Player Features and Ideas Discussion

While I agree that run boost and lob missiles in, is about the only PvP role a NH can take your assessment of great tank is based on a design that would only be appropriate with multiple logistics backup due to lack of cap.
This is getting into large fleet territory.
Where the tank you have is not going to be appealing when there is the better choice of a Vulture.

For small/medium roams it needs an Injector on it to turn it into a PvP fit.
So you don't also have to rely on logistics for cap as well.
Your not the only ship they have to keep alive.
You can't rely on multiple logistics ship availability to validate a ship design.

with 10mn ab its too slow even with the nano.
so your left with 100mn ab or 10mn mwd fits for viable run and boost tactics.
This means injector.

So mwd/em/inv/inj/booster
ok now you can run away and fire missiles in.
but tank is not what it should be on a T2 command playing the CS role.

Run and lob missiles is a bad tactic for small gang where damage application and tackle from every ship is going to be important.

So to sum up
Small gangs not viable due to lack of tackle.
Medium gangs , moderately viable with 1 kind of setup although a little light on tank
Big gangs not enough tank.

I'll grant you there's one setup which somewhat works.
This is not enough , the whole purpose of having slots is so you can design different setup and put the ship to work in different ways.
Otherwise if a ship can only do one thing why bother with slots in game at all.

There needs to be choices when ftting a NH as there are for all ships.
Do I fit tackle ?
Do I fit max tank ?
Do I add mid slot ewar ?

The NH needs 6 mids not 5 lows.

The only use of a 5th low slot is for Passive Shield Recharge PvE designs.
Ships should never be designed around PvE unless the whole class is designed for that role.

So, a couple of points.

Multiple logistics is not "Large Fleet Territory" in fact with the T1 Logistics it's perfectly viable to have at least one logi in a small gang since these are cheap and fairly easy to fit out.

Case and point, incursions are set up much like a small to medium sized gang and tend to run about 2-3 logi out of every 11 people.

You don't define "too slow" you just say that this ship is it.

More than that you are trying to fit a ship in a way that is not going to be as effective as other ships. You would really be better off ASB fitting the thing or just using it with any amount of logistics.

The fifth low lets you fit speed which better helps you maintain the damage at range advantage of missiles. Alternatively it may be used for damage projection depending on if we get missile mods or not.



Or you could use the solid damage application of Precision missiles to turn that frig into a cloud of dust where any turret based Command Ship would be shooting at it in vain, probably even with a web on it.



So, with 2 Invuls, a T2 EM Rig, and a DC 2 I get better Shield EHP out of the Nighthawk than the Slephnir with 3 Invuls, DC2, and a T2 Kinetic Rig at least partly due to the Nighthawk's much higher base shield HP. If we do the smart thing for a resists tank and swap that EM rig for an EM Screen Mod then we end up with even better EHP and better across the board resists overall. The EM is squishier but not hugely and the Thermal and Kinetic resists are huge compared to the Slephnir which means against Hybrids, some Lasers, any Kinetic bonused missile boat, and most Projectiles you're going to do way better than the Slephnir.

If we throw an Explosive Rig in the lows that turns to all projectiles except EMP.

All of this combines to make it a solidly better resist tanked ship than the Claymore, especially since the Claymore seems likely to run into fitting issues trying to squeeze in an extra LSE to make up for the shield HP and resists difference.

Overall though I'd rather run the Vulture in large fleets and the Nighthawk in small ones due to higher damage at range and better damage application against small targets, not to mention having overall higher DPS than the Claymore.

Plus if Rise follows through and we do get missile damage application/projection mods then that low becomes a lot more useful. As things stand I'd just fit an Overdrive Injector or Nano so you can better make use of the aforementioned damage at range.

First off, I did the three invuls entirely because it's what you stated, unless you somehow assumed 1 invul base on a Nighthawk.

Second, the Kinetic Hardener fit comes out to 84.675 average resist value, where as the Nighthawk fit comes out to 87.175. The original triple invuln fit only comes out slightly below the Kin hardener fit at 84.475.

Not sure where your numbers came from but I fit out a deadspace setup and the Nighthawk still wins, 92.35 to 91.475. This is without links but those are stacking penalized and therefore will have a pretty minor effect in the final resist totals. I can only assume you somehow weren't factoring in that the Nighthawk's resist bonus isn't stacking penalized.

Also the Claymore runs out of CPU well before it can squeeze on another LSE, let alone the MWD which means you need to either drop a BCS for a CPU mod or use up a rig slot that would be better spent on tank.

There no need to get into a arguement about what constitutes large
The point is you need mulitple logistics ships to make your fit work, its a bad fit.
Other ships in this class need far less support whatever size fleet there boosting.



Sleepers while better than standard rats are still pretty dumb opponents.
Incursions are not PvP
Incursion fleets are not PvP fleets.
Most players for instance wont stay on grid and let you blow them to bits unless there tackled.

If you want a 5slot passive recahrge fit for incursions say so and stop hiding behind bs fits that don't work for PvP.




Do you even PvP ?
Precision heavys are pants against anything doing more than 300m/s if memory recalls.

Maybe you should use the damage graph on EFT against a moving target.
See what you get against a ab frig orbiting you at 1k/s or a mwd frig at 2.5k/s

It seems to me that the fleet/field command distinctions have not disappeared. It's simply that amarr/caldari CSs are now fleet command and the others for field command.

In this context, the NHs speed need not be such an issue.

What will be an issue for it I think is the 5-mid tank in that context. It seems to me that the Vulture is a lot more viable as an on-grid booster than the NH in all circumstances.

This of course suggests that very few new nighthawks will be bought for the purpose of fleet PVP.

I have said it before. I am supportive of the CS changes. But I do agree that the nighthawk is currently looking a little unusable.

In PVE it might still work, but that wouldn't interest me.

I guess you guys aren't changing anything, regardless of the logic behind it.

The Eos is basically required to use three different offensive and defensive systems to make use of all of its bonuses?

Heavy drones, active tank, and freaking medium hybrids on 4 turret slots?

I guess the myrmidon skin is going to be its sole saving grace.

So when's that coming out?

While a Vulture has an advantage the NH does not.
The lack of a 6th mid cancels out it resists advantage.

So a Clay is better than a NH at fleet once its damage reduction from speed is factored in.
On the other hand The NH is wholly inadequate at smaller fleet roles.

The concept that Caldari players should not be able to enjoy small fleet actions unless they spend 6 months cross training to Mini is also a bad place to start from.

I have no problem with a NH being worse than a Clay at small fleet as long as the difference is not so massive as it is atm.




This is why you fail to understand the issues.
There are only superficial simalarities between Incursion fleet setups and PvP small fleets.

*PvP fleets are not always based around logistics chains.
*PvP fleets also bring tackle, the smaller the fleet the more you need tackle on every ship
*PvP ships require better mobility on grid than incursion ships
*PvP ships need to be able to protect themselves from small tackle more than incursion ships do.



So now you see the need for tackle ?
If not try some PvP instead of incursions.



1k/s is a ballpark figure for speed of MWD bs what you on about ?
The slowest ships in a standard PvP fleet are approx 100% faster than your NH Build.
Just because Sleeps puttle around at a few 100 m/s and are happy to be shot from range does not mean players are.



Yeah shame you need to run your hards and links isnt it.
also cap stable is not the same thing as Cap secure. Cap is life it runs your hards links and propulsion
A player gets a heavy neut on you , your dead in the water unless a corpy with a transfer rescues your sorry ass.
Thats far to vulnerable a position to be in in PvP.
Also Curse pilots will luv you.

I'm not saying the NH is worthless , I'm saying it's worthless for PvP.

Totally eclipsed by the Vulture or Clay depending on gang size.
And the shame is it only needed a mid for a low to be largelly fixed.


Face it.
Unless your doing a PSR fit for ratting that 5th low has to little value atm.
might as well be a 5:4 slot layout.

They talked to the null sec cartel - dominated CSM about these changes.
Clearly, that group is a perfect cross-section of all the player demographic in the game.
Or rather, all the players that matter.

Why would you expect anything else?

Damage reduction from speed is extremely situational and not reliable. Plus if you're using an MWD unless you are orbiting fairly close you're reducing very little damage, especially from medium guns.

I've already given you a basic fitting concept that works for small gangs with no logi, your response was "no I want to do it my way".



Yes, and all of these things necessitate fitting trade-offs. If you don't like the trade-offs the Nighthawk forces you to make then no one's forcing you to bring it on a fleet.

You will likely benefit more from the Skirmish Link bonus on the Claymore anyway.



You need the tackle more on a non-missile ship though and if the thing tackling you is lightly tanked (like frigate tackle tends to be) then you have a decent chance of popping him or making him bug out with just missiles. Even more so if we get those damage mods.

As a rule though you can make up for a lack of tackle on one ship by having good fleet coordination. If everyone is pretty close together and you're focusing primaries then that frigate should be webbed down from three other ships and dead in seconds.



You keep saying sleepers, those are wormhole rats not incursion rats.

Also I would go for the AB for better speed tank and the fact that it can't be stopped by a Scram but that's just my personal preference. I already pointed out that you can run a MWD if you so choose without an injector and that the Claymore will have CPU issues trying to fit everything you're talking about along with links.

[/quote]Yeah shame you need to run your hards and links isnt it.
also cap stable is not the same thing as Cap secure. Cap is life it runs your hards links and propulsion
A player gets a heavy neut on you , your dead in the water unless a corpy with a transfer rescues your sorry ass.
Thats far to vulnerable a position to be in in PvP.
Also Curse pilots will luv you.

I'm not saying the NH is worthless , I'm saying it's worthless for PvP.

Totally eclipsed by the Vulture or Clay depending on gang size.
And the shame is it only needed a mid for a low to be largelly fixed.

Face it.
Unless your doing a PSR fit for ratting that 5th low has to little value atm.
might as well be a 5:4 slot layout.
[/quote]

And if you're running a MWD an Arazu pilot will shut you off at 30km, what's your point? Everything has a counter, everything has potential issues. An Arazu could stagger neuts and still shut off most of your fit even with a booster.

Instead of saying it's useless how about saying it's not up to your apparently exhaustive standards?

Not really, Nighthawk has slightly better CPU, tank, and damage.