SirMoric Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.01.06 02:40:00 - [126] Originally by: BiggestT 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. Okay then, lets remove all races except one. You like that? Cause that is what is happening when all ships in all classes are "equal". rgds
Compendium	Posted - 2009.01.06 02:48:00 - [127] As I have already stated, I fly a sleipnir as well. This thread is about the nighthawk, remember? What are you going to do with the MWD on the nighthawk? The speed with one of the heaviest races will be quite low. You're sacrificing too much tank for that. You going to fit HAMs? Where are you going to get the powergrid to fit a couple shield extenders, HAMS, and the MWD? Without any ballistic controls, your dps will be pointless. How are you going to fit that gang module?
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.06 03:59:00 - [128] Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 06/01/2009 04:02:13 Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 06/01/2009 04:01:45 Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 06/01/2009 03:59:20 Originally by: SirMoric Originally by: BiggestT 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. Okay then, lets remove all races except one. You like that? Cause that is what is happening when all ships in all classes are "equal". rgds You don't get it all, its not about being equal, its about being usefull and on par with the other races. And being able to fullfill its intended role as the other commands. Currently it can not do that at all. I suggest you actually read this thread before posting such nonsense. And as another note having a ship suck and say "that just how the race is" is stupid imo. The goal of every ship is to be usefull at what they where inteded to do. And how excatly would this be a problem if the NH got more grid? Is it so bad that it might actually find its proper use in PvP after all? Is it so bad if it actually did outperfom the vastly cheaper Drake?
Norwood Franskly Minmatar Fleet of the Damned Dark Trinity Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.06 04:20:00 - [129] Edited by: Norwood Franskly on 06/01/2009 04:20:58 Originally by: Compendium As I have already stated, I fly a sleipnir as well. This thread is about the nighthawk, remember? What are you going to do with the MWD on the nighthawk? The speed with one of the heaviest races will be quite low. You're sacrificing too much tank for that. You going to fit HAMs? Where are you going to get the powergrid to fit a couple shield extenders, HAMS, and the MWD? Without any ballistic controls, your dps will be pointless. How are you going to fit that gang module? No matter what gang you are in you should always, always fit a mwd for pvp, if you tried to join one of my fleets I wouldn't let you in without mwd. I know alliances that blow up friendly ships that have **ty fittings, people do take it seriously, no mwd = fail. Without it fitted what happens if fleet needs to burn across 4 or 5 gates quickly (say theres a tackled carrier a few systems away) but theres a large bubble anchored on a gate. You'll have to slowboat out of the bubble, you take **ing ages and you'll get picked off while the rest of fleet leaves you behind. Shoot the bubble you say, fleets not going to waste time on that when theres a cap tackled, especially with the aggro timer that will prevent you jumping. What happens if you get puled into a sling bubble behind the gate you warped to and your 20 or 30 km off the gate (again not that uncommon), you take ages to get to the gate and fleet leaves you behind (or you waste time warping to a planet and then back to gate and you sill get left behind). What happens if a hostile covert ops gets a warp in on the sniper fleet and dictors get bubbles up, you get trapped in the bubble and you die as hostile close range bs's warp in. That's just a few reasons to fit one, I'm sure you can think of a few more.
Compendium	Posted - 2009.01.06 04:55:00 - [130] Edited by: Compendium on 06/01/2009 04:58:36 Originally by: Norwood Franskly Edited by: Norwood Franskly on 06/01/2009 04:20:58 Originally by: Compendium As I have already stated, I fly a sleipnir as well. This thread is about the nighthawk, remember? What are you going to do with the MWD on the nighthawk? The speed with one of the heaviest races will be quite low. You're sacrificing too much tank for that. You going to fit HAMs? Where are you going to get the powergrid to fit a couple shield extenders, HAMS, and the MWD? Without any ballistic controls, your dps will be pointless. How are you going to fit that gang module? No matter what gang you are in you should always, always fit a mwd for pvp, if you tried to join one of my fleets I wouldn't let you in without mwd. I know alliances that blow up friendly ships that have **ty fittings, people do take it seriously, no mwd = fail. Without it fitted what happens if fleet needs to burn across 4 or 5 gates quickly (say theres a tackled carrier a few systems away) but theres a large bubble anchored on a gate. You'll have to slowboat out of the bubble, you take **ing ages and you'll get picked off while the rest of fleet leaves you behind. Shoot the bubble you say, fleets not going to waste time on that when theres a cap tackled, especially with the aggro timer that will prevent you jumping. What happens if you get puled into a sling bubble behind the gate you warped to and your 20 or 30 km off the gate (again not that uncommon), you take ages to get to the gate and fleet leaves you behind (or you waste time warping to a planet and then back to gate and you sill get left behind). What happens if a hostile covert ops gets a warp in on the sniper fleet and dictors get bubbles up, you get trapped in the bubble and you die as hostile close range bs's warp in. That's just a few reasons to fit one, I'm sure you can think of a few more. hmm, I don't see any bubbles up in low sec or empire. You should not assume everyone is in 0.0. Your assumptions=fail. I cross-trained to minmatar for a reason.

Norwood Franskly Minmatar Fleet of the Damned Dark Trinity Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.06 05:03:00 - [131] I'm not going to argue, but even in low sec a propulsion mod is valuable, what happens if you chase a gang into 0.0? I still wouldn't want you in my gang without a mwd.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.01.06 08:53:00 - [132] It doesn't matter where you are, empire or 0.0. Not having a MWD on a Drake is fail enough, not having one on an uninsurable 200 mill ISK T2 Drake is just stupid. MWD is probably the single most powerful module that a subcapital can fit. Well, apart from a covops cloak, maybe.
Compendium	Posted - 2009.01.06 10:59:00 - [133] Originally by: Gypsio III It doesn't matter where you are, empire or 0.0. Not having a MWD on a Drake is fail enough, not having one on an uninsurable 200 mill ISK T2 Drake is just stupid. MWD is probably the single most powerful module that a subcapital can fit. Well, apart from a covops cloak, maybe. So you want to sacrifice yet another mid slot for a MWD? That leaves what, three left to attempt to tank with (assuming the warp disruptor is still on)? How the hell can you fit that anyway? You don't even have the powergrid for two large shield extenders afterwards so passive won't work. You can't get an active tank like this either since one slot goes to cap booster (although you'd never get that to work with a shield booster as well). That would leave one slot for resists. MWD breaks the nighthawk. Forget about heavy assaults or a gang module.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.01.06 11:36:00 - [134] Edited by: Gypsio III on 06/01/2009 11:36:25 Well, this is kind of the point, isn't it? This is why the Nighthawk isn't a very good ship - it has crippled PG and an unremarkable tank when fit for PVP. But really, the point of CS is to fit a gang mod. The inability of the NH to fit a basic pvp fit without multiple fitting mods is the problem, and easily fixable by a 150-200 PG boost. The following basic fit simply should not require two fitting mods: [Nighthawk, Buffer-HM] Damage Control II Reactor Control Unit II Power Diagnostic System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Large Shield Extender II Photon Scattering Field II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Siege Warfare Link - Shield Harmonizing Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I The NH's PG issue when PVP-fit was taken to the CSM in the summer.. It was rejected, with comments that the NH was a perfectly good PVE ship. It was then resubmitted, accepted and forwarded to CCP. That was seven months ago.
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2009.01.06 14:19:00 - [135] maby its time to do something more about it, submit it agin.
NoNah	Posted - 2009.01.06 16:51:00 - [136] Originally by: Vrabac Originally by: NoNah Brutix(1150) -> Astarte(1450) = +1 Turret Harbinger(1500) -> Absolution(1575) = +/-0 Turrets Drake(850) -> Nighthawk(710) = -1 Launcher Cyclone(1200) -> Sleipnir(1460) = +2 Turrets This is all so correct, insightful and exciting. Brutix has 7 turrets just like Astarte. Harbinger has 7 turrets, Abso has 6, but Abso is actually a t2 PROPHECY. Nighthawk isn't a t2 Drake. Cyclone -> Sleip part almost makes sense. All that aside, nighthawk is still kinda pointless. Adding it grid to remove the need for rcu and swaping low for a mid would make it competitive with other field commands in gank/tank area, since it could fit similar to haml Drake with dc, 3 bcus, mwd, web, scram, invus, lse and hams and actually be better than Drake. But how would that reflect on other fits I don't know so cant really say that doing it would solve all the issues. I have no clue how drunk I must've been when posting that - I didn't even have a clue I had said it. Though using your own arguments the nighthawk is a t2 ferox and not a drake. And the nighthawk is indeed a ******* better than the ferox - atleast as a missile platform. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 522500
Compendium	Posted - 2009.01.06 18:48:00 - [137] Edited by: Compendium on 06/01/2009 18:48:47 Originally by: Gypsio III It was rejected, with comments that the NH was a perfectly good PVE ship. Woo, yay for PVE-only field command ship! Interesting that I don't see that said for any of the other ones.
Ignition SemperFi Private Nuisance	Posted - 2009.01.07 23:53:00 - [138] I love the people here who dont fly the nighthawk, that are trying to say a PG boost isnt needed? Im sure it would definately push this ship over the edge in being broken and the its a pve ship its fine... gtfo
Atreus Tac Quatidion Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.01.07 23:57:00 - [139] just want to comment, if you are going to do something to the nighthawk, can the vulture be given a look in to.
Dread Phantom Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.01.08 11:01:00 - [140] Its not even that much better at missions

Framic Caldari Balex Academy	Posted - 2009.01.08 11:06:00 - [141] Edited by: Framic on 08/01/2009 11:09:00 Edited by: Framic on 08/01/2009 11:08:19 Originally by: TimMc Its awesome at mission running, the rest of them suck at it... any you want more? Heavy missile launchers do not take as much PG as the other races guns, but I do agree it should have a nicer CPU (or perhaps the others are too high). And who cares about missions? And it is not much better than drake for running missions. And it cant be properly fitted for PVP. With 5 mid, 5 low slots and no grid you cant neither passive nor active tank. For PVP you need mwd and point (web would be good) and that leaves you on 2-3 mid slots. And for active shield tanker it misses shield booster bonus like sliepnir has. To work as command ship you simply cant fit gang modules with this grid and have usefull setup. Drake can do all things better than NH (just a bit lower DPS) and it is 6 times cheaper and is insurable. So what do i want? I wont that they fix NH. It is completly stupid to say it works in missions, cause no ships should be designed to be gurista/serpentis PVE ship and NH is one. Arguments "dont fly it, train something else" are idiotic. That way we could remove 30 ships from game and let us all fly ishtars, megas, gedons and canes. :rolleyes: I want that every ship in game be useful if this is much to ask, then gmae is becoming useless. And for person that said that Drake is useless in PVP. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2009.01.08 14:23:00 - [142] Originally by: Framic Originally by: TimMc Its awesome at mission running, the rest of them suck at it... any you want more? Heavy missile launchers do not take as much PG as the other races guns, but I do agree it should have a nicer CPU (or perhaps the others are too high). And who cares about missions? A helluva lot of people. The NH is broken for PvP - correct. Yet it's one of the most popular CS around. Why? Because shed loads of people (relatively speaking) use it for mission running. Quote: And it is not much better than drake for running missions. Get a clue! It's the second best Caldari mission ship in the game. On average (ie;taking every mission offered) it is arguably as good as a Golem. Quote: You obviously dont know what are you taklking about. -- (Sarcastic mission running veteran, 4+ years) [Brackley, UK] My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned.
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.08 14:26:00 - [143] While it is good at missiosn, it would certenly not be anye worse if the grid was raise, so I don't know what all of you PvE guys complain about. A command ship should be banchmakred in PvP, not PvE.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.08 14:58:00 - [144] To be honest, adding grid to the Nighthawk wont really unbalance anything.. As a counter point, try fitting the tank/gank/ganglink setup that people complain the Nighthawk struggles at, on all the other command ships. You will notice, the Astarte loses a gun slot and needs an expensive ACR rig to make it work, and the Absolution and Sleipnir have similar problems AND cpu fitting problems trying the same thing. And as its been said before, every other races long range guns use over 200 grid per gun (even with AWU5) with those skills the Nighthawk uses less than 100 per launcher. 100+ grid x 6 does show you why the NH has so little grid compared to the others..
Delichon The First Foundation SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.01.08 15:19:00 - [145] Originally by: Rastigan And as its been said before, every other races long range guns use over 200 grid per gun (even with AWU5) with those skills the Nighthawk uses less than 100 per launcher. 100+ grid x 6 does show you why the NH has so little grid compared to the others.. Other races can downgrade weapons because guns have lower tier variants. You can't fit any tank if you fit 6x Heavy Beams + MWD + Gang link on Absolution. You CAN fit a 1600mm plate if you downgrade to Focused Beams. You can't fit Sleip with LR guns whatsoever, but it is utterly lol with them anyway :) Autocannons fit fine. You can easily fit what ever you want on Astarte - just downgrade to 200mm or 150mm.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.08 19:42:00 - [146] Originally by: Delichon You can easily fit what ever you want on Astarte - just downgrade to 200mm or 150mm. Fitting an Astarte for anything other than maximum damage is a waste though. For that you use the useless Eos. That would be like fitting a Nighthawk with Assault II launchers (which it does get some bonus for).
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2009.01.09 09:05:00 - [147] Edited by: Andrue on 09/01/2009 09:06:07 Originally by: Sidus Isaacs While it is good at missiosn, it would certenly not be anye worse if the grid was raise If that's all they did then no. Unfortunately those of us that have been playing this game a while (nearly five years for me) are sceptical that's all they would do. Quote: , so I don't know what all of you PvE guys complain about. A command ship should be banchmakred in PvP, not PvE. Why? PvE is as valid a part of the game as PvP. If we were discussing a newly introduced ship on Sisi then it might be valid to ask how it is going to be used. I don't know if CCP ever think of a ship purely in terms of PvE v. PvP but if anyone does then initial design time is when to do it. The Nighthawk is not, however, a newly introduced ship. It's been around for a couple of years now. It's role is well established. Whether that role is right or wrong is immaterial. I would guess that 90% of Nighthawks are currently being used for PvE. I base that on my own experience but also from monitoring threads on the forums. People that like the Nighthawk use it for missions. People that don't like the Nighthawk want to use it for PvP. Ignoring the Nighthawk's PvE credentials is selfish and irresponsible. I also question the assertion that PvE players shouldn't be allowed to use any Command Ships. Traditionally (speaking as a Veteran) Caldari have always been somewhat mission oriented. If any CS is to be used in PvE then the Nighthawk is the obvious candidate. With the December patch it actually has the perfect niche to occupy. A specialist's alternative to the Golem. -- (Sarcastic mission running veteran, 4+ years) [Brackley, UK] My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned.
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.01.09 10:14:00 - [148] Quote: That would be like fitting a Nighthawk with Assault II launchers (which it does get some bonus for). Yeah, in another thread about this same subject (where I was being mercilessly trolled by Dev alts) that was the best fit they could come up with. 200m isk frig killer, oh joy.
Fuazzole	Posted - 2009.01.09 12:00:00 - [149] Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 02/01/2009 04:00:19 Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 02/01/2009 03:59:28 Originally by: TimMc Its awesome at mission running, the rest of them suck at it... any you want more? Heavy missile launchers do not take as much PG as the other races guns, but I do agree it should have a nicer CPU (or perhaps the others are too high). I give a **** about mission running for the NH to be frank. It could shine in PvP with better grid, and its in PvP where PvP ships should be benchmarked! With AWU 4 it can't even fit this: [Nighthawk, lol wut?] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II Siege Warfare Link - Shield Harmonizing [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] In comparison thi has lots of grid to spare: [Absolution, New Setup 1] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defence [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] Seems balanced? I do not think so. NH need a serious boost! This is a little bit Fail since common low slots for shield tankers are PDS (+pg) and you are yet to fit the Medium armour rep x2, MWD/AB, Cap injector to which the Absolution can't go without.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.01.09 13:06:00 - [150] Edited by: Gypsio III on 09/01/2009 13:09:01 Originally by: Fuazzole This is a little bit Fail since common low slots for shield tankers are PDS (+pg) and you are yet to fit the Medium armour rep x2, MWD/AB, Cap injector to which the Absolution can't go without. This is a little bit fail, since PDS are not desirable for a shield tanker's low slots. You want a suitcase and damage mods, with maybe a lowslot ECCM in the NH's fifth lowslot. In general, for a shield tanker, PDS are fitting mods and should be avoided (yeah yeah Onyx).



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 :: 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.