If I can get 2,390 Atavum at 3.8m each, we’re looking at 9,210,391,061.69 ISK (9.2b ISK).
The materials are only 106,824,240.00 ISK (106.82 Million ISK).
Problem: Transporting 9b through LS isn’t too difficult, but I watched 2 pilots get popped making the trade in Zarzakh. You’re very exposed.
I’d recommend buying it for 15.8b, or waiting for it to come down a bit.
I’ve been watching the Jita prices over the last few days. There’s always someone in a hurry to sell so put a real low price.
You just have to grab it before someone else does. I got lucky and got a Tholos for 4.4 billion, paid 50m to ship it to Domain, and flipped it for 6.5B. For the Cenotaph, I’ll just wait it out for a week or so and see how much it’s come down.
I don’t think there’s much to be made on these, to be honest. At least right now. Just want to get a few in my hangar eventually. Plenty of time for that.
Thanks for doing all the PITA stuff and letting the forum know what’s what with these things.
Mr Epeen 
Nice catch!
Me too, but I’m keeping it. 
That’s what got me to Zarzakh in the first place. I had to have the SB for the Breacher Pod Launcher. 
Removed a number of posts for the below reasons.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to courteous when disagreeing with others.
In order to maintain an environment where everyone is welcome and discussion flows freely, certain types of conduct are prohibited on the EVE Online forums. These are:
The nerf is too much to digest for me, I don’t know you, but I have had a pretty busy HS life with gankers, from the casual can popper, to the obsessed I will not quit Eve untill I have ganked you and ruined your day… It’s these kind of gankers you should be worried about… the fact that for a long time now gankers seems to concentrate on high reward ganks like freighters doesn’t diminish my Alert.
And watching around d-scan when you have to jump into a gate camp doesn’t
save your ship also. A Paperfoil Vargur will not survive a 10 cat gank now even with 3x LSE, 150K EHP will be eaten away in 30 secs and you’re death.
It’s too much to digest.
…then, perhaps you should adjust your consumption.
@Taggo has accepted, like most of us, that at some point he may be ganked. It’s uncommon enough away from the hotspots in Highsec, but nowhere is completely safe.
No ganker of my acquaintance has ever spoken these words or anything resembling them. What I have heard or read is a gank target promising to pursue gankers until his revenge is complete. Indeed, that used to be quite common, along with real-life threats and other garbage.
Your scaremongering will not work, Queotzcatl. I’m sure Taggo is sufficiently mature effectively to weigh the risks and rewards of his chosen activity, and to avoid unnecessary hand-wringing and other wasteful indulgences.
Stay alert; stay smart; the rest is in Fortune’s Favour.
It’s either you are on the side of CCP or with the gankers, or with us…
Scaremongering Taggo? I’m trying to have him dose some common sense
of survivalism. Today we accept the most expensive ships hull in Eve being
retro-scaled back to paperfoil, tomorrow someone will be ganked, and will be
asking himself, if perhaps his tank is sufficient enough, or if it’s entirely worthwile to fly
an expensive ship with tinfoil tank.
Sasha yours is propaganda, not mine.
We need Fighters, Resistance, not accomodation…
We players will always be on the short side of the stick…
And the more casual players if start being discouraged by playing
because now they feel unsafe, bc they are, they will quit.
Everybody lose.
I’m happy that Taggo feels OK, It’s not my intention of scaremongering anyone…
It’s not digesting that will get us safe on the other side!
Maybe I’m wrong, your is faith…
CCP doesn’t listen to the “silent majority”.
It’s a great game, but they should listen to the blue collar guys more.
But I am a player, too, Queotzcatl, so you clearly don’t speak for everyone. In fact, the nerf to Marauders reduced my Falloff by 4km; hardly a deal-breaker.
The removal of bonuses to buffer tanking would have hit hard where those modules were heavily relied upon. I active-tank my Vargur, and so, again, I have nothing to worry about.
It’s clear, from what I’ve said above, that the Marauder nerfs were highly specific, targeted and designed to address what CCP regarded as a problem. They have promised to keep the matter under review and I guess those affected by the changes will have to wait and see what the outcome is.
My active-tanked Vargur does not have anywhere near 150,000 EHP. I still manage to relax and enjoy turning in L4 Security Missions. If it gets blapped in Highsec by a motley crew of Gankers, that’s par for the course. Once in 8 years isn’t bad going, I think.
For those in the specifically targeted areas of play, they must either wait and see or work on finding solutions to their difficulties. We used to be good at that in EVE Online…
I, too, am waiting!
MMGA - Make Marauders Great Again.
Maybe it’s time to nerf the Catalyst’s DPS.
I don’t think that will be enough discourage ganking (if that was the intention). Gankers have proven to be both resilient and inventive in dealing with nerfs to the play style.
The meta has already moved to include previously unused hulls like the Coercer, and I’ve noticed more variety than ever among the smaller ships. The Thrasher, of course, retains its usefulness at gates in Highsec and the Talos does sterling work eliminating freighters. Perhaps they too should be nerfed, based on hull cost to amount destroyed?
The truth is that in sufficient quantity, almost any ship will do; it’s just that the Catalyst currently holds the biggest bang for the buck (for its size).
And, of course, if ganking continues despite the nerf you propose, either you or someone holding your views will declare that it was insufficient, that we need Just One More Nerf in order to ‘balance’ Highsec mechanics.
You will see that such a chain of events cannot possibly end until ganking is nerfed altogether, heralding its demise - and if that is your intent, then why not say so?
I’ve always said that HS should stand up to its name.
Aside from WD’s (which are broken), there should be NO violence within the so-called “High-Security Space”.
Why are people so against having a place of asylum?
HS only makes up %15 of the solar systems in Eve Online.
I just want it on record that I oppose this position. PVP in all of the forms manifest in EVE Online is what attracted me to the game.
I had a couple of pilots attempt to gank me outside of Dodixie recently. It was a very timely reminder a totally safe HS would be a totally boring HS, to me, and to gaming customers like me.
I’m going to echo what has been repeated countless times before on this forum, and on it’s precursors, PVP in all sections of EVE Online is what is on offer in the gaming marketplace. If you do not want to participate in such a game, then just play a different game.
But PVP, in all it’s many forms, in all of EVE’s game space been the rule for over 20 years.
CCP has never tried to disguise or downplay this aspect, when you undock you are at risk, everywhere.
So, 85% of the solar systems is not enough for PvP to take place on a scale that suits you?
I don’t believe “violence” is what you’re looking for.
You want to bash the productive members of the game.
If you do not want to participate in such a game, then just play a different game.
I finally broke down and built one.
What’s your offer today?
*I realize how much new item prices fluctuate 
If activity in Highsec were as starkly ‘black and white’ as your comment suggests (‘them’ versus ‘us’), it might be a tad more convincing.
But, there is nuance. If gankers don’t gank, a percentage of ships and modules doesn’t get built, doesn’t get sold. In Highsec, mission-runners rarely lose ships and I expect, as a percentage of the total, it’s little different for explorers and miners or haulers.
Then there is the commonly held belief that a ganker is a ganker is a ganker - and nothing else. This helps writers like you to frame us as heartless one-trick ponies and, while there are certainly examples of exclusively focused practitioners, it is not by any means a region-wide phenomenon.
Take my situation. I satisfy as much of the material needs of my clutch of characters as I can, through my own efforts or the efforts of those close to me. That includes mining, compressing, reprocessing, building and hauling ships and modules for use in keeping Highsec the vibrant and entertaining location it has become.
As a builder, do I regard the ganker as an enemy? No, he’s just an occupational hazard which I have the tools to thwart. Do I regard the miner, hauler etc., as an enemy? No again; I simply wish to remove from him his ship and any modules dropping therefrom.
Thus, I am also a productive member of the game - perhaps more productive than many others in Highsec, for I both build and destroy - and have a fine time doing so!
So, would the world be worse off if shoplifters ceased to exist tomorrow?
I disagree with your logic.
Society is most productive in a safe environment.
*I already know what you’ll bring up next.
Yes, you’re right! This is a point-and-click-space-sim video game and not (thank Goodness!) Real Life.
Most certainly it would; shoplifters are also people and may very well contribute more to the world in general than they remove from it in your local store.
You are again falling prey to that curiously myopic view which mistakes the part for the whole.
I wasn’t aware that I was advancing an opinion grounded in formal logical garb. I was offering a rebuttal to your assertion that I wished to ‘bash the productive members of the game’. I thought I did so quite well, but you are - of course - welcome to disagree.
I already know what you’ll bring up next (assuming you have the inclination to respond to this post); it will be a restatement of your previously expressed view(s), already aired here and elsewhere, to the acclamation of as many of our dear readers as you have been able to persuade of their validity.
Do not be disappointed at the outcome, Smarter ThanU.
EDIT: I just realised that you were responding to someone other than me. Apologies for the oversight, Smarter ThanU. I hope the points I made are still relevant!
