| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sir Elliot
   |
Posted - 2009.04.16 17:27:00 -
[31]
Sry.
Worthless item + new worthless bonus = worthless item.
|
Joshua Lonestar
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 17:58:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Joshua Lonestar on 16/04/2009 18:03:47
Jesus man. I see a lot of wasted talent here.
How so?
If you eve market players could play the real market as well as you do the Eve market, you'd be bloody well rich! 
ETA: This isnt meant in any way negative!
|
Rapt Industries
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 19:29:00 -
[33]
And I almost reprocessed 3000 arb's by accident! 
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 20:47:00 -
[34]
 Originally by: Joshua Lonestar
Edited by: Joshua Lonestar on 16/04/2009 18:03:47
Jesus man. I see a lot of wasted talent here.
How so?
If you eve market players could play the real market as well as you do the Eve market, you'd be bloody well rich!
ETA: This isnt meant in any way negative!
Some of us do but there is that nagging things called time bills and taxes that tend to reduce our profit amounts  |
Tasko Pal
THE IRIS
United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 21:17:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Sir Elliot
Sry.
Worthless item + new worthless bonus = worthless item.
The actual equation is:
weak frigate + covert ops cloak + 0 delay targeting + torp explosion, flight time, and velocity bonuses + 15% per level torp damage bonus = nice item. Cloaked velocity is somewhat slower.
Three cruise missile bonuses and the cloaked velocity bonus were lost. The torp damage bonus is effectively the equivalent of the 2 cruise missile bonuses. So gain effectively six bonuses for the cost of four, plus a velocity boost. The covert ops with no targeting delay is a huge boost all on its own.
|
Eliana d'Arlene
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 21:33:00 -
[36]
Damm.. I was contemplating on buying few thousands arb siege launchers 2 days ago =(. Should've followed my instinct!!! Playing safe cost me hundreds of mils in profit -.- |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 01:31:00 -
[37]
ehm sry, but the sb is still a lil ~20mil frig and deals damage accordingly. sure, it does a lil more boom now (in the hands of someone understanding the missile formula)
but they will never replace force recons - nor hacs, for that matter -.-
it wasnt all that useless before and it isnt now - and it still requires the same knowledgeable pilot, which has been the problem all along - no patch can change that
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 08:20:00 -
[38]
hehe i reckon I bought about 20,000 of these over the past year, might be time to sell soon. |
Rembi
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:10:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Sir Elliot
Why, exactly, would SBs go up in price?
.......Stealth bombers are worthless.
All the people who flew them previously (and complained about the wasted missile skill) have just been asked by CCP to drop another 1.5m into missile skills that won't do anything.
I may be missing the point so forgive me if I do but surely SB's are now far less useless. They're not going to revolutionise combat but surely they're efficient enough now that you can't ignore them? Even if it's the same pilots, they're a viable option now, they're going to see more action. If they're being flown more regularly then people will want more ships, the more often they're flown the more often they go boom.
Also for a new character/player would the SB not apppeal as a mildly useful, accessible, and relatively risk free PvP ship now?
Add that to the hype and you have you're demand.
Originally by: Sir Elliot
Generally for an item to go up in price it must be able to contribute.
Well not exactly, as I understand, for an item to go up in price there just has to be an increase in the demand without the same increase in supply. The hype over SB changes has been enough to make artificially altering the market still beneficial.
I can't see why it's a bad thing, the Manti's a cash cow in Jita. Judging from the fact that between 1900 GMT+1 and 0730 GMT+1 the price went from 42mil to 30mil I can''t see how it'll last, just enjoy it while it does.
This ofcourse this is just my opinion and I'm no expert.
|
Saggy Glands
Amalgamated Transport And Trade
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:51:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Rembi
I may be missing the point so forgive me if I do but surely SB's are now far less useless. They're not going to revolutionise combat but surely they're efficient enough now that you can't ignore them? Even if it's the same pilots, they're a viable option now, they're going to see more action. If they're being flown more regularly then people will want more ships, the more often they're flown the more often they go boom.
Yes you're missing the point. They are -far more- useless. The whole discussion is about Arby Torps, which results in you having a range well within drone control capabilities. That means you're not likely to be coming back home in your uninsurable ship. How does this make for a more efficient and viable ship?
Sounds like a recipe for sustained high demand to me.  |
Clair Bear
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 21:43:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Rembi
Also for a new character/player would the SB not apppeal as a mildly useful, accessible, and relatively risk free PvP ship now?
30M for the ship, 8M for the cloak. That's nearly 40M right there -- a single loss of this ship (which is now much more likely as the above poster so eloquently described) is equivalent to about *60* cruiser, 30 battlecruiser or 10 battleship losses.
Factor in modules and the cost difference shrinks somewhat. But if I was a new PvP player I'd be thinking Raven instead of Manticore based simply on economics. Or, more likely, I'd be thinking geddon instead of either.
There is one possible joker in this deck, and that's alpha striking cyno jammers. 300+ bombers fit with torp launchers + bomb, no cloak or expensive mods can be covert cynoed in to a jammed system, just about alpha strike the generator, die, get podded and return to the field of battle immediately in their cap ships. Expensive, sure. But big alliances are made of money.
|
Clair Bear
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 21:47:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
Some of us do but there is that nagging things called time bills and taxes that tend to reduce our profit amounts
Not to mention that some of the tactics mandatory for success in eve markets would land us in JAIL in real life. And that's a best case scenario.
Besides, RL trading is as bad as .01 isk games or gatecamping. Long periods of bored waiting punctuated by occasional heart attacks. Who needs it?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.04.18 08:31:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Saggy Glands
Originally by: Rembi
I may be missing the point so forgive me if I do but surely SB's are now far less useless. They're not going to revolutionise combat but surely they're efficient enough now that you can't ignore them? Even if it's the same pilots, they're a viable option now, they're going to see more action. If they're being flown more regularly then people will want more ships, the more often they're flown the more often they go boom.
Yes you're missing the point. They are -far more- useless. The whole discussion is about Arby Torps, which results in you having a range well within drone control capabilities. That means you're not likely to be coming back home in your uninsurable ship. How does this make for a more efficient and viable ship?
Sounds like a recipe for sustained high demand to me.
Q: What is the t1 torp range of a bomber?
A: 60Km without rigs or implants
|
Tasko Pal
THE IRIS
United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.18 15:00:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Clair Bear
Factor in modules and the cost difference shrinks somewhat.
The cost difference shrinks a lot. The cost difference also shrinks, if you're in a place with supply problems. It's a lot easier to sneak in a frigate than a battleship in some areas (eg, behind enemy lines).
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |