Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lars Lodar
Caldari Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 11:02:00 -
[1]
In the last 10 days Nighthawks average selling price went from 175-200 Million isk all the way to 275-300 million isk.
Now I don't do the whole market thing so forgive me for my newbishness.
Why have the prices increased by 50%? Is it because of more demand? Or is the something else I'm missing...
I just think that that's a huge jump in the span of a week.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 11:12:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Lars Lodar Why have the prices increased by 50%? Is it because of more demand? Or is the something else I'm missing...
There are various reasons that could be effecting the price. I'm just speculating right now as but I'd say you might be seeing an impact from pre-Rev3 speculations starting to have a market effect. Essentially, prices on most of the items needed for tech II construction have been increasing due to some hoarding being done. Everyone wants to control the market when the new(er) ships arrive. The price increases on the materials can sometimes take time to be seen on that market as most producers like to purchase their supplies in bulk and then place up their product for long durations. Often this means most operations tend to change prices over a period of a couple of weeks instead of updating daily. (This of course is not about the 0.01 isk wars but cost vs profit mark point determinations.) Another reason could simply be, those who had them on for sale noticed a lack of competition and simply decided to raise their prices. I did it in my own market not too long ago. Raised prices about 60% because I was the only one there. The reasons are potentially endless, may in fact be correct in every explanation, and might have no relation to reality. We may never really know. >shrugs<
It's A GIRL!!!!! |
Liisa
Absolutely No Retreat The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 13:09:00 -
[3]
As Shar said: could be almost anything.
Could be an invention/producer couldn't log on and supply the market, causing a shortage. Could be that several inventors have had bad runs, causing them to raise prices to compensate. Could be that they decided to form a cartel. Could be somebody tried to speculate and raise the prices and everybody followed.
You'll probably never know. Signature Your signature exceeds the 24000 byte limit allowed on the forums. -Darth Patches |
Altaree
Red Frog Investments Blue Sky Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 16:50:00 -
[4]
I still see them for sale for 200 M. What are you yibbering about?
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 18:15:00 -
[5]
I see them for 190-200 as well. Anyone paying 300 is quite lazy.
On top of that, anyone who stockpiles nighthawks pre-patch is asking for trouble. The only thing nighthawks are going to do is go down in price next patch. I'd guess they will drop to at least 150, probably lower in the long term.
Being able to specify which ship you invent is going to lower the price of nighthawks and raise the price of vultures. (Speculators are welcome to jump on this if you wish).
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Motivated Prophet
Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 20:54:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Shadarle Being able to specify which ship you invent is going to lower the price of nighthawks and raise the price of vultures. (Speculators are welcome to jump on this if you wish).
Terrible idea.
BTW, free hint: command ships aren't the only ships affected by the change to multi-path invention.
MP --
Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression! |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 21:40:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Motivated Prophet
Originally by: Shadarle Being able to specify which ship you invent is going to lower the price of nighthawks and raise the price of vultures. (Speculators are welcome to jump on this if you wish).
Terrible idea.
BTW, free hint: command ships aren't the only ships affected by the change to multi-path invention.
MP
Not sure what your picture is supposed to show. You have 12 vultures... so what?
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Shannar'a
Enterprise Inc Empire Research
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 22:18:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Shadarle
Being able to specify which ship you invent is going to lower the price of nighthawks and raise the price of vultures. (Speculators are welcome to jump on this if you wish).
No. You're forgetting something rather basic.
|
Lars Lodar
Caldari Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 22:56:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Altaree I still see them for sale for 200 M. What are you yibbering about?
In forge they were 275-300.
I went to citadel and bought 2 nighthawks for 200 million isk each just in case prices go higher.
|
Motivated Prophet
Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 23:12:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Shadarle Not sure what your picture is supposed to show. You have 12 vultures... so what?
That's around a billion isk worth of Vultures at current prices. I'm saying I believe their prices will increase. Then again, I've been holding these for a while now; I bought them for 50-55m apiece.
Originally by: Shannar'a
Originally by: Shadarle
Being able to specify which ship you invent is going to lower the price of nighthawks and raise the price of vultures. (Speculators are welcome to jump on this if you wish).
No. You're forgetting something rather basic.
Apparently, then, so am I. Please enlighten the class?
MP --
Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression! |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 00:23:00 -
[11]
Vultures right now are the "waste byproduct" of Nighthawks. As such, assuming invention costs will remain the same (which, incidentally, they won't, see thread in sig), will cause NH prices to go down and Vulture prices to go up, everything else remaining the same. However, there's TWO more things to be considered, other than the invention changes. Those two things are the Golem (on one side) and the torpedo changes... and it can swing both ways, depending on wether all remains "as is" on SiSi now, or things will change.
Bottom line, if you're going to be using cruise missiles on Raven variants to run L4s, you are pretty much the same as with a heavy missiles Nighthawk, total compretion time wise (since you save a LOT on smaller ships, and don't lose all that much against larger ships, completion times are similar). On the other hand, outfiting a NH is cheap as heck, and gives you pretty much the same tankability as an expensive Raven (but a Golem will be much easier tanked).
So, all in all, it's a toss-up. I'd say NH prices will remain roughly the same as they were a short while ago (my personal recommendation would be to sell now while most people don't have a clue about the invention cost changes), Vulture prices will remain pretty much the same overall, with maybe a small increase (not very likely though), and all torpedo prices will drop like a rock while cruise prices (and maybe heavy missiles too) will increase slightly. _ Char creation | Stacknerfs | Invention |CNVTF |
SencneS
Amarr Balsarferskratchin Inc Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 00:27:00 -
[12]
These along with every T2 ship will go up in price.
There is a rather weird thing happening with raw minerals, they are going up, and going up rapidly. This will in turn make all the T2 ships and mods that use them more expensive to manufacture.
Here is what I'm predicting since speculation is rampant at the moment.
Raw Minerals are going up as people are buying them to make Complex material, used in Component manufacturing. This will increase the cost of the Complex material price which will increase the component price.
Guess what then.. Yep, Ship prices will go up, Since (at the moment) Command Ships used the most components to make they are already seeing the hit. Along with speculation of people believe invention will make a change as well.
In comes Invention!!
With the luckily holders of the BPOs for these ships all they need to do is worry about raw material prices. But invention needs to tack on the cost of invention as well.
Sure there will be some major supply which will probably saturate the market but the all important RAW Material cost is STILL the control on price. People are not going to spend 200mil making a command ship to sell it for anything less.
In case anyone is interested, here is all the raw material you need to make a Nighthawk :)
As you can see at Yesterdays prices it's 18mil for JUST the stuff you need to make the components that go toward a single Nighthawk. It is actually more then this because reactors makes between 200 and 10,000 units in a single cycle, but this all that is going toward a single Nighthawk.
Amarr for Life |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 00:45:00 -
[13]
I have thought about all these things mentioned so far.
I think the NH will still be just as popular next patch as it is now. Perhaps slightly less popular. But the easy of inventing it will increase drastically. Instead of 50/50 with vultures popping out it will be all NH's (no one will invent vultures until they sell for more than NH's). The cost of invention may go up, but the profit on a NH will be far higher because half of the profit is split off due to the 50/50 result. The cost of invention will not rise even near high enough to offset this gain.
Nighthawks will def drop in price, the only question is how low they will go. I don't want to make too drastic a prediction, but I really think they will go as low as 100 within 6 months if not lower longer down the line. Vultures will rise in price to about the same level as the NH imo, but they will at least hit 100 mil.
The only reason I'm not speculating on them is because it's just not enough profit for me given the length of time it will take for this to happen. A 50% possible gain over 6 months is not worth it for me. But I'd love others to speculate as it helps me in other ways.
We can all check back a month or two after patch and see how wrong or right we all were. I very well could be far off, but I think you'll see at least some downward trend on NH's and an upward trend on vultures.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Motivated Prophet
Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 01:06:00 -
[14]
Originally by: SencneS In case anyone is interested, here is all the raw material you need to make a Nighthawk :)
As you can see at Yesterdays prices it's 18mil for JUST the stuff you need to make the components that go toward a single Nighthawk. It is actually more then this because reactors makes between 200 and 10,000 units in a single cycle, but this all that is going toward a single Nighthawk.
Plus another 15-20 mil for the base ship, let's not forget.
MP --
Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression! |
Rissy
Gallente Handsome pilots
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 08:40:00 -
[15]
Nighthawks are no way go down in prices after patch. Also, there will be no way they go down 150m, cos it's invention+production cost at this moment. This is becouse of this reasons: - raw materials will go up in price considerably, same as with t2 components - with having possibilities to invent and produce new ships after patch, inventors will go there, rising prices for commandships till the moment, when profit there will be equal to profit from new ship construction
|
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 09:22:00 -
[16]
I would put my bet on rising datacore and decryptor prices tho.
|
Lars Lodar
Caldari Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 09:59:00 -
[17]
I would kill to have nighthawks at 100 million. I'd be much more inclined to bring it in for pvp. Although I'm sure I'd see more command ships in low sec if there weren't enough already.
|
Leora Nomen
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 10:18:00 -
[18]
There was a thread going in general discussion about people pulling out of 0.0, dismantling their POSs, due to upcoming nerf to carriers. Getting fuel to POS will be more difficult as carriers won't be able to jump haulers loaded with cargo and overall the prediciton is that there will be less POS set up overall after these changes. Less POS means less moon mining going on means less starting materials for T2 production. I would think that some tech II items would therefore become more expensive as material supply is interrupted.
guide to game time codes |
Corporati Capitalis
Tollan Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 10:42:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Shadarle Nighthawks will def drop in price, the only question is how low they will go. I don't want to make too drastic a prediction, but I really think they will go as low as 100 within 6 months if not lower longer down the line. Vultures will rise in price to about the same level as the NH imo, but they will at least hit 100 mil.
NH won't drop to 100m, unless the success chance of the decryptors is improved as well in Trinity. Currently it costs almost 150m to invent and build one, ignoring the 50% Vultures you'd get. With the current decryptor changes on Sisi, the invention price would drop about 15-20m at most, so they'll still cost 130m or even a bit more. Add at least 15% profit margins and you come to 150 again.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 22:34:00 -
[20]
Quote: Bottom line, if you're going to be using cruise missiles on Raven variants to run L4s, you are pretty much the same as with a heavy missiles Nighthawk, total compretion time wise
Interesting. If it weren't for all the other skill requirements of the Nighthawk I'd say that new folks stepping through missions would be more likely to move from a drake using heavy missiles into a nighthawk using heavy missiles as their next step, since it would allow them to reuse their battlecruiser and heavy misssile skills. At least, they might if the nighthawk dropped down in price to that of the Raven. But then if it became a popular missioning ship I would think it would rise again in cost.
|
|
Lars Lodar
Caldari Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 23:09:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ulstan
Quote: Bottom line, if you're going to be using cruise missiles on Raven variants to run L4s, you are pretty much the same as with a heavy missiles Nighthawk, total compretion time wise
Interesting. If it weren't for all the other skill requirements of the Nighthawk I'd say that new folks stepping through missions would be more likely to move from a drake using heavy missiles into a nighthawk using heavy missiles as their next step, since it would allow them to reuse their battlecruiser and heavy misssile skills. At least, they might if the nighthawk dropped down in price to that of the Raven. But then if it became a popular missioning ship I would think it would rise again in cost.
I don't really see that happening TBH. You can spend 2 weeks getting Battleships to lvl 4 and Cruise Missiles to lvl 4 and run missions very successfully. All the other shield/energy/missile bonus skills equally benefit all other ships so there really is no inclination to spend many months training to hop into a command ship that is runs missions at the same speed as a cruise raven.
I chose to train for the nighthawk because I hate the slow and ugly raven as well as the nighthawks potential in pvp.
For most mission runners, it's much more effective to save up for a CNR and do missions extremely fast. Plus with the time it takes just to step into a Nighthawk, the CNR pilot should have all BS related skills to lvl 5.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 12:02:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Lars Lodar For most mission runners, it's much more effective to save up for a CNR and do missions extremely fast. Plus with the time it takes just to step into a Nighthawk, the CNR pilot should have all BS related skills to lvl 5.
If my ego had a choice between flying a CNR for mission running and a Nighthawk... Nighthawk just for pure sexiness. Everyone and his mother uses a CNR.
It's A GIRL!!!!! |
Motivated Prophet
Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 15:08:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Lars Lodar For most mission runners, it's much more effective to save up for a CNR and do missions extremely fast. Plus with the time it takes just to step into a Nighthawk, the CNR pilot should have all BS related skills to lvl 5.
If my ego had a choice between flying a CNR for mission running and a Nighthawk... Nighthawk just for pure sexiness. Everyone and his mother uses a CNR.
A NH can also tank a level 4 mission fitted with civilian mods, or damn close. A CNR requires Gist and Pith (or a lot of time and player skill).
MP --
Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression! |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 15:26:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Motivated Prophet
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Lars Lodar For most mission runners, it's much more effective to save up for a CNR and do missions extremely fast. Plus with the time it takes just to step into a Nighthawk, the CNR pilot should have all BS related skills to lvl 5.
If my ego had a choice between flying a CNR for mission running and a Nighthawk... Nighthawk just for pure sexiness. Everyone and his mother uses a CNR.
A NH can also tank a level 4 mission fitted with civilian mods, or damn close. A CNR requires Gist and Pith (or a lot of time and player skill).
MP
Not to mention a NH can passive tank extremely well, meaning you don't have to spend a second thinking about your tank and can focus purely on killing and looting.
I've never understood why more people don't train for NH's and use them. Even if for level 3's, they outshine a drake in every category and I like it more than a regular raven of course. And I personally like it more then a CNR because I don't feel like flying a 1.5-2 billion isk ship around when a 300 mil ship will get the job done with less hassle (albeit a little bit slower).
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Lars Lodar
Caldari Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 20:44:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Lars Lodar For most mission runners, it's much more effective to save up for a CNR and do missions extremely fast. Plus with the time it takes just to step into a Nighthawk, the CNR pilot should have all BS related skills to lvl 5.
If my ego had a choice between flying a CNR for mission running and a Nighthawk... Nighthawk just for pure sexiness. Everyone and his mother uses a CNR.
EXACTLY!
If you're gonna fly, might as well do it in style. I also enjoy the simplicity of not having to change my outfit for each mission. Well, maybe if there is heavy EM damage, I will swap the invuln fields for some EM ones.
|
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 21:41:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Shadarle And I personally like it more then a CNR because I don't feel like flying a 1.5-2 billion isk ship around when a 300 mil ship will get the job done with less hassle (albeit a little bit slower).
True altho reason why people fly those CNR's is usually that those are faster in missions. Not by some insicnificant amount but quite noticeable way. Takes more skill and attention tho than Nighthawk so main reason why it's not as popular for 'afk missions' must be the skill req's and people unwillingness to train for them if even regular T2 fitted raven is faster (altho not as easy in missions ofc).
So true equation people are solving is T2 fitted Raven (faster) vs. Nighthawk (easier), both at approx 300 mil ballpark.
|
SencneS
Amarr Balsarferskratchin Inc Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 16:18:00 -
[27]
If you're talking about running missions I really can't get past a Damnation. Literally, load up your huge cargo bay with FOF Heavy missiles, warp into the area, activate tank, turn on fof, go watch TV. Come back in 15 minutes collect reward.
If you wanted save time, do the same thing but your last two high slots have a Salvager and a Tractor beam. Loot and salvage while your fof does all the work.
No other sub Battleship can tank level 3 and 4's like a Damnation and not have to manage your weapon systems. With a heavy missile range in up in the 90km range (due to Damnation bonuses) you literally don't have to move.
Amarr for Life |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 16:32:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Shadarle on 18/11/2007 16:33:25
Originally by: SencneS If you're talking about running missions I really can't get past a Damnation. Literally, load up your huge cargo bay with FOF Heavy missiles, warp into the area, activate tank, turn on fof, go watch TV. Come back in 15 minutes collect reward.
If you wanted save time, do the same thing but your last two high slots have a Salvager and a Tractor beam. Loot and salvage while your fof does all the work.
No other sub Battleship can tank level 3 and 4's like a Damnation and not have to manage your weapon systems. With a heavy missile range in up in the 90km range (due to Damnation bonuses) you literally don't have to move.
You can basically do the same thing in a nighthawk... almost no difference. Especially since you have to move in so many missions just to get to the next warp point. A nighthawk tanks plenty well in a passive setup. I can't recall any times that I came close to losing my tank on level 4's.
But ultimately I don't think that many people will fly Nighthawks despite how good they are. Plus the market for Golem's will mostly be the people who fly Nighthawks and CNR's. So if anything a few nighthawk pilots will shift to Golem's, which means less NH demand. Couple this with increased supply and you have decreased price.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 09:00:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: Motivated Prophet
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Lars Lodar For most mission runners, it's much more effective to save up for a CNR and do missions extremely fast. Plus with the time it takes just to step into a Nighthawk, the CNR pilot should have all BS related skills to lvl 5.
If my ego had a choice between flying a CNR for mission running and a Nighthawk... Nighthawk just for pure sexiness. Everyone and his mother uses a CNR.
A NH can also tank a level 4 mission fitted with civilian mods, or damn close. A CNR requires Gist and Pith (or a lot of time and player skill).
MP
Not to mention a NH can passive tank extremely well, meaning you don't have to spend a second thinking about your tank and can focus purely on killing and looting.
I've never understood why more people don't train for NH's and use them. Even if for level 3's, they outshine a drake in every category and I like it more than a regular raven of course. And I personally like it more then a CNR because I don't feel like flying a 1.5-2 billion isk ship around when a 300 mil ship will get the job done with less hassle (albeit a little bit slower).
Yah. NH is a bit slower than a CNR for some missions but it's so relaxing. In fact it's biggest problem is that it's almost boring. Warp in. Target stuff. Fire weapons. Claim reward.
It makes L4 missions almost as 'exciting' as mining.
I love the NH.
My alt can fly a Sleipnir. It's fairly competent (after I got my skills trained up) but you have to work at it. You actually have to pay attention to your shields and cap. -- (Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |