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

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.29 10:11:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

Some players got in excess of 10 T2 bpos from the lottery, and additionally those players with good T2 bpos made such a huge fortune (far in excess of anything else in game at that time) they could afford to buy up more T2 bpos (at a [for the time] good price) and are now sitting on wealth only 0.0 alliances can hope for (moons)


So they worked for those BPO getting the RP points and probably got several of them in the second lottery when invention was already running and lovering returns fast (about half of the t2 BPo were in the 2 lottery that started at the same time of the introduction of invention).

If someone forked the isk to buy the BPO when the price was "good", well, good for them. Wish I had the money at the time. Wink

Be sure, most of those guy that got the early BPO and got the huge isk have already sold most of them as they have better system to get the max from their isk.

They probably are keeping the best isk making BPO till they feel the return is worth it but they but will not risk being burned by CCP changes in the game. They will prefer to pass it to other investors willing to buy for the current high prices.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.29 10:26:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: SXYGeeK

stuff


NOT RELEVANT!!

T2 BPOs were originally given out free (effectively), their 'value' has no bearing on this arguement.



Pleas, this is the stupidest argument you can use.

They were not free.

- They required an investment of several millions SP in the relevant skills (and I can assure you that having 3 millions of SP locked in science skills in a character with 6 millions SP impact on everything you do);

- they required the standing with the relevant R&D corporations, so running missions for them instead of other more immediately rewarding corporations;

- they required RP. Points that you can now trade for datacores;

- tho get more RP you had to do missions and till late 2006 those missions weren't "give my tritanium" or "move this packet with a shuttle", they were "get me 1.000 holoreels", "get me enriched uranium", "move those 8.000 m3 of containers to station x", or the never done as the scientists were sold at 900K for units "get me 20 science graduates".

You can say it was low maintenance work after getting the initial standing and skills, but you still ad to keep the account active paying the sub as the mail offering the BPO had a expiration date and losing a interesting BPO because your account was not subbed and you weren't there to read it would have been a hard blow.

They weren't never "free" unless you are one of the guys that think that the minerals you get mining are "free" or the isk you get doing a mission are "free".


Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.08.29 10:58:00 - [63]
 

Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 29/08/2009 11:02:44
Originally by: Venkul Mul

They weren't never "free" unless you are one of the guys that think that the minerals you get mining are "free" or the isk you get doing a mission are "free".




Also worth adding:
people who in the end didnt get t2 BPO could easily cash in RPs into datacores which at the time (start of invention) could easily net 10bil isk for all RPs if not more. In some cases people who actually didnt get BPO ended up in better position than the ones who took BPOs (for example t2 ammo ones).

Quote:

So they worked for those BPO getting the RP points and probably got several of them in the second lottery when invention was already running and lovering returns fast (about half of the t2 BPo were in the 2 lottery that started at the same time of the introduction of invention).


Over half. First BPO lottery was only ships + mods. Second lottery (the fast one) was same ships + mods + t2 ammo.

Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2009.08.29 13:04:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: SXYGeeK
this is evidenced by the fact that there are plenty of T2 modules for which there exist no BPO's (items added after the conversion from lottery to invention) and invention on these modules does not yield more profitability than those modules that do have BPOs.
Exactly this.
The only difference between invention and T2 BPOs is that T2 BPO owners can still make decent profit at the prices which are driven down by inventors undercutting each other..


Rather proves the point that BPO owners have an unfair advantage, thanks
They have an advantage, yes.
Unfair?
What do you define as fair?
Many BPO-holders worked hard for their BPOs. So what?
Hard work shouldn't be rewarded?
Try to make of it what you want, but the only thing it proves is that this thread was made out of pure envy, nothing else.

A player with 40m SP has an advantage over a 2m SP player.
A player with lots of friends has an advantage over someone who doesn't.
Next we see a thread about jobless players having an unfair advantage. Or rich players..

The prices are dictated by inventors, not BPO-holders. Nothing would change for the better for inventors.
So why get rid of T2 BPOs? To get rid of the envy?
Sorry, but that doesn't cut it.

Try to improve the game instead of pursuing your own agenda.

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.29 13:24:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: SXYGeeK

stuff


NOT RELEVANT!!

T2 BPOs were originally given out free (effectively), their 'value' has no bearing on this arguement.



Pleas, this is the stupidest argument you can use.

They were not free.

- They required an investment of several millions SP in the relevant skills (and I can assure you that having 3 millions of SP locked in science skills in a character with 6 millions SP impact on everything you do);

- they required the standing with the relevant R&D corporations, so running missions for them instead of other more immediately rewarding corporations;

- they required RP. Points that you can now trade for datacores;

- tho get more RP you had to do missions and till late 2006 those missions weren't "give my tritanium" or "move this packet with a shuttle", they were "get me 1.000 holoreels", "get me enriched uranium", "move those 8.000 m3 of containers to station x", or the never done as the scientists were sold at 900K for units "get me 20 science graduates".

You can say it was low maintenance work after getting the initial standing and skills, but you still ad to keep the account active paying the sub as the mail offering the BPO had a expiration date and losing a interesting BPO because your account was not subbed and you weren't there to read it would have been a hard blow.

They weren't never "free" unless you are one of the guys that think that the minerals you get mining are "free" or the isk you get doing a mission are "free".




Tosh, they WERE effectively free, I have 4 research characters, all with good standings for R&D agents and skills, the effort was minimal, the reward (lottery) was totally out of proportion (for the better BPOS)

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.29 13:33:00 - [66]
 

Edited by: Donatien de''Sade on 29/08/2009 13:53:37
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: SXYGeeK
this is evidenced by the fact that there are plenty of T2 modules for which there exist no BPO's (items added after the conversion from lottery to invention) and invention on these modules does not yield more profitability than those modules that do have BPOs.
Exactly this.
The only difference between invention and T2 BPOs is that T2 BPO owners can still make decent profit at the prices which are driven down by inventors undercutting each other..


Rather proves the point that BPO owners have an unfair advantage, thanks
They have an advantage, yes.
Unfair?
What do you define as fair?
Many BPO-holders worked hard for their BPOs. So what?
Hard work shouldn't be rewarded?
Try to make of it what you want, but the only thing it proves is that this thread was made out of pure envy, nothing else.

A player with 40m SP has an advantage over a 2m SP player.
A player with lots of friends has an advantage over someone who doesn't.
Next we see a thread about jobless players having an unfair advantage. Or rich players..

The prices are dictated by inventors, not BPO-holders. Nothing would change for the better for inventors.
So why get rid of T2 BPOs? To get rid of the envy?
Sorry, but that doesn't cut it.

Try to improve the game instead of pursuing your own agenda.



Very many people did very little work to get their T2 BPOs.

Fair - get rid of the inbuilt advantage (ME/PE) built into the invention vs BPO equation, if idiots want to regard their minerals and datacores as valueless, that is their issue, deal with it.

With changes to invention - mainly ME/PE then there is no reason to get rid of T2 BPOs.

Comparitive player sp? wtf you on about, primitive derail attempt I presume..

Try to improve the game without pursuing your own agenda

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.08.29 14:08:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

Try to improve the game without pursuing your own agenda


Hypocrisy much? I paid for t2 BPOs yet you want to remove them from game because YOU dont have them.

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.29 14:16:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

Try to improve the game without pursuing your own agenda


Hypocrisy much? I paid for t2 BPOs yet you want to remove them from game because YOU dont have them.


Where did I say I wanted to remove them?

When did you buy them, how much for, did you have any previously, which ones? do I care?, nope, you have no valid arguement to bring to the table..

Pot kettle black right back at you... Rolling Eyes

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.08.29 15:23:00 - [69]
 

Check trade forums if ya want to see BPO trades. Fact is - you dont have BPOs yet you are the first person to know "how to fix any issue with t2 BPOs".

And here it comes: i did both (and actually still do): invention and BPO production. And they are pretty comparable. BPOs are slow in production but more cost-effective, invention is faster but less cost-effective. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Ofc there is for you, the robin hood of eve. Like i said: if you want to change anything sure, go ahead. But first pay for BPOs and use em to gain "huge advantage".

You still managed to ignore my post from page [2] of this thread. So you do ignore the fact that the *profit* of BPO has to take into an account the costs of acquiring said BPO. But in your little world everything is for free (as you stated above and as Venkul corrected you on this).

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.29 15:44:00 - [70]
 

Edited by: Donatien de''Sade on 29/08/2009 15:51:31
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
stuff


No, the profit from the BPO does NOT need to take into account the cost of aquiring said BPO, that is my point, the relative value given the BPO is arbitary, not relevant to the arguement.

CCP wanted to move away from T2 BPOs, they brought on invention, in module invention T2 BPOs have been marginalised, it was generally thought that the same was true for ships, this has been proven not to be true, because of the big (and it is) advantage of reduced costs from production.

Examples:

Jaguar: BPO(0/0) vs BPC(-4/-4)

Deflection Shield Emitter x44 x60
Electrolytic Capacitor Unit x33 x45
Fernite Carbide Armour Plate x44 x60
Ladar Sensor Cluster x22 x30
Nanomechanical Microporcessor x22 x30
Nuclear Reactor Unit x44 x60
Plasma Thruster x33 x45

10 MN MWD:(makes do difference from 0/0 to -4/-4)

Antimatter Reactor Unit x5
Ion Thruster x10
Plasma Thruster x32

I would like to see T2 ship production working (in terms of cost) in a similar way to T2 module production.

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.08.29 16:07:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

No, the profit from the BPO does NOT need to take into account the cost of aquiring said BPO, that is my point, the relative value given the BPO is arbitary, not relevant to the arguement.



Of course it is relevant. If it is not then why wont you buy BPOs i offered on previous page? They generate income on level higher than invention can.

Quote:

CCP wanted to move away from T2 BPOs, they brought on invention, in module invention T2 BPOs have been marginalised, it was generally thought that the same was true for ships, this has been proven not to be true, because of the big (and it is) advantage of reduced costs from production.

Examples:

Jaguar: BPO(0/0) vs BPC(-4/-4)

Deflection Shield Emitter x44 x60
Electrolytic Capacitor Unit x33 x45
Fernite Carbide Armour Plate x44 x60
Ladar Sensor Cluster x22 x30
Nanomechanical Microporcessor x22 x30
Nuclear Reactor Unit x44 x60
Plasma Thruster x33 x45

10 MN MWD:(makes do difference from 0/0 to -4/-4)

Antimatter Reactor Unit x5
Ion Thruster x10
Plasma Thruster x32

I would like to see T2 ship production working (in terms of cost) in a similar way to T2 module production.


And it does. % wise its same change. You cant measure it in absolute numbers, only in relative. What would you expect? That modules cost 0,2mil isk over BPO production so ships should too?

Na'amah
The Children of Lilith
Posted - 2009.08.30 21:02:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

Maybe for someone new to T2 BPOs, but if you are buying now, then you are probably too rich for it to matter tbh - a 5 year (or more) return is utterly silly imo.

Your points are moot, and not relevant to the issues raised here, the vast majority of ship T2 BPOs have been in their owners hands for quite some time - the large scale investments you speak are a distraction to the actual problem, namely that existing ship T2 bpo owners command 56% of the market, way in excess of anything we had been led to believe by CCP (or indeed the bpo owners themselves Wink )

Some players got in excess of 10 T2 bpos from the lottery, and additionally those players with good T2 bpos made such a huge fortune (far in excess of anything else in game at that time) they could afford to buy up more T2 bpos (at a [for the time] good price) and are now sitting on wealth only 0.0 alliances can hope for (moons)


No, Donatien, it is very relevant for old owners too.

Read Na'amah post. She did the right thing for maximum return from a investment, she sold the hulk BPO and invested the isk in a more profitable activity.

Probably she got at least 60 billions, probably more. I don't know how she invested them, but if she brought a few alts with R&D and inventing skills and with the standing for some R&D corporation she would have exchanged her single BPO output for several inventors output (11 invention slots and 11 production slots each!).

More in game work and more profit.




75b.

And I've blown at least 25b of that on stuff that's definitely not making me any profit :P

Ephraim Glass
Posted - 2009.09.11 23:45:00 - [73]
 

It seems that the debate thus far has covered the economic and investment aspects of Invention versus T2 BPO's. I think I'm a more casual hobbyist and I'd like to weigh in with a third viewpoint.

Manufacturing in EVE is what I do for fun. It's an interesting puzzle to solve. I'd like, however, for there to be a reward for solving it. Unfortunately, the margins on T2 production via invention are sometimes so low that it hardly seems worthwhile at the volumes I'm able to generate.

I'd like to propose for discussion a couple of ideas that would help to make T2 production more rewarding both for enthusiasts like me and power-sellers. A rising tide lifts all ships.

1) Make decryptors more accesible for manufacturers of fittings, frigates, cruisers, etc. As expensive and rare as decryptors are now, they simply don't have any purpose for many Invention jobs. Like rigs, I think that something should be done to promote more regular, widespread use of decryptors. One method that I thought of to achieve this is to give decryptors charges. Inventing a fitting would use up 1 or 2 charges, while inventing a Marauder could use up 40. It could also be made so that a decryptor is only expended (and/or the charges are only spent) if the Invention job succeeds.

2) Provide more ways for an Inventor to affect the outcome of the Invention job. For example, spending more datacores or increasing the Invention time to increase the probability of success or to improve the ME or PE of the resulting BPC. There are lots of possibilities for this one, even though I've only brainstormed a few so far.

Komi Toran
Posted - 2009.09.12 03:03:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

So, to sum it up:

Washell Olivaw: inventor advantage is the number of item produced in a span of time and in flexibility

Komi Toran: Advantage in number produced is not as great as you make it

Venkul Mul: But did you know that invention is more flexible?


Fixed for you.

Obviously, if I had a problem with the flexibility argument, I would have addressed it when Washell first made it. So, your post had what purpose?

People who throw red herrings around annoy me. Often times, they're just looking to get someone defending an indefensible position. So, instead of engaging on that ground, I prefer to just call them idiots. Doesn't win debate points, but it's very satisfying.

Komi Toran
Posted - 2009.09.12 03:31:00 - [75]
 

Well, figured since I posted on something that wasn't on topic, I should post something that is on topic.

As for the "unfair advantage," yes, I will concede that many T2 BPO holders were lucky and thus have an "unfair" advantage. Others may want to debate whether winning a T2 BPO in a lottery constitutes work or not, but I'll just chalk that point as a given. The problem is, others, who did not win the BPO lottery, have worked for the isk to buy those T2 BPOs from lottery winners who want to cash out. So, as it stands now, if you want to eliminate the "unfair" advantage of the original BPO winners, you would have to unfairly penalize new T2 BPO owners. That's not a good solution.

As for adjusting the output of invention, it ultimately won't solve anything. You aren't going to get better profit margins in the long run. It will lower the cost to manufacture, which means there is more room to undercut. Plus, even if all current T2 producers keep their prices exactly the same in order to create better margins, the fact that production of that T2 item is so profitable will cause new manufacturers to step up, flooding the market and thus driving prices down. So, it's not a solution to anything, except if you want to deflate the cost of T2 items.

Finally, if you want to eliminate chance from invention, there's a pretty easy way to do it. On average, each invention job WILL require X hours and Y datacores. So, you just set the chance to 100%, set invention time to X, and datacores to Y, and you will have the exact same average output rate as you did before the change. Then, all that you would really need to do is add waste to the invention process, so that your science skills could be used to offset it, just as they currently increase your invention chances.

Actually, the above might increase profit margins a bit, as it makes calculating the expense of an invention job far easier, so you might have fewer people getting the math wrong and setting their prices too low.

Ephraim Glass
Posted - 2009.09.12 03:45:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Komi Toran

As for adjusting the output of invention, it ultimately won't solve anything. You aren't going to get better profit margins in the long run. It will lower the cost to manufacture, which means there is more room to undercut. Plus, even if all current T2 producers keep their prices exactly the same in order to create better margins, the fact that production of that T2 item is so profitable will cause new manufacturers to step up, flooding the market and thus driving prices down. So, it's not a solution to anything, except if you want to deflate the cost of T2 items.


Although the end result is the same, my motivation is subtly different than what you describe. I don't want to deflate the cost of T2 items. That would be a natural consequence of what I want: deflating the cost of manufacturing T2 items. I would, of course, also like to see decryptors accessible for a greater fraction of invention jobs. That's something I want irrespective of its impact on the market. The recent intervention on behalf of rigs has inspired that. I want more control of the output of my invention jobs. It doesn't even have to make T2 production via invention cheaper. I'd just like to be able to choose ME over rate of success or number of runs over ME, etc.

Eint Truzenzuzex
Posted - 2009.09.12 08:46:00 - [77]
 

Sorry guy's i see the BPO owner as a holder of a patent.

The have made the effort to get the BPO's and so it is there right to protect there investment for the next 25Years.

You should look on the the invention coast as Licensing Fee producing advance Technologie.

So don't wine, here in EvE there is no "Zoll"-guy who tell you you have to remove the handles form you pan's because there you broke a patent.

btw, WTS 50mm Reinforced Steel T2 not cheap

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.12 11:21:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Ephraim Glass

1) Make decryptors more accesible for manufacturers of fittings, frigates, cruisers, etc. As expensive and rare as decryptors are now, they simply don't have any purpose for many Invention jobs. Like rigs, I think that something should be done to promote more regular, widespread use of decryptors. One method that I thought of to achieve this is to give decryptors charges. Inventing a fitting would use up 1 or 2 charges, while inventing a Marauder could use up 40. It could also be made so that a decryptor is only expended (and/or the charges are only spent) if the Invention job succeeds.


Won't work unless you differentiate the decryptors in different classes (i.e. module & drone, ammunition, frigate, cruiser, battleship).

The price of the decryptors is based (roughly) on the best return you can get doing a job with them.

If inventing a marauder (after all costs with the exclusion of the decryptors) give you a profit of 10 millions without decryptors, 20 with decryptor A, 50 with decryptor B, the price of decryptor A will be in the range of 3-5 millions, decryptor B 10-20 millions.

I.e. a price range were the decryptor still give a competitive edge against people not using it but where the seller of the decryptor get a good price for it.


If the same decryptor can be used for Command ship invention but the profit before decryptors are 2 millions, 5 with decryptor A and 10 with decryptor B those decryptors lose any interest for BC invention.
The maraunder inventors will place buy orders just above teh BC return point and will get all the decryptors.

The only way to avoid that is to inflate decryptor production to a level where they will be used in any job (but then who will spend time exploring for them) or changing the decryptors so that we have (for example) a set of module decryptors with different characteristics from ship decryptors (for example no ME modifier as it has little effect on modules but a better PE modifier and a way larger number of extra runs, from +10 to +40.

Ship decryptors instead could maintain the low number of extra runs for BS invention, a slightly increase for cruiser and a larger increase for frigates. Or instead getting better ME.

Quote:

2) Provide more ways for an Inventor to affect the outcome of the Invention job. For example, spending more datacores or increasing the Invention time to increase the probability of success or to improve the ME or PE of the resulting BPC. There are lots of possibilities for this one, even though I've only brainstormed a few so far.


My preferred way is what was originally proposed by the Devs. The level of ME/PE of the BPC affecting the output invented BPC ME and PE levels.

Probably a 1:10 or 1:20 rapport (seeing the skill, time and material requirements of T2 research) would be about right.

Other options like those you suggest can be valid too.

Fullmetal Jackass
Posted - 2009.09.12 22:01:00 - [79]
 

I'm tired of hearing the T2 BPO holders crying "I paid billions for my BPO. It'll take 20 years to pay it off." You made a stupid purchace then. Deal with it.

I'm all for T1 print ME/PE transfering over to the T2 BPC. Invention needs to be more competitive. Sure you can mass produce modules and ammo faster, but at lower profit margins. Plus if everyone mass produced as suggested, the bottom would fall out of the market. Severely diminishing returns. Time vs profit goes in the toilet real fast. And then the BPO holder will undercut you and laugh while he still makes money.

Personally I'm all for changing T2 BPOs into 10,000 run copies. That or giving invention a very low chance of producing a working T2 BPO. I could live with T1 print research transfering to T2 invented copies though.

I was around when they were handing out T2 BPOs. I wasn't lucky enough to get one. I wasn't stupid enough to pay the obscene price for one either. T2 bpo holders made stupid silly cash for what, two years before invention was added? There's no longer a monopoly on T2 items, but T2 BPO holders still enjoy an unfair advantage over the average joe inventor. Price paid for the BPO is irrelevent. Second hand mark up on a rare item. No one forced anyone to pay whatever they did. T2 BPOs are a problem. Why should the rest of us have to compete against forever?

Zabrina
Posted - 2009.09.13 07:03:00 - [80]
 

I had a T2 BPO for a ship. it sold for 90-140m isk over the 2 years I've had it. Cost of materials were 45M to 65M in purchased raw moonables. I could make 1 every 34 hours or 10 per 2 weeks.

I sold it for ISK and received the approximate value of 25 years of timecards.

When you think of it that way, radicaly changing what was already done is going to p off a few people.

However, I believe invention came out pre-nerfed and has been forgotten about. Loosen up a bit on the invention standards and costs for these types of ships.

Put in a chance, however so small to create an original, or a 100 run copy. Even put in a chance to make a modified or faction version. But don't give the T2 BPO holders of today that same chance, unless they go the invention route.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.13 08:30:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 13/09/2009 08:47:40
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass


I'm all for T1 print ME/PE transfering over to the T2 BPC. Invention needs to be more competitive.


Change without removing stuff, good


Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass

Personally I'm all for changing T2 BPOs into 10,000 run copies.


Removing stuff because you don't have it, very bad and simply envy fueled.

Originally by: Zabrina

However, I believe invention came out pre-nerfed and has been forgotten about. Loosen up a bit on the invention standards and costs for these types of ships.


Invention was pre nerfed when the datacores where 500 RP for one and not 50 like today.

Originally by: Zabrina

Put in a chance, however so small to create an original,



And so make invention for production obsolete as any "small chance" multipled for 10K inventors mean several BPO produced every day.

89% of all hulks are produced from invented BPC.
That mean hundred of attempts every day.
Even a 1/1000 chance of inventing a BPO mean one every 5-6 days.
70+ in a year and at that point probably you have tripled the total number of hulk BPO in game.

And if a chance of a BPO was there people will cry louder until it is much more than 1/1000.

As things stay today the T2 BPo will slowly disappear as people leave the game, get banned or they are lost in accidents or hangars lost to the enemy. At the same time the playerbase enlarge and the BPO lose importance on the market.

If you add a way to produce them you increase the market share of the BPO with a deterimental effect on invention.



Originally by: Zabrina

or a 100 run copy. Even put in a chance to make a modified or faction version. But don't give the T2 BPO holders of today that same chance, unless they go the invention route.


A bit better btu personally when I am inventing i prefer to know that I have a 75% chance of inventing 10 runs item X with stat A and B to a 50% chance of inventing 10 runs item X, a 20% of inventing 10 runs of item X+ with stat A+ and B- and a 5% chance do inventing 100 runs of the above.

Especially as some inventors getting the 100 run copy will price that batch of items as if they where always getting that, i.e. dividing the invention cost by 100..

Daemien Murdoc
Posted - 2009.09.13 12:12:00 - [82]
 

I dont own T2 BPOs but i dont support the idea of removing them or nerfing them in anyway. They are good as they are. Many people have paid billions of ISK to get one so it would upset many people hence its bad idea.

But i do support the idea of "fixing" the gap between inventors and T2 BPO owners.

(I didnt read the whole topic, but heres my suggestion)

First: Make the invented T2 BPCs researchable. So one could research -4/-4 into +20/+20 or whatever

Second: Once the BPC is out of runs, it would not disappear. Simply it would have 0 runs remaining and could not be used for production. The BPC could be then "reloaded" with new runs.


This way BPO owners still would have some advantage over invented ones, since they would never need "reloading research".
And inventors wouldnt have to struggle with negative ME/PE

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2009.09.13 12:14:00 - [83]
 

Having done extensive invention with obscene profits to show for it, I really have no idea what issue the original post is trying to address.

Yes, a BPO holder builds at less cost and thus earns higher profits per build. The inventors sell more.
We don't complain if a person was clever/foresighted enough to invest in a stock that suddenly climbs like mad, while we are stuck with regular bonds.

The benefit of inventing compared to using a BPO are many fold:
- You operate in bulk. Less profit per unit, but huge number of units being moved.
* BPO holder builds less and earns more. My calculations when I started had me even with a holder in total profits.
- You build from multiple prints at any given time, which translates into less overhead (investment is returned faster).
* BPO holder HAS to move whatever merchandise he has the print for or his money is tied up in assets which is bad (assets do not generate wealth).
- You can invent ANYTHING and is therefore not hit nearly as hard by market slumps on specific items.
* BPO holder is required to use invention or invest fortunes in other BPOs to be able to avoid the market fluctuations. If he doesn't he will live off reserves until market rebounds .. reserves that are tied up in assets in most cases.

There are downsides to inventing obviously, most of which have been mentioned in other posts. On the whole there is no reason to tweak or balance it though.
The only thing that might benefit from a look is alchemy.
Alliances and their affiliates in control of both BPO's and the flow of raw T2 materials is a cartel waiting to happen. As they break up and reform chances are that prints will coalesce in fewer and fewer hands increasing the chance of a price fixing scheme to evolve.

Since this is many years in the future I am however not overly concerned.

Fullmetal Jackass
Posted - 2009.09.13 17:46:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass

Personally I'm all for changing T2 BPOs into 10,000 run copies.


Removing stuff because you don't have it, very bad and simply envy fueled.




Limited BPO's were a bad idea. CCP has stated as much themselves. It's not envy. It's a broken mechanic that should have been fixed long ago. T2 BPO give a huge time saving advantage. People recognize this, which along with the rarety is why they sell for billions. The longer they are around the more the price will climb. But broken is broke, reguardless of what some idiot was willing to pay.

As I also stated though, I'd be fine with leaving them in as a status symbol if invention were more competetive, or there was a way to creat new originals.

Maobih Vanire
Posted - 2009.10.21 19:47:00 - [85]
 

Edited by: Maobih Vanire on 21/10/2009 19:57:10
as was mentioned in a prior post, addressing the cost of decryptors would be helpful to invention imo.

decryptors currently are going for around 10mil at times you can get them for 4mil or so. increasing the drop rate of these to get them down in the range of say an ME datacore i think would also be a good addition to the original idea.

currently the only invention that i would consider using a decryptor on (which can be used to improve me/pe or number runs and thus cost of invention) is a jump freighter or a t2 battleship. the reason being that adding 10mil into a frigate invention is ... uh... a bit silly. due to the current cost of decryptors, i would guess they are not used in a sizable number of inventions. this seems to defeat the purpose of them being in game at all.

also, i think making it rational to actually use a decryptor on the cheaper items would make invention a more interesting process because right now it's just a grind. there are no choices to make and this would make it so that people would be more likely to think about what they are doing and make different choices.

another thing that might decrease the cost of decryptors would be to make them an item available on the LP store (possible side effect of which i am not sure would be desirable, being that it would create a baseline for pricing of the decryptors) or something that drops in missions...

ASR Briggs
Posted - 2009.10.22 18:34:00 - [86]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: SXYGeeK

stuff


NOT RELEVANT!!

T2 BPOs were originally given out free (effectively), their 'value' has no bearing on this arguement.



Pleas, this is the stupidest argument you can use.

They were not free.

- They required an investment of several millions SP in the relevant skills (and I can assure you that having 3 millions of SP locked in science skills in a character with 6 millions SP impact on everything you do);

- they required the standing with the relevant R&D corporations, so running missions for them instead of other more immediately rewarding corporations;

- they required RP. Points that you can now trade for datacores;

- tho get more RP you had to do missions and till late 2006 those missions weren't "give my tritanium" or "move this packet with a shuttle", they were "get me 1.000 holoreels", "get me enriched uranium", "move those 8.000 m3 of containers to station x", or the never done as the scientists were sold at 900K for units "get me 20 science graduates".

You can say it was low maintenance work after getting the initial standing and skills, but you still ad to keep the account active paying the sub as the mail offering the BPO had a expiration date and losing a interesting BPO because your account was not subbed and you weren't there to read it would have been a hard blow.

They weren't never "free" unless you are one of the guys that think that the minerals you get mining are "free" or the isk you get doing a mission are "free".




This is probably the worst argument I've heard for T2 BPO holders. Ever. You realise that all those skills and whatnot are actually required for invention yes? That if people want ANY hope of making invention profitable, they need R&D agents for their own datacores, yes? Which requires the same standings, yes? You seem to be a relatively bright guy, so why you'd come out with this drivel has me stumped.

There is only one difference between BPO holders and inventors. We weren't around 2 or 3 years ago. Why are we being penalized for that?
The whole point of EVE is that it's a place of opportunity. Where you can choose your path and do your best to excel at it. With invention, you always have one hand tied behind your back cause you know that there are people out there that can produce the same item you are for MUCH less.

Your other arguements, about how many years it takes to recover the cost of a T2 BPO. Well if you were stupid enough to buy one for billions of ISK then yeah, a long time. But for the people that had one just drop in their lap.......how many years of ISK printing do they deserve?

T2 BPO's need to be removed. "oh but T2 BPO's make the baseline and invention just fills in the gaps". If T2 BPO's were removed, supply would drop significantly and prices would skyrocket. People see "oooo T2 production is actually profitable now!". Hordes of people move to T2 production. Supply increases. Price normalises. Everyone lives happily ever after.

darius mclever
Posted - 2009.10.22 18:41:00 - [87]
 

T2 production is profitable in many areas as is. just in some areas you got idiots dumping modules just over production costs onto the market. if those people, who think materials they get themself are free, would just stop dumping stuff on the market, everything would be fine.

Jason Sarek
Posted - 2009.10.22 19:13:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: ASR Briggs
There is only one difference between BPO holders and inventors. We weren't around 2 or 3 years ago. Why are we being penalized for that?
Many, if not most, of current T2 BPO holders have bought their BPO. So much for that difference.
If you also want a T2 BPO, buy one. Others have done it, so can you. But you prefer to call them stupid and instead of putting up the same effort, simply try to defraud them of their hard earned originals.
Originally by: ASR Briggs
The whole point of EVE is that it's a place of opportunity. Where you can choose your path and do your best to excel at it.
Exactly. Everybody has the chance to buy a T2 BPO, if he or she really wants to.
Originally by: ASR Briggs
Your other arguements, about how many years it takes to recover the cost of a T2 BPO. Well if you were stupid enough to buy one for billions of ISK then yeah, a long time.
Here the double standards start. Either call them lucky bastards with an unfair advantage or stuid people who don't know how to spend their ISK, but not both.
Or do you really want to punish the few lucky players who got a BPO and haven't sold it yet, while not giving a damn about those who bought their BPO for lots of ISK, since they were stupid and obviously don't deserve better?
Geez, talk about collateral damage..
Originally by: ASR Briggs
T2 BPO's need to be removed. "oh but T2 BPO's make the baseline and invention just fills in the gaps". If T2 BPO's were removed, supply would drop significantly and prices would skyrocket. People see "oooo T2 production is actually profitable now!". Hordes of people move to T2 production. Supply increases. Price normalises. Everyone lives happily ever after.
If this is your actual argument for removing them, I'm sorry to say that it doesn't fly.
There are a couple of T2 items in the game that don't have a BPO. And profit for those items isn't really much different from the items where BPOs exist.
It shows that inventors themselves are the biggest competitors for each other.
Making everything better by removing T2 BPOs is wishful thinking. There is no indication for it to work.

Boosting invention, on the other hand, is a different matter and should be looked into, if there really is a need to change something.
However, even that is not going to make it a lot more lucrative. Maybe more rewarding, maybe more fun, but in every aspect of the game there is only so much ISK in the pot to share amongst all participants.
Especially if it's something everybody can do, and if it's rather easy to do (yes, once figured out, invention is relatively easy).

The big money will always be reserved for those selected few who do exceptionally better than others, who put a lot more effort into something, who have ingenious ideas, or who are just plain lucky.
Traders, alliance leaders, 'Chribbas', mega-industrialists with lots and lots of accounts.. just to name some.

Zahorite
Posted - 2009.10.22 21:08:00 - [89]
 

Edited by: Zahorite on 22/10/2009 21:14:35
You know if we really want a change that is going to have far reaching effects I do have an idea. Why not just allow a like one in a hundred thousand chance of making a T2 BPO when you invent that item.

The main argument I see here is that inventors want a chance to lower their costs, while those that own T2 BPO's need to recoup the price they purchased those BPO's for.

The effects of adding the possibility of creating a T2 BPO wouldn't have large effects on the T2 market for at least a year since you would only see perhaps a couple dozen new T2 BPO's in the first year. This would allow the current T2 BPO holder's time to recoup their losses, while at the same time allowing inventor's to have a small chance of making a few billion isk every time they invent something.

Of course by the time that things really balance out I'd say CCP will have released T3 inventing and the T2 BPO problem will fade into the past.

Oh and this would also fix a problem I see that is going to come up. As Eve population continues to grow the number of T2 BPO's is not growing. Basically it is going to get harder and harder to get a T2 BPO as things go on and I'd like people to at least believe it is possible to get one, even if the chances are almost zero. Certainly anyone can get a BPO, with a few billion isk, which even as a two year player isn't likely.

Jason Sarek
Posted - 2009.10.22 22:09:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: Jason Sarek on 22/10/2009 22:15:52

Since I personally don't like the 'infinite' nature of any BPOs, even T1, in the first place, I definitely don't like the idea of having an ever growing number of T2 BPOs in the game, eventually making the T2 market as dumb and uninteresting as the T1 market and killing invention (which is one of the more interesting game mechanics).
No, I don't think it's a good idea.
Actually I think has the potential to rival the titans 'concept' (only a handful of titans ever in the game... yeah... right..) in magnitude of fail.

How about a basic change in invention instead?
Instead of a binary success/failure operation, where you can end up having 10 successes in a row a losing streak of 10 failed marauder inventions, the invention process could be modified so that it produces a BPC of varying quality with just a small chance of failure (10% or so, to keep it a bit unpredictable and interesting).

You would succeed most of the time, but the resulting ME/PE would be depending on your 'lucky throw'.
The better your skills, the better the maximum possible ME and PE and maybe also your minimum ME and PE. Makes those level5 invention skills a bit more useful, especially if chances for really good ME/PE only get unlocked with very good skills (i.e. all three relevant skills @5).
So instead of a failure you would get a BPC with bad ME/PE.

This would also make Decryptors a lot more useful, as they wouldn't be wasted in most cases. They would have to be changed a bit, though, to keep them from being too powerful (esp. +runs).
And overall invention duration and effort (actually doing something for those RPs?) might need to be increased.
Imho nothing bad. More predictability and less prone to bad luck for part-time inventors. More lucrative and interesting for players specializing and putting the effort into it.


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