EVE Search - Is the Zealot too vunerable?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Is the Zealot too vunerable?

» 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)
Tista	Posted - 2007.02.25 11:45:00 - [1] I've never flown this ship but i have killed a few and i wanted to know what sort of combat to use this. Since i fly a pilgrim i usualy distinguish my targets by how much cap use they have. The Zealot is how ever an expensive ship with alot of vunerablities, such as cap, tracking, no drones.. im not sure if it can tank high dps either.. though if used correctly it hurts alot. but im just trying to think of a t2 ship that couldnt beat it.. other than assault frigates just about any other t2 ship could win against this poor amarrian ship. Battleships & Battlecruisers shouldn't have too much trouble either. So my question i put to you is: other than killing t1 cruisers what can the Zealot kill and does anyone have any video footage?
comrade captain	Posted - 2007.02.25 11:52:00 - [2] Edited by: comrade captain on 25/02/2007 11:50:25 I can send you a video of me killing lots of npcs in it on level 3 missions lol. I would not pvp in it as the cost of the ship is far too high, many cheaper ships can do a better job. Its useless for solo pvp but pretty good as part of a small gang as a damage dealer but you could use a geddon for less than half the price inc fittings to do that.
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.02.25 11:57:00 - [3] I've used a Zealot for a long time, and imho it needs either a 5th turret, with the PG/CPU to go with it, or a 25m3 drone bay. It tanks well, but it's dps is meh... ------------------------------------------ Every ship has a base 60-70% resist against the primary damage type of the race that is the least able to vary it's damage types.
Tista	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:02:00 - [4] mhmm i think some T2 ships do need a fair boost.. mainly the turret ones. Things such as the Muninn with only 5 turrets.. which is alot better than the Zealot which only has 4 but the munnin deserves maybe one or two more.. also the Deimos needs either a 6th gun placement along with an agility change and a few other bits and pieces.. The eagle needs another gun turret placment because at the moment that ship isn't too good at it's primary function.. which is sniping expecialy since the rohk can do it with insurance and alot better. The same goes for all the Heavy Assault Cruisers.. their battleship counterparts do it alot better.. tank better.. have more DPS.. dont need to be specialised to be fantastic either, along with being cheaper but it is a player owned market so price doesn't come into it.
ScreamingLord Sutch Hand in Mouth	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:46:00 - [5] All the pilgrims bonuses exploit the zealots weaknesses. 1) Pilgrim kills the cap the zealot needs to shoot 2) Amarr guns are most affected by tracking disruptors, the pilgrim has an insane bonus to them So in short, its safe to say the pilgrim was designed to kill the zealot.
comrade captain	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:01:00 - [6] hacs should only cost about 15-20 mills, at this price they are brilliant and very easy to replace, but sadly there are too many rich people playing eve and prepared to pay well over the odds at like 200 mill for a ship you can only insure for 15 mill with platinum. If they cost what they should then they would be an excellent and dispensable ship.
Ichabod Crane LFC Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:29:00 - [7] Originally by: comrade captain hacs should only cost about 15-20 mills, at this price they are brilliant and very easy to replace, but sadly there are too many rich people playing eve and prepared to pay well over the odds at like 200 mill for a ship you can only insure for 15 mill with platinum. If they cost what they should then they would be an excellent and dispensable ship. Supply. And. Demand. Why do people persist in whining about the cost of things when its repeatedly explained to them? If you cant afford it, dont fly it. -
Arx Impera Amarr Gr0und Zer0	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:30:00 - [8] Originally by: ScreamingLord Sutch All the pilgrims bonuses exploit the zealots weaknesses. 1) Pilgrim kills the cap the zealot needs to shoot 2) Amarr guns are most affected by tracking disruptors, the pilgrim has an insane bonus to them So in short, its safe to say the pilgrim was designed to kill the zealot. Quote. ...who of course promptly went bat****, flipped out and killed some people.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.02.25 13:52:00 - [9] Originally by: Ichabod Crane Supply. And. Demand. Why do people persist in whining about the cost of things when its repeatedly explained to them? Because supply is, because of the stupid T2 lottery and the brokedness of Invention, much too small for the demand? Not too mention price-gouging producers/resellers... Most of us do understand supply and demand. That doesn't make the current insane prices right, especially when you know the cause of this. Anyways, IBTL
ScreamingLord Sutch Hand in Mouth	Posted - 2007.02.25 15:34:00 - [10] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Originally by: Ichabod Crane Supply. And. Demand. Why do people persist in whining about the cost of things when its repeatedly explained to them? Because supply is, because of the stupid T2 lottery and the brokedness of Invention, much too small for the demand? Not too mention price-gouging producers/resellers... Most of us do understand supply and demand. That doesn't make the current insane prices right, especially when you know the cause of this. Then post it in one of the threads on supply and demand or price whines. Theres enough on-topic whines without off-topic ones cluttering up this space.
Ichabod Crane LFC Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.25 18:35:00 - [11] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus Because supply is, because of the stupid T2 lottery and the brokedness of Invention, much too small for the demand? Not too mention price-gouging producers/resellers... Most of us do understand supply and demand. That doesn't make the current insane prices right, especially when you know the cause of this. Actually I dont think you do understand supply and demand in eve. People complain about the state of the t2 market because they're comparing it to the tech1 market and expecting it to be exactly the same. The t2 blueprint/copy distribution system might limit the number of available suppliers on the market but it is not the root cause of the high prices, nor are 'price gougers/resellers'. Tech2 along with officer/faction/deadspace gear is supposedly the best available ingame. Because they are better than base technologies like tech1 there is automatically a higher demand for them and producers/sellers anticipate this and set their prices accordingly. Supply and demand does not relate to their being far more of a demand than suppliers can cope with (infact there is an adequate supply of t2 stuff for the current demand), it just means that the producers can dictate their prices based on what the current demand is. Contrary to popular belief that is not price gouging, its simple capitalism. People see a way of making a profit and exploit that. Despite whatever folks say about selling at a fairer price if they had a t2bpo/could invent, they would do exactly the same if they were in that position because that is the nature of the game. Make as much ISK as you can by whatever means necessary. Which brings me to my point of people comparing tech2 to tech1. The most common argument against tech2 prices and distribution is the fact that unlike tech1 you cant insure t2 ships to their full market price or the t2 gear you fit to a ship vastly outweigh's the price of the vessel, therefore the t2 market is obviously broken and should be fixed. Wrong. The only reason why you can insure a tech1 ship to its full market value (besides insurance going off base production costs) is because the tech1 market is saturated. People are all producing the same thing and competing with each other in pricewars. The end result of this is that you get t1 ships and modules that dont cost a whole lot more than their production costs because t1 producers are being forced to compete. Simply put, if the tech1 market was not saturated like the tech2 market isnt, you'd get the same situation where producers and sellers were setting higher prices than the production costs. Again, its simple capitalism. People see a way of making profit and they do so. The eve economy is meant to be completely unregulated and player driven, which is why the tech1 and 2 markets are as they are now. CCP wont interfere with the economy to the level that the whiners are asking for because you cant have a player driven economy if you regulate the prices. You said that knowing the cause of the 'insane' t2 prices does not justify them. Well I've just explained how the eve economy works to you from my own experience and observations. And I say that yes, based on that it does justify the prices. Whether you agree with those prices or not is irrelevant. Like I said before, if you cant afford it, dont buy it. -
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 18:54:00 - [12] Jepp, it is definately true that the t2 prices are not that high because sellers (and resellers) are pushing them that high, but because the costumers are willing to pay as much. Noone forces people to buy t2 items - especially the most overpriced t2 items, HACs are essentially luxus toys. There is almost nothing what a BC or BS cannot do better. One might argue, though, that the current supply is too low. Is t2 meant to be the rolls royce and ferrari of eve or more the mercedes and audi?
Nylian Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.25 19:01:00 - [13] Holy thread-jack batman. I was really excited the first time I hopped in my zealot... and my excitement quickly turned to dissapointment. I love the hull, the way it looks, and all that jazz, however I was extremely dissapointed in it's performance solo. Can fit a great tank and with beams + t2 ammo the range can be phenominal. Making it great for groups. Either solo or groups I've more damage output with a harbinger.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.25 20:32:00 - [14] Originally by: Ichabod Crane snip Did you really just argue that tech 2 prices are neither high because of a high demand, low supply or oligopoly? And then go on to argue that they are high because of high demand and low supply? Also, the tech 1 market for ships is nowhere near saturated. Or, if you consider it to be saturated, then the tech 2 market must also be saturated. Since they are all ships and the only thing seperating them is roles. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 21:30:00 - [15] I think you should look up a definition for market saturation
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated Free Trade Coalition	Posted - 2007.02.25 21:36:00 - [16] Zealot?Its an awesome ship tbh. If you want to pair it up in a fight against a pilgrim the way the zealot might win is to get out of nos range and use highly damaging crystals(can be done because of its range bonus) But i think the zealot is ment to have high damage and a slight tank...Kinda like a mid range deimos with a stronger tank less dps and no dronebay. __________________________________________ Yes it is great being amarr.
Ichabod Crane LFC Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.25 21:36:00 - [17] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ichabod Crane snip Did you really just argue that tech 2 prices are neither high because of a high demand, low supply or oligopoly? And then go on to argue that they are high because of high demand and low supply? I said neither factor was solely responsible for the prices, and went on to argue that what people were complaining about was basically part of the player economy and therefore not really an issue. Maybe I minced my words. Originally by: Goumindong Also, the tech 1 market for ships is nowhere near saturated. Or, if you consider it to be saturated, then the tech 2 market must also be saturated. Since they are all ships and the only thing seperating them is roles. Market saturation occurs when there are more producers than there are buyers. That forces them to compete with each other to sell their goods which forces the prices right down to near production costs. Now considering your average t2 item usually sells for at least 100% more than its buildcost (depending on demand etc) how exactly is the t2 market saturated? I guess you misread me. Anyway, this is way off topic, thats it for me. -
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.25 21:36:00 - [18] Originally by: Aramendel I think you should look up a definition for market saturation I have. If you go for each ship type then there is less than 50% market saturation for most ships in the game. If you go by roles there is still a low amount of saturation becaue ship roles vary so widly and no races are able to fill all the roles. If you go by just "who has ships" then the market is saturated for both tech 1 and tech 2. Seperating ships by their tech status is stupid and arbitrary. The only ships that i could even think to get close to saturation in eve would be missile ships[BC/BS] because hot damn it seems like everyone and their mom takes 2 weeks off for easy mode ratting. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.25 21:41:00 - [19] Originally by: Ichabod Crane Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ichabod Crane snip Did you really just argue that tech 2 prices are neither high because of a high demand, low supply or oligopoly? And then go on to argue that they are high because of high demand and low supply? I said neither factor was solely responsible for the prices, and went on to argue that what people were complaining about was basically part of the player economy and therefore not really an issue. Maybe I minced my words. Originally by: Goumindong Also, the tech 1 market for ships is nowhere near saturated. Or, if you consider it to be saturated, then the tech 2 market must also be saturated. Since they are all ships and the only thing seperating them is roles. Market saturation occurs when there are more producers than there are buyers. That forces them to compete with each other to sell their goods which forces the prices right down to near production costs. Now considering your average t2 item usually sells for at least 100% more than its buildcost (depending on demand etc) how exactly is the t2 market saturated? I guess you misread me. Anyway, this is way off topic, thats it for me. Except that there is only one real factor responsible for the high prices. The supply limitation on t2 goods able to be produced by BPOs leads to a perfectly inelastic [in most cases] supply line at the maximum producable quantity. Price then fluxuates entirely based on what the demand is at the time. re: Market saturation No, market saturation is when everybody owns something. Characterized by the number of people in a system who own a product. Tackling frigates are saturized because everyone has a tackling frigate[or 4]. Saturatization has nothing to do with the number of producers or consumers. And similalry neither does price since the number of each is irrelevent, but the number demanded is not. What I am trying to say is that you dont have a clue what you are talking about and are confusing people who may want to know without being misinformed. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:04:00 - [20] Originally by: Goumindong If you go by just "who has ships" then the market is saturated for both tech 1 and tech 2. Seperating ships by their tech status is stupid and arbitrary. To the contrary, NOT doing this is stupid. An item is not = an item just because you can file them under the same letter. Quality is a major difference between items of the same general type. Just because the market for rolls royce is saturated it does not mean that the one for volkswagens is saturated, too. Don't even try to argue with me here, I won't bother to waste time because you a stubborn.
Aberash eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:15:00 - [21] Zealot does amazing damage and is good in gangs, but your right, poor cap, very fragile imo give it a drone bay to make it a bit better... but tbh will never happen so
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:23:00 - [22] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Goumindong If you go by just "who has ships" then the market is saturated for both tech 1 and tech 2. Seperating ships by their tech status is stupid and arbitrary. To the contrary, NOT doing this is stupid. An item is not = an item just because you can file them under the same letter. Quality is a major difference between items of the same general type. Just because the market for rolls royce is saturated it does not mean that the one for volkswagens is saturated, too. Don't even try to argue with me here, I won't bother to waste time because you a stubborn. Yes, but then you have to differentiate between quality of the same general type. Which means the tech 1 market isnt saturated. You dont need a population growth for more people to buy moas. You just have to convince them that training caldari cruiser and buying them is worthwhile. The only way the tech 1 market is saturated and the tech 2 is not, is if are using arbitrary destinctions that dont help us define the market. Its like saying "The market for cars is saturated because everyone has a car, but the market for Rolls Royces is not, because not everyone has a Rolls Royce" ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Angus McLean Gallente Divinity Trials	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:29:00 - [23] "Is the Zealot too vunerable?" Yes. with 4 Heavy Pulse laser II's 3 Heatsink II's, an MAR II and 3 resistance platings on top of HAC resistance bonuses and HAC's 4 bonuses, the Zealot still cannot kill a good BC pilot in a respectable time. It can even stuggle against a well tanked Tech 1 cruiser. It is a gank ship that has a bit of trouble ganking before its tank runs out. As for how to fix it, leave that to goumindong or someone else who likes to fix stuff. ---------------- Freedom Of Speech Band of Brothers T-shirt
Tista	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:32:00 - [24] mhmm agreed it cant really gank
Leshrac Shepherd Amarr Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:44:00 - [25] The Zealot is a fine ship that's struggling in the current setup ecosystem of nosses, neutralizers and 80% to EM resistance tanks.
Angus McLean Gallente Divinity Trials	Posted - 2007.02.25 23:15:00 - [26] Originally by: Leshrac Shepherd The Zealot is a fine ship that's struggling in the current setup ecosystem of nosses, neutralizers and 80% to EM resistance tanks. So what your really saying is that the Zealot isnt a fine ship. . The Zealot is only a fine ship when current issues are resolved, until then it is still vunerable. ---------------- Freedom Of Speech Band of Brothers T-shirt
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.25 23:16:00 - [27] Originally by: Goumindong You dont need a population growth for more people to buy moas. Actually you do. Of cource, people need to replace destroyed moas, but that is a constant factor - it does not increase or decrease suddenly. Quote: Its like saying "The market for cars is saturated because everyone has a car, but the market for Rolls Royces is not, because not everyone has a Rolls Royce" To the contrary. Each "quality lvl" has a different clientbase. So essentially a different quality lvl is just the same thing as a different item alltogether for the market. As said, you cannot simpyl throw both in the same pot.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.26 02:12:00 - [28] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Goumindong You dont need a population growth for more people to buy moas. Actually you do. Of cource, people need to replace destroyed moas, but that is a constant factor - it does not increase or decrease suddenly. Quote: Its like saying "The market for cars is saturated because everyone has a car, but the market for Rolls Royces is not, because not everyone has a Rolls Royce" To the contrary. Each "quality lvl" has a different clientbase. So essentially a different quality lvl is just the same thing as a different item alltogether for the market. As said, you cannot simpyl throw both in the same pot. No you dont. If i want a moa i simply train caldari cruiser and then buy a moa. It does not require more people entering the system. This is why you can say the market isnt saturated. There are 100 people and 50 are without shoes, but they dont want shoes. Them wanting shoes is not a population increase, and at that point, your market is not saturated. The market for caldari cruisers isnt saturated, there is a significant portion of the population that does not own any. When a market is saturated, a sale of brand X must nessesarily take away sales from all brands not X without a population increase. Is the market for Rolls Royces saturated? Yes, if they had not bought a Rolls Royce they would have bought something else, thus denying market share. Just as the less qualitative markets are saturated. This is not the case for ships of any sort. Saying that saturation has anything to do with cost is ridiculous. Saturation has nothing to do with cost and everything to do with market dynamics between competiting entities. Price is predcited by supply and demand, and we can quite easily determine the point where the supply becomes perfectly elasticitic, which is the single largest determining factor in tech 2 prices. The next is obviously demand. I.E. the number of buyers and the number of sellers. Not the percentage of people who own a good. If you want some good reading on the subject, Mankiw is easy to get into and iformative. He only does textbooks, but they read very well for textbooks. I hear Krugman has a good laymans book out, but I havent read it, so i cant comment on its quality. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 02:42:00 - [29] Originally by: Goumindong No you dont. If i want a moa i simply train caldari cruiser and then buy a moa. It does not require more people entering the system. This is why you can say the market isnt saturated. Again, no, it is just the opposite. From the original quote: ...the market is said to be saturated i.e. further growth of sales of refrigerators will occur basically only as a result of population growth and in cases where one manufacturer is able to gain market share at the expense of others.... If people train for the moa they are switching to it from another ship. That ship looses market share. The moa gains market share. It's a sign for a saturated market. Quote: Saying that saturation has anything to do with cost is ridiculous. Saturation has nothing to do with cost and everything to do with market dynamics between competiting entities. It has quite a lot to do with saturation. The price, or better: the profit margin is a direct result of the market saturation. If the supply can meet (or overtake) the demand we have a saturated market, because everyone who wants that item can get it for around the production cost. If there is less supply than demand the market isn't saturated. As direct result the price gets higher because this is the only way to balance demand with supply. If you have 20 items and 100 people would buy it for production cost, 50 for twice the production cost and 20 for three times it's production cost the product will be sold for three times the production cost. Basically, the higher the profit margin of a product is the more possible buyers compate for it (and rise the price as result). If there is competition the market isn't saturated, because if it would there would be no competition between the buyers since there would be enough for everyone.
Siakel	Posted - 2007.02.26 04:17:00 - [30] Originally by: Aberash Zealot does amazing damage and is good in gangs, but your right, poor cap, very fragile Indeed. Damage so amazing, it outdamages both the Sacrilege, and the Eagle, both of which are known to be DPS monsters. (Note: It gets outdamaged by the Deimos, Ishtar, Vagabond, Muninn, and Heavy Assault Missile Cerberus, while giving up all versatility and managing only a mediocre tank to do so, but hey.. it's Amarr, so that's good enough, right?)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.26 04:35:00 - [31] Originally by: Aramendel Again, no, it is just the opposite. From the original quote: ...the market is said to be saturated i.e. further growth of sales of refrigerators will occur basically only as a result of population growth and in cases where one manufacturer is able to gain market share at the expense of others.... If people train for the moa they are switching to it from another ship. That ship looses market share. The moa gains market share. It's a sign for a saturated market. In which case the tech 2 market is similarly saturated because if someone trains for an eagle they switch from the moa that ship looses market share and its a sign of a saturated market. Market saturation deals with brands gaining/losing market share. "Moa" is the entire market good. Or "Long range anti-support ships" would be the market good. Switchin to moa from coercer would represent a market change. But even then, the market for long range anti-support ships isnt saturated and still contains the eagle in its definition. You cant have it both ways with the current market. Either both are saturated or both are not saturated depending on the good you are defining Quote: It has quite a lot to do with saturation. The price, or better: the profit margin is a direct result of the market saturation. If the supply can meet (or overtake) the demand we have a saturated market, because everyone who wants that item can get it for around the production cost. If there is less supply than demand the market isn't saturated. As direct result the price gets higher because this is the only way to balance demand with supply. If you have 20 items and 100 people would buy it for production cost, 50 for twice the production cost and 20 for three times it's production cost the product will be sold for three times the production cost. Basically, the higher the profit margin of a product is the more possible buyers compate for it (and rise the price as result). If there is competition the market isn't saturated, because if it would there would be no competition between the buyers since there would be enough for everyone. Saturation has crap all to do with supply and demand. Yea, it freaking sounds nice to say "the market is saturated because supply and demand are relativly balanced" but its god damn wrong. Saturation is about where you get new customers. Do you get new comstomers by convincing people that they need an X? Or do you get new customers by convincing people that your X is better than the competing brands X? That is what market saturation tells you. Not price[unless that is how you plan to either A: get people to want X, or B: get them to want it more than a competing brand]. When people say "supply and demand are relavitly equal" what they mean is that there is an accepted and stable price in effect. That is all it means, it has nothing to do with how saturated the market is. "Demand" is a quantity that would be purchased at a specific price for all prices along the range. Supply is a quantity that would be be purcahsed at a specific price for all prices alonge the range. Where Supply and Demand are equal is the price the market will find. Notice that both supply and demand have **** all to do with what percentage of the population already purchases the good, and everything to do with how much those people would buy and sell at any given price? The tech 2 market has high prices because instead of the steady gradual increase in quantity supplied as price increases there is a brick wall where quantity is equal to the max BPO production quantity. Producers will take any price above the price at lim(x->0+)[Q-x]. And so Supply and Demand will be equal at that quantity, no matter what the price that demands it is, so long as the price willing to be payed at that quantity is above lim(x->0+)[Q-x] for supply. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
prathe Minmatar Omega Enterprises Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.26 04:50:00 - [32] Edited by: prathe on 26/02/2007 04:47:40 Originally by: Siakel Originally by: Aberash Zealot does amazing damage and is good in gangs, but your right, poor cap, very fragile Indeed. Damage so amazing, it outdamages both the Sacrilege, and the Eagle, both of which are known to be DPS monsters. (Note: It gets outdamaged by the Deimos, Ishtar, Vagabond, Muninn, and Heavy Assault Missile Cerberus, while giving up all versatility and managing only a mediocre tank to do so, but hey.. it's Amarr, so that's good enough, right?) properly fitted and flown a munnin and deimos are absolute evil munnin's fitted correct with dmg /arty setup can boast a dmg modifier of 17x with good skills it's a good ship to use in a second wave sort of way warp in usually about 15 seconds after the fight starts @ about 50k line up for warp out and just start devastating support t-1 frig/destroyers will just vaporize "poof" t2 might take two volleys . cruisers will take 3-4 volleys if they are tough but generally by the time they figure it out it's over anyway . alternatives are rupture/cyclone/hurricane they can all be fitted to recreate the munnin sorta but they will never have the dmg/range but if you on a budget they will do alright deimos are a bit trickier to fly because you gotta be in close and that mean if you gotta jet your in scramble range so once again it's best to not be their intended target but rather the random element on the battle field they didn't see til it was too late . but fitted for dmg deimos can hit HARD they are basically flying chainsaws . alternatives thorax/myrmidon/brutix same as above fitted similar they will hurt but you will be in close and you wont have the resists of the deimos if your deciding to get into this or any hac try a similar t-1 version and get the feel for it before your break the bank on a t2 pimp mobile
whejl Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 08:27:00 - [33] Not many people realize that the quad beams have the highest dps and the lowest fittings of the t2 lasers, if you fit thoose you have plenty of grid for tanking. The quad beams also use very little cap making it likely they will shoot a lot even if you are nossed. Yes, you have to get close, so no vaga or cerb chasing.
Ifni Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.02.26 08:52:00 - [34] I'm currently flying my fifteenth Zealot. Whilst I will agree, in a 1v1 situation, it lacks something, whether it's a midslot to apply to cosntraining your opponent, or an extra gun to up the damage output, it's academic really. However, in group fights, its very much the instant damage dealer, and I often find myself sitting top of the mails as the greatest damage dealer. So the problems stem from the ship having a role, and people using it outside of that role. You take what is offered. And that must sometimes be enough.
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.02.26 09:12:00 - [35] Originally by: goodby4u Zealot?Its an awesome ship tbh. If you want to pair it up in a fight against a pilgrim the way the zealot might win is to get out of nos range and use highly damaging crystals(can be done because of its range bonus) Pilgrim bonus. Tracking disruptors II. Toothless Zealot. ------------------------------------------ Every ship has a base 60-70% resist against the primary damage type of the race that is the least able to vary it's damage types.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.26 10:18:00 - [36] (On test server) I beat a dev in a Zealot to a standstill in my ruppie. That ain't right. Amarr might need a little boost. sgb
Zephyr Zhang Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.02.26 10:22:00 - [37] Originally by: comrade captain hacs should only cost about 15-20 mills, at this price they are brilliant and very easy to replace, but sadly there are too many rich people playing eve and prepared to pay well over the odds at like 200 mill for a ship you can only insure for 15 mill with platinum. If they cost what they should then they would be an excellent and dispensable ship. They cost 35 mill to make /sigh i wish people would get there facts right before spointing utter **** --------------------------------------- 30 seconds means 30 seconds
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 11:22:00 - [38] Originally by: Goumindong The tech 2 market has high prices because instead of the steady gradual increase in quantity supplied as price increases there is a brick wall where quantity is equal to the max BPO production quantity. Producers will take any price above the price at lim(x->0+)[Q-x]. And so Supply and Demand will be equal at that quantity, no matter what the price that demands it is, so long as the price willing to be payed at that quantity is above lim(x->0+)[Q-x] for supply. And that is the whole point. If a market is saturated by a product further growth in sales can only be achieved through: - product improvements - market share gains - a rise in overall consumer demand However, for t2 this is not the case. Because the amount you sell is not limited by the consumers, but by your production. There are only so and so many items you can produce. Due to the max BPO production quantity "brick wall" it is impossible to have a saturated market for many t2 items.
Riho Red Wrath Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.26 12:27:00 - [39] zealot is kinda like the deimos. they are both similar in a few areas. they are dmg dealers... that means they shine in gangs :) they both are bad at solo (even tho i DO solo in my deimos :P) i like the zealot for the 7 lows.. but the 4 turret slots should be turned into 5 OR the util. slot turned into 4th med (dunno... might actually make it OP then :P). alltho im not really worried about pilgrims in my deimos :D faction web + faction nos keep them out of theyr nos range and webbed. and i can still hit them whit null :D Great being Gallente... aint it ? ----------------- <------ Hijack free space :) -----------------
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.26 12:36:00 - [40] Originally by: whejl Not many people realize that the quad beams have the highest dps and the lowest fittings of the t2 lasers, if you fit thoose you have plenty of grid for tanking. The quad beams also use very little cap making it likely they will shoot a lot even if you are nossed. Yes, you have to get close, so no vaga or cerb chasing. Most people do not realize this because its false. They have lower damage than both FMP and HP, they have lower optimal range than both, they cannot use scorch so medium range tracking is terrible. They have worse falloff than small pulses and they cant use conflag so in close they are restricted to gleam which gives them a max optimal range of 3km.[falloff 1.25k max] They blow. Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Goumindong The tech 2 market has high prices because instead of the steady gradual increase in quantity supplied as price increases there is a brick wall where quantity is equal to the max BPO production quantity. Producers will take any price above the price at lim(x->0+)[Q-x]. And so Supply and Demand will be equal at that quantity, no matter what the price that demands it is, so long as the price willing to be payed at that quantity is above lim(x->0+)[Q-x] for supply. And that is the whole point. If a market is saturated by a product further growth in sales can only be achieved through: - product improvements - market share gains - a rise in overall consumer demand However, for t2 this is not the case. Because the amount you sell is not limited by the consumers, but by your production. There are only so and so many items you can produce. Due to the max BPO production quantity "brick wall" it is impossible to have a saturated market for many t2 items. the part about "If a market is saturated by a product further growth in sales can only be achieved through: - product improvements - market share gains - a rise in overall consumer demand" is false, 100% false. When the market is saturated there is only one way to get sales, and that is at the expense of sales of a competitor. Rise in demand and product improvements do not fit the definition. If there are 100 people in eve, and all buy Moas every day, and there are 100 moas sold every day. If i was to sell a moa, then someone else will LOSE a sale. If only 50 people buy moas, I can get a sale without someone else losing a sale. That is what market saturation means. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Tar Magen Amarr Arx Amarria	Posted - 2007.02.26 12:45:00 - [41] Originally by: Aramendel Jepp, it is definately true that the t2 prices are not that high because sellers (and resellers) are pushing them that high, but because the costumers are willing to pay as much. Noone forces people to buy t2 items - especially the most overpriced t2 items, HACs are essentially luxus toys. There is almost nothing what a BC or BS cannot do better. One might argue, though, that the current supply is too low. Is t2 meant to be the rolls royce and ferrari of eve or more the mercedes and audi? Another person trying to defend the broken t2 BPO distribution system. Here is a simple thought experiment: what if T2 BPOs were available as readily as T1 BPOs. Do you think that, just maybe, competition would bring prices down to something that is in line with costs? Of course it would. Even if competition wasn't doing the whole job, then I could just say screw you to the gougers, buy my own BPO and build it myself. The whole and complete reason that T2 prices are so high is because of the quasi-monopolies that have been created. Period. End of story. The T2 distribution reflects the very beginning of the price curve, when a new and useful product is introduced. At first the initial manufacturer can get away with a high price. But you know what? Soon other companies have found ways around the patents and are producing products that do the same thing. Then they compete and the price goes down. Here in the EVE wonderland of economics, we stay perpetually stuck on the initial spike of the curve. In fact, the situation gets worse, not better, because over time people that own T2 BPOs drop out and others that have some manage to get hold of even more. The situation tightens and consolidates rather than loosening up as it should by any realistic economic measure.
Pinky Denmark	Posted - 2007.02.26 14:37:00 - [42] Originally by: Zephyr Zhang They cost 35 mill to make /sigh i wish people would get there facts right before spointing utter **** Yes, but the base price I.e. what CCP was aiming for them to cost is iirc around 18m isk. Baseprice is also the measurement tool of balance... The double production cost is due to mineral shortage and market influence I guess - the extra build cost sure doesn't explain the going market price... Pinky
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 14:48:00 - [43] Edited by: Aramendel on 26/02/2007 14:45:12 Originally by: Goumindong the part about "If a market is saturated by a product further growth in sales can only be achieved through: - product improvements - market share gains - a rise in overall consumer demand" is false, 100% false. Then I guess these guys don't have a clue about what they are talking about. I mean, it's not like they are one of the biggest information sites about market and investment. Originally by: Tar Magen Another person trying to defend the broken t2 BPO distribution system. You might want to read my last sentence.
Ishmael Hansen No Quarter. C0VEN	Posted - 2007.02.26 15:29:00 - [44] Never flew a zealot, been killed a few times by them. Pilgrim is really overpowered. Tech 2 bpo owners should get their bpos magically turned into Veld rocks.
Almarez	Posted - 2007.02.26 16:25:00 - [45] Like most Amarr ships they are very vulnerable to NOS. And I wouldn't even think about going up against a T2 Minmitar ship in one due to the insanely high base resists to EM on those ships.
Liet Traep Minmatar Black Lance Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.02.26 17:49:00 - [46] The zealot is the perfect amarr ship. Heavy armor tank, great laser damage and that's it. No drone bay, no missiles, no mid slots for ew trickery. I has all the best and the worst of amarr design. It's inflexible. Like it's smaller cousin the retribution this is a ship that needs friends. Not a solo ship. Meanwhile the pilgrim and curse which have mediocre armor, lots of midslots and don't use lasers as a weapon are great solo ships. I think the zealot could use a drone bay. Especially as the maller it's based on has one. Another mid slot would be great but I don't see that happening. The problem with laser boats is that they do less damage due to the stacking penalty. You can't stack 7 heatsinks anymore effectively. Also the average ship is much more resistant to alser damage because of omni armor tanks used now. My solution? easy. Make lasers do more base damage. Adjust them so they're just about as effective as they were before the omni tanks. High resistances count but if you do enough damage the resistances don't matter as much. Give them a ludicrous amount of em damageto compensate for the omnitank and laser oats will be effective again. My .02
Siakel	Posted - 2007.02.26 18:21:00 - [47] Originally by: Liet Traep The zealot is the perfect amarr ship. The perfect example of what's wrong with Amarr, maybe. A complete lack of versatility, no options other than shoot+tank, and the ability to do both of these at a mediocre level, outdamaging only two HACs, and tanking ability about on par with every HAC that doesn't have a resist bonus. Originally by: Liet Traep The problem with laser boats is that they do less damage due to the stacking penalty. Actually, I think this is more of a Zealot-based problem, as the ship appears to have been designed around having lots of damage mods, and never changed when CCP introduced the new stacking penalty. Where before it was a feared DPS monster, it now is near the bottom of the HAC DPS list, with no impressive tank to make up for it, no versatility to help offset the lack of DPS/Tank advantages, and generally, nothing going for it other than looks. As to the rest of your post... you can't fix Lasers by making them do more DPS. Yes, that may well help against omni-tanked ships. However, your lasers then completely obliterate tri-hardened ships, structure, unhardened HP, and to a lesser extent, shield tanks. Just moving from underpowered in one area, to overpowered in three. Making more problems in an attempt to solve one.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.02.26 18:43:00 - [48] Originally by: whejl Not many people realize that the quad beams have the highest dps and the lowest fittings of the t2 lasers... Hurr? Unless my calculations are wrong, the QLB have the 2nd WORSE DPS of all med lasers (second to FMB, which is kinda screwed up TBH). Anyways, IBTL
Angus McLean Gallente Divinity Trials	Posted - 2007.02.26 18:49:00 - [49] Theres more talk about Market Saturation than of 'Is the Zealot broken.' Yes the T2 BPO system is screwed, yes the prices are inflated, yes its broken, no arguing about market saturation wont fix jack all. ---------------- Freedom Of Speech Band of Brothers T-shirt
Emperor D'Hoffryn No Quarter. C0VEN	Posted - 2007.02.26 18:50:00 - [50] stacking nerf that made 4 damage mods the absolute max kicked the zealot hard. In full gank mode it outdamage the sac (who doesnt) and the eagle when the eagle uses rails. the myth of the high damage zealot died a long time ago....no one flies them anymore really....so people just have these old memories of when they were good to go on. zealot has the same problem of all true amarr ships, equal or worse damage and tank of ships that also have med slot ew tricks, nos, drones, capless weapons, free choice of all damage types. The zealot(amarr) gives up all of this, in exchange for what exactly? Originally by: Snuggly It's just so great to have an actual reason to not die, incentive is fantastic!
Almarez	Posted - 2007.02.26 18:58:00 - [51] Originally by: Liet Traep I think the zealot could use a drone bay. Especially as the maller it's based on has one. Another mid slot would be great but I don't see that happening. The Zealot is based on the Omen not the Maller, but you're right the Omen does have 15m^3 drone space.
Mr Peanut STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.26 19:31:00 - [52] The Zealot stands for all that amarrian design is. However, that tends to suck at solo.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.26 19:38:00 - [53] Edited by: Goumindong on 26/02/2007 19:34:34 Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 26/02/2007 14:45:12 Originally by: Goumindong the part about "If a market is saturated by a product further growth in sales can only be achieved through: - product improvements - market share gains - a rise in overall consumer demand" is false, 100% false. Then I guess these guys don't have a clue about what they are talking about. I mean, it's not like they are one of the biggest information sites about market and investment. The way in which you stated it leads to false information, yes. None of which has any bearing on Eves markets since there is no branding, you cant make product improvements, services cannot exist. Which leads to what ive been saying all along, if the tech 1 market is saturated, then the tech 2 market is saturated. If its not, then its not. but none of that has anything to do with the freaking cost of the goods ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Tisanta Amarr Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom	Posted - 2007.02.26 19:45:00 - [54] Originally by: Riho zealot is kinda like the deimos. they are both similar in a few areas. they are dmg dealers... that means they shine in gangs :) they both are bad at solo (even tho i DO solo in my deimos :P) i like the zealot for the 7 lows.. but the 4 turret slots should be turned into 5 OR the util. slot turned into 4th med (dunno... might actually make it OP then :P). alltho im not really worried about pilgrims in my deimos :D faction web + faction nos keep them out of theyr nos range and webbed. and i can still hit them whit null :D oh i want to meet your deimos in a dark ally in my pilgrim.. hehe hope u got insurance! --- Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Tisanta Amarr Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom	Posted - 2007.02.26 19:47:00 - [55] Originally by: Tar Magen Originally by: Aramendel Jepp, it is definately true that the t2 prices are not that high because sellers (and resellers) are pushing them that high, but because the costumers are willing to pay as much. Noone forces people to buy t2 items - especially the most overpriced t2 items, HACs are essentially luxus toys. There is almost nothing what a BC or BS cannot do better. One might argue, though, that the current supply is too low. Is t2 meant to be the rolls royce and ferrari of eve or more the mercedes and audi? Another person trying to defend the broken t2 BPO distribution system. Here is a simple thought experiment: what if T2 BPOs were available as readily as T1 BPOs. Do you think that, just maybe, competition would bring prices down to something that is in line with costs? Of course it would. Even if competition wasn't doing the whole job, then I could just say screw you to the gougers, buy my own BPO and build it myself. The whole and complete reason that T2 prices are so high is because of the quasi-monopolies that have been created. Period. End of story. The T2 distribution reflects the very beginning of the price curve, when a new and useful product is introduced. At first the initial manufacturer can get away with a high price. But you know what? Soon other companies have found ways around the patents and are producing products that do the same thing. Then they compete and the price goes down. Here in the EVE wonderland of economics, we stay perpetually stuck on the initial spike of the curve. In fact, the situation gets worse, not better, because over time people that own T2 BPOs drop out and others that have some manage to get hold of even more. The situation tightens and consolidates rather than loosening up as it should by any realistic economic measure. /signed 30 times and more! --- Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:18:00 - [56] Originally by: Goumindong The way in which you stated it leads to false information, yes. None of which has any bearing on Eves markets since there is no branding, you cant make product improvements, services cannot exist. Branding is not even mentioned there, so it's of no issue. Product improvements are not always possible in real life, too, so it's a nonissue as well. Just because the eve market is more limited it does not mean that you can give it your own personal definition. Quote: Which leads to what ive been saying all along, if the tech 1 market is saturated, then the tech 2 market is saturated. If its not, then its not. but none of that has anything to do with the freaking cost of the goods It leads that you still decide to be stubbord and ignore evidence and instead repeat your old mantra, which has no founding at all. Since I have given you proof and you ignore it there is obviously zero sense in arguing with you about this here. So I'm out of this particular derailing of this thread.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.27 02:45:00 - [57] Edited by: Goumindong on 27/02/2007 02:42:16 No, you have constantly ignored the issue that defining the market nessesitates either both as saturated or both as unsaturated. And of course that it has absolutly nothing to do with the equilibrium price anyway. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.27 03:42:00 - [58] Armandel, think of the definition with regards to the sets of possible outcomes with regards to supply and demand The definition either encompases all possible market economies or no possible market economies. All depending on whether or not you consider price to be a "product improvement" If you do not consider it to be a product improvement then a supply shifter, even in a saturated market will increase sales. But if you do consider it a product improvement then there are no products which do not meet the criteria of a saturated market. E.G. Tech 2 battlecruisers 1 day after Kali went live. That would have been a saturated market because the only ways that sales increases were going to happen was a price decrease[supply shift]/product improvement, market share changes, or a rise in the overall demand. demand can never be perfectly inelastic within the range that supply can produce which is nessesary for their definition to exist. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Maeltstome	Posted - 2007.02.27 03:51:00 - [59] wish a mod would snip these posts or lock this topic - shame really, some good points are being made about the zealot imo. just to chuck in my opinion... it needs another turret slots, a tech II cruiser with only 4 offensive highs? that seems not-on-par with everyone else.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.