open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked T2 BPO Holders Make 1/3 of T2 Items (and all the profit?)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.21 02:21:00 - [1]
 

According to the CCP report, T2 Blueprint Original holders make 1/3 of all the T2 items (excluding drones and ammo), including over half of the T2 ships. What does this equate to in terms of T2 production profit? T2 BPO holders avoid the costs of invention, and can produce their items at levels approaching 0% waste (through ME research), so their 1/3 of items are significantly more profitable than an item produced through invention. I would wildly speculate that this small number of individuals make 50%, 75%, 90% or more of the total profit from all of T2 production.

If this is true, invention as it exists today appears to be for suckers.

I have a potential solution:

How about letting the ME/PE of the T1 BPO influence the ME/PE of the invented T2 BPC? T2 BPO holders still get to keep a competitive advantage (no need to invent) while other industrialists can have a chance at some profit by manufacturing their items at similarly high material efficiency. This sidesteps some of the potential backlash from T2 BPO holders if they were to be removed from the game (which is debated endlessly in multiple forums), while opening the door to profitable T2 production for the vast majority of players who today don't have access to these no longer available* items.

This proposes absolutely zero change to T2 BPO functionality, while allowing everyone a chance at competitively producing T2 items.

What do you think? Is this something CCP should pursue? Feel free to critique, but leave your whine at home with your cheese.

* Quick disclaimer, it is often repeated that anyone can own T2 BPOs, and while this is technically true it is frankly silly as in most cases it would take many years of 24/7 production to recoup the cost of the BPO so while this may be an option for the very, very, very rich, it is certainly out of reach for 99% of players and most corporations.

Thoughtfully,

Garthran
AP Holdings
Posted - 2009.08.21 03:18:00 - [2]
 

I'm generally in favor of this. Increasing availability of t2 and decreasing production cost would also make it more affordable. Something I think most of Eve would have no problem with.

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.21 05:18:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Garthran
I'm generally in favor of this. Increasing availability of t2 and decreasing production cost would also make it more affordable. Something I think most of Eve would have no problem with.

Thanks for the support Garthran!

Anyone else have anything to say on this?

Gautan Virdamot
Nebula Rasa Vanguard
Posted - 2009.08.21 05:29:00 - [4]
 

Doesn't bother me much since we typically research the hell out of our prints anyways.

On another note I'd like to see more T2 BPOs being released to make this invention deal less of a grind for fairly standard T2 items and ramp it up to deal with aspects of T3 instead.

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.21 05:40:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Gautan Virdamot
Doesn't bother me much since we typically research the hell out of our prints anyways.

On another note I'd like to see more T2 BPOs being released to make this invention deal less of a grind for fairly standard T2 items and ramp it up to deal with aspects of T3 instead.

I expect that we are unlikely to see any new T2 (or T3+) BPOs in the future, although I do appreciate the input, and I do agree that it would be great to see invention revamped somehow to make it more interesting. Though regardless of how they might make it better all around, it should somehow make it profitable (more than just marginally) to be a career inventor and/or T2 producer without relying on ownership of unattainable* assets.

* See disclaimer above.

Best,

Ydyp Ieva
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2009.08.21 06:58:00 - [6]
 

Invention was never meant to mass produce T2 ships. Only to give another option to players to acquire T2 stuff and making sure the owners of a T2 BPO doesn't go way out of the prices. As if they went up higher, more people would start invention. So if you ask me CCP achieved what they wanted to reach with invention in the first place.

Kalia Masaer
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Posted - 2009.08.21 15:12:00 - [7]
 

Sadly if CCP wants to make T2 BPO holders very rich that is the case. Using a munin as an example the BPO researched to ME 90 should use 12.8% less material than the best BPC at -1, then providing there is at best only a 59.06% chance of inventing a single run BPC and the cost of that should be around 5 mil for each attempt so one average that would cost 7.9 million and, I did not include the price of a rupture in that it is not worth it, just to get the BPC costs about 6% of the price of a muninns retail price of 130 mil

Now just for simplicities sake we assume muninns don't have a mark up on them that means the BPO holder is about 24.5 mil ahead of the inventor. 18.8% extra profit margin for the BPO holder. Liscence to print cash no. At the very least the the advantage of ML should be removed and even then the BPO holder still gets a 6% advantage over Inventors.

They deserve an advantage but not a liscence to print ISK.

Washell Olivaw
Posted - 2009.08.21 15:36:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 21/08/2009 16:04:37
Originally by: Castaspella
If this is true, invention as it exists today appears to be for suckers.


It isn't true. You can make more profit with BPC's and be more flexible with changing markets. The reason for this, while T2 BPO's do indeed have a larger profit per item, invention allows you to handle bigger volumes. BPO allows you to sell 10 items at 500k isk profit, making you 5 million. Invention allows you to sell 100 items at 100k isk profit, making you 10 million. As for flexibility, an inventor in the vagabond market before the speednerf easily switched to other ships and modules. A Vagabond BPO owner just saw his time to recoup the purchasing cost double from 3 to 6 years. A lottery winning Vagabond BPO owner saw his asset value drop by several billion.

T2 BPO's are an investment/savings account you make a couple procent of interest per year on. If you have several billion lying around and want to do something with minimal amount of effort, you buy a T2 BPO.

If you want to make billions more, you forget about T2 BPO's and go into invention.

Traska Gannel
Posted - 2009.08.21 21:12:00 - [9]
 

I have a couple of questions/comments:

Another poster mentioned that BPCs allow for greater production rates. However, I thought you can also create T2 BPCs from T2 BPOs? Wounldn't someone with a T2 BPO create a number of copies and then use these for production? In addition, the ME and PE of the copies of these T2 BPOs would be the same as the original BPO as far as I know.

Does that happen with invention? From the suggestion at the beginning of this thread it would sound like this is not the case for T2 BPCs made from invention.

Finally, it would seem to me that it might be time to phase out the T2 BPO's. Perhaps this could be done by changing them into extended run BPCs. For example, if the cost to invent a T2 BPC was 500k ISK and an equivalent T2 BPO had a market value of 1 billion ISK - then the T2 BPO could be converted into a 2000 run BPC which would place T2 BPO and invention on a more even footing and when the T2 BPO was used up the owner would have recovered their investment (and the perceived problem would be out of the game).

Nub Sauce
Posted - 2009.08.21 21:25:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 21/08/2009 16:04:37
Originally by: Castaspella
If this is true, invention as it exists today appears to be for suckers.


It isn't true. You can make more profit with BPC's and be more flexible with changing markets. The reason for this, while T2 BPO's do indeed have a larger profit per item, invention allows you to handle bigger volumes. BPO allows you to sell 10 items at 500k isk profit, making you 5 million. Invention allows you to sell 100 items at 100k isk profit, making you 10 million. As for flexibility, an inventor in the vagabond market before the speednerf easily switched to other ships and modules. A Vagabond BPO owner just saw his time to recoup the purchasing cost double from 3 to 6 years. A lottery winning Vagabond BPO owner saw his asset value drop by several billion.

T2 BPO's are an investment/savings account you make a couple procent of interest per year on. If you have several billion lying around and want to do something with minimal amount of effort, you buy a T2 BPO.

If you want to make billions more, you forget about T2 BPO's and go into invention.


I think that running BPCs off of your BPO would be much more profitable than inventing much worse BPCs.

Washell Olivaw
Posted - 2009.08.21 21:40:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Traska Gannel
However, I thought you can also create T2 BPCs from T2 BPOs? Wounldn't someone with a T2 BPO create a number of copies and then use these for production? In addition, the ME and PE of the copies of these T2 BPOs would be the same as the original BPO as far as I know.

Does that happen with invention? From the suggestion at the beginning of this thread it would sound like this is not the case for T2 BPCs made from invention.


No, copy time is significantly longer than just building it in the first place. ME/PE is indeed copied, but you're pretty much giving away your profit margin making copies.

Originally by: Traska Gannel
Finally, it would seem to me that it might be time to phase out the T2 BPO's. Perhaps this could be done by changing them into extended run BPCs. For example, if the cost to invent a T2 BPC was 500k ISK and an equivalent T2 BPO had a market value of 1 billion ISK - then the T2 BPO could be converted into a 2000 run BPC which would place T2 BPO and invention on a more even footing and when the T2 BPO was used up the owner would have recovered their investment (and the perceived problem would be out of the game).


No. T2 BPO's provide a baseline of supply. In the cases where they exceed demand, they provide cheap T2 modules/ships. Most notable example, T2 drones. Where they fall short of demand, invention fills the gap. Besides, perceived problems should not be fixed. People should be educated.

TwoDogs
Posted - 2009.08.22 03:18:00 - [12]
 

A old alliance lost 50 hulk and couple weeks ago. how does this matter , well to my knowledge they own a Hulk BPO.

now you can look at this so many way it isnt funny

cost and time need to replace the losses
the export value just to name a afew

How can inventing compete with this ?


Washell Olivaw
Posted - 2009.08.22 11:40:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: TwoDogs
A old alliance lost 50 hulk and couple weeks ago. how does this matter , well to my knowledge they own a Hulk BPO.

now you can look at this so many way it isnt funny

cost and time need to replace the losses
the export value just to name a afew

How can inventing compete with this ?




Inventing allows more hulks in production at the same time. 50 hulks will be back in the field sooner. What you paid extra in inventing cost, will earn itself back in the days/weeks of extra mining you can do.

XXXAKTIVE
Posted - 2009.08.22 11:50:00 - [14]
 

I personally agree with this, but t2 BPO holders, that payed billions and billions of isk in BPOs will not be happy)))))))))

Still, they are the minority (actually they are the main isk farmers in EVE and the main rm traders in EVE), so I vote +100 for that

Komi Toran
Posted - 2009.08.22 12:35:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Washell Olivaw
The reason for this, while T2 BPO's do indeed have a larger profit per item, invention allows you to handle bigger volumes. BPO allows you to sell 10 items at 500k isk profit, making you 5 million. Invention allows you to sell 100 items at 100k isk profit, making you 10 million. As for flexibility, an inventor in the vagabond market before the speednerf easily switched to other ships and modules. A Vagabond BPO owner just saw his time to recoup the purchasing cost double from 3 to 6 years. A lottery winning Vagabond BPO owner saw his asset value drop by several billion.

Although I am a T2 inventor that does not want to see the system changed, I have to say: no. Invention does not allow you to make 10X more T2 ships (your choice for choosing the vagabond), for the simple reason that most of the build time is found in building the T2 components, not the ship. So, 3, 4, 5X as fast, sure. 10X? Unless you're willing to reduce that 100k isk margin to 10k by buying those components off the market, no way no how, as half of your build slots will be dedicated to making those components.

Now, with modules, maybe 10X works, but definitely not with ships.

Ssnakezor
Caldari
Posted - 2009.08.22 13:20:00 - [16]
 

remove t2 bpo, that's what I'd agree for based on what has been discussed Twisted Evil

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.22 13:28:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Traska Gannel
I have a couple of questions/comments:

Another poster mentioned that BPCs allow for greater production rates. However, I thought you can also create T2 BPCs from T2 BPOs? Wounldn't someone with a T2 BPO create a number of copies and then use these for production? In addition, the ME and PE of the copies of these T2 BPOs would be the same as the original BPO as far as I know.

Does that happen with invention? From the suggestion at the beginning of this thread it would sound like this is not the case for T2 BPCs made from invention.

Finally, it would seem to me that it might be time to phase out the T2 BPO's. Perhaps this could be done by changing them into extended run BPCs. For example, if the cost to invent a T2 BPC was 500k ISK and an equivalent T2 BPO had a market value of 1 billion ISK - then the T2 BPO could be converted into a 2000 run BPC which would place T2 BPO and invention on a more even footing and when the T2 BPO was used up the owner would have recovered their investment (and the perceived problem would be out of the game).


1) T2 BPO copy time is x2 production time. You get 1 run BPC in the time you could build 2 items. So coping the BPO would slower your production (yes, it is different from T1).

2) currently T2 BPO sell for the profit of 3-10 years of production at the current profit.
2.000 run BPC could be about right for a ship BPO (depending on size), not for a module.
And note that that conversion would simply not remove the investment the owner made, but will negate all the potential profits as, if he paid the equivalent of 10 year of gains for the BPO getting a BPC that would last him 10 years would mean that he would get back only what he paid and after 10 years.

Talk about a bad investment.


Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.22 13:47:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 22/08/2009 13:51:45
Originally by: Kalia Masaer
Sadly if CCP wants to make T2 BPO holders very rich that is the case. Using a munin as an example the BPO researched to ME 90 should use 12.8% less material than the best BPC at -1, then providing there is at best only a 59.06% chance of inventing a single run BPC and the cost of that should be around 5 mil for each attempt so one average that would cost 7.9 million and, I did not include the price of a rupture in that it is not worth it, just to get the BPC costs about 6% of the price of a muninns retail price of 130 mil

Now just for simplicities sake we assume muninns don't have a mark up on them that means the BPO holder is about 24.5 mil ahead of the inventor. 18.8% extra profit margin for the BPO holder. Liscence to print cash no. At the very least the the advantage of ML should be removed and even then the BPO holder still gets a 6% advantage over Inventors.

They deserve an advantage but not a liscence to print ISK.



"Nice numbers" with some "little" problem.

1) ME 90 for a Munin require 11.970 hours ( 71 weeks). With a POS lab bonus 8.978 hours (53 weeks and a half) .

Even at a rate of 10K/hour for the lab that is 120.000.000 isk, plus another 14.000.000 for materials.

And one year of missed production.

I doubt a ME 90 munin BPO exist anywhere.

2) some of the materials have no extra wastage:
- the Rupture, you use 1 for the BPO and for the BPC, and the RAM (95% of 12 units in both situations) so that is 1 million less in the difference.

To pay the live cost of the research you had to sell 5 Munin, but to pay for the lost year of production you would have to build for something like 5 years.

Most T2 BPO have some level of ME and a bit more levels of PE but nothing near the numebr you suggested.


BTW: yes, I am in favor of giving a increase in ME/PE based on the T1 BP research.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.22 13:54:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 22/08/2009 13:56:25
Originally by: TwoDogs
A old alliance lost 50 hulk and couple weeks ago. how does this matter , well to my knowledge they own a Hulk BPO.

now you can look at this so many way it isnt funny

cost and time need to replace the losses
the export value just to name a afew

How can inventing compete with this ?



Very well seeing that 91% of the hulks are build from BPC.

Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Posted - 2009.08.22 15:42:00 - [20]
 

I think its generally a good solution, but it will put some people with way to high ME on there BPO's a to big advantage.

I would rather that the "quality" of the blueprint attributed to more to the successrate of a bpc and a little less to the ME/PE outcome as it would be to static.

Some important chances could be made to invention though, make invention interfaces take damage if not there is really no point in having them at all atleast not the way the game is put together today. The interfaces are to cheep and that makes that part of exploration totally redundance.

ExclamationAnother important change is to allow people to research BPC's, i think this would change the game a lot towards the inventers. You properly all know the anoying feeling of highends going up so much that all the BPCs you have in stock are worthless compared to there invention cost.
So to counter this i suggest that CCP allow inventers the option of researching a BPC. It would take time to research a BPC and cost datacores but for something like T2 ships it would be such an important change. The T2 ships pritty much dominate the marked when it comes to regulating the price of complex reactions so allowing inventers to create BPCs that do not have a negative ME or PE would really help change the current market flux of complex reactions.

Washell Olivaw
Posted - 2009.08.22 17:29:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 22/08/2009 17:29:42
Next time I'll add the disclaimer: Numbers are to illustrate the point so I don't have to do 30 minutes of math on one or two T2 products. Happy now?

I thought said disclaimer was implied in the impossible neat numbers, forgot I was on the EVE forums.

Komi Toran
Posted - 2009.08.22 18:03:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 22/08/2009 17:29:42
Next time I'll add the disclaimer: Numbers are to illustrate the point so I don't have to do 30 minutes of math on one or two T2 products. Happy now?

I thought said disclaimer was implied in the impossible neat numbers, forgot I was on the EVE forums.

Washell, you aren't the only one who makes the 10X statement. It's a common myth that is repeated by inventors to convince themselves that they are doing better than a BPO owner. You'll see it referenced constantly on the forums.

steave435
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.08.22 19:26:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Originally by: TwoDogs
A old alliance lost 50 hulk and couple weeks ago. how does this matter , well to my knowledge they own a Hulk BPO.

now you can look at this so many way it isnt funny

cost and time need to replace the losses
the export value just to name a afew

How can inventing compete with this ?




Inventing allows more hulks in production at the same time. 50 hulks will be back in the field sooner. What you paid extra in inventing cost, will earn itself back in the days/weeks of extra mining you can do.

They're not mutually exclusive...the BPO owner can invent to make the same amount of ships that a normal inventor can, but with the addition of an extra x amount of items (whatever the BPO can produce) with the much better me.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.22 20:09:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Komi Toran
Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 22/08/2009 17:29:42
Next time I'll add the disclaimer: Numbers are to illustrate the point so I don't have to do 30 minutes of math on one or two T2 products. Happy now?

I thought said disclaimer was implied in the impossible neat numbers, forgot I was on the EVE forums.

Washell, you aren't the only one who makes the 10X statement. It's a common myth that is repeated by inventors to convince themselves that they are doing better than a BPO owner. You'll see it referenced constantly on the forums.


The advantage of a inventor is not a larger production (that is the advantage of the inventors as a class as they can corner a lucrative market, see the 91% of the hulk production coming from BPC).

The advantage of the inventor is the capability to completely change line of production in a few days.

If hulk prices tank he can start copying Vexor to build Ishtar and in a few days he will be selling in a new, more lucrative market.

His invented and not yet build hulk BPC could be put away for the time when the hulk become again a good seller. He will lose nothing and only lock away a few millions he did spend inventing the BPC.

A T2 BPO owner if the price tanks has only 2 options:
- continue to build a the items at reduced returns until the market recover (and him selling a low price will make that requiring more time);
- shelve the BPO (with complete loss of production) and produce some invented item with better returns than his BPO. And shelving the BPO mean that you have several billions doing nothing.


Komi Toran
Posted - 2009.08.22 21:03:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
stuff

And that post begins with a quote from me for what reason, exactly? I fail to see how anything I talked about there had anything to do with what you posted. Am I quoted because you desperately want my opinion on your highly tangential subject of choice?

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.22 22:20:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

A T2 BPO owner if the price tanks has only 2 options:
- continue to build a the items at reduced returns until the market recover (and him selling a low price will make that requiring more time);
- shelve the BPO (with complete loss of production) and produce some invented item with better returns than his BPO. And shelving the BPO mean that you have several billions doing nothing.




And the problem is what exactly - that the BPO owner bought into a bad investment? I hardly think that is a good arguement for not boosting invention, just an attempt at protectionism.

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.22 22:26:00 - [27]
 

There are a variety of other possible ways to boost invention:

Change base ME/PE to 0/0.

Change base invention BPC runs. for example:

Ships - BS:2 BC:2 CR:5 DD:5 FR:5
Modules - 15
Ammo - 15
Rigs - 5

Change decryptors so they have a bigger effect on ME/PE and no effect on runs (if you also change runs as above) for example:

Probability Multiplier/ME modifier/PE modifier

0.8 / +20 / +15
1.2 / +10 / +10
1.6 / +5 / +5
2.0 / +0 / +0

Increase invention research time to balance if needed.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2009.08.22 22:51:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Castaspella
it is often repeated that anyone can own T2 BPOs, and while this is technically true it is frankly silly as in most cases it would take many years of 24/7 production to recoup the cost of the BPO


So what were you saying about profit again?

Vanessa Vasquez
Quantar Swords
Posted - 2009.08.23 10:33:00 - [29]
 

I'd vote for a complete removal of all T2 bpo's or make T2 availiable for everyone.

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.23 11:17:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Originally by: Castaspella
it is often repeated that anyone can own T2 BPOs, and while this is technically true it is frankly silly as in most cases it would take many years of 24/7 production to recoup the cost of the BPO


So what were you saying about profit again?

Thanks for asking Joe!

What I am talking about, in case it wasn't clear the first time, is that it is barely profitable (often not at all) to invent and manufacture T2 items due to T2 BPOs allowing players to not only sidestep invention all together, but to also build their items at levels approaching 0% waste, while the vast majority of players must not only invent the BPC, but then proceed to manufacture the item against a second (and typically more significant) disadvantage. It is my opinion (and one I gather many other players share based on the early feedback this thread has received) that if a player is willing to dedicate significant training (Science and Industry skills in the case of T2 production) towards a goal, that this player should ultimately (given enough infrastructure development, in game aptitude, and focused skills training) be at least somewhat competitive. This is certainly true for other aspects of the game (PVP, PVE, holding space, trading, etc.) and it seems unreasonable to expect a player to have hundreds of billions in isk to assemble an unspectacular collection of T2 BPOs just to begin to be competitive in T2 production. As a theoretical exercise, 150 billion (converted to PLEX at 350 million a piece, and then reconverted into US dollars at $15 each) is equivalent to about $6,500. I haven't heard anyone reasonably suggest that this is an appropriate barrier to competitive T2 production within EVE, and note that this would only buy a mediocre collection of BPOs.

Note that my suggested course of action on this, unlike many others that are thrown around on the forums and even in this thread, is to retain today's T2 BPOs with absolutely no direct impact to their functionality as it exists today, while simply improving the invention process to make it feasible for the 99%+ of players who do not hold T2 BPOs to compete on a more (although not completely as I have described) playing field.

I presume the point you are cleverly trying to make is that today's T2 BPO owners have made a multi-year investment in these items. I have certainly not read 100% of the developer posts as they relate to T2 BPOs (however, I do consider myself better read on the topic than most), although I don't recall seeing any confirmation from CCP that these are indeed wise investments that will continue to produce incomes at the same level they do today. I could go on about the risk of investments, blah blah blah, but suffice it to say that while many of the T2 BPOs are veritable isk printing machines today, it is a gamble to buy them and nobody should count on things staying the same in a MMO such as EVE.

At the end of the day it isn't your decision any more than it is mine (unless you are posting as a developer's alt), though it seems reasonable that CCP will continue to make decisions that favor the many (i.e. non T2 BPO holders) over the very few.

Cheers,


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only