Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aiko Intaki
Lodizal Capsuleers Lodizal Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 13:39:00 -
[121]
Edited by: Aiko Intaki on 22/04/2009 13:53:00 With T1, if someone prices things stupidly you can generally buy it up, refine it and profit off their foolishness. With T2, some of the costs people overlook can't be reclaimed by recycling. At least as far as I can tell...
Doesn't this pretty much mean that T1 prices will settle toward reprocessed mineral value equivalents... while T2, if saturated both in number and by 'free resources' folks, will fall somewhere between their reprocessed mineral value and their actual market-based production cost?
EDIT: If true, wouldn't the following (mostly) correct this situation:
1. Allow reprocessing of T2 items with sufficiently high reverse engineering skill to yield datacores required for an invention run against the item. (not a 1-for-1 reclamation, but it would help by lowering the costs of datacores)
2. Allow researched T1 BPOs to pass on some of their ME/PE characteristics to T2 BPCs. (again, not a perfect 1-for-1 solution, but it allows a lower cost partial alternative to decryptors which should drive their market costs down as well).
3. Possibly (if needed) replace T2 BPOs in game with a pair of T1 BPOS and high-run T2 BPCs of equivalent research values to avoid extended exploitation of reverse-engineering for datacores.
|
Petyr Baelich
Taggart Transdimensional Virtue of Selfishness
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 16:16:00 -
[122]
Edited by: Petyr Baelich on 22/04/2009 16:16:54 Edit: Fixed a spelling error.
Originally by: Aiko Intaki Edited by: Aiko Intaki on 22/04/2009 13:53:00 EDIT: If true, wouldn't the following (mostly) correct this situation:
1. Allow reprocessing of T2 items with sufficiently high reverse engineering skill to yield datacores required for an invention run against the item. (not a 1-for-1 reclamation, but it would help by lowering the costs of datacores).
Not directly possible because of the chance-based nature of invention. Even if they gave it the same chances of yielding cores as the original invention had, not everyone's invention process is the same due to the use of decryptors. Also, people can copy t2 BPOs and create BPCs that never required datacores.
Quote: 2. Allow researched T1 BPOs to pass on some of their ME/PE characteristics to T2 BPCs. (again, not a perfect 1-for-1 solution, but it allows a lower cost partial alternative to decryptors which should drive their market costs down as well).
Nullifies the BPO advantage.
Quote: 3. Possibly (if needed) replace T2 BPOs in game with a pair of T1 BPOS and high-run T2 BPCs of equivalent research values to avoid extended exploitation of reverse-engineering for datacores.
I think this is a bad idea, even beyond the fact that many people have beggared their corporate and personal coffers to acquire T2 BPOs. At any rate the BPOs increase competition and market efficiency, and have no meaningful coercive influence.
These are all solutions to a problem that doesn't really exist. If you can't figure out ways to game people who are behaving irrationally and make a profit, then maybe you need to look at what you're doing.
|
Aiko Intaki
Lodizal Capsuleers Lodizal Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 19:45:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Petyr Baelich Edited by: Petyr Baelich on 22/04/2009 16:16:54 Edit: Fixed a spelling error.
Originally by: Aiko Intaki Edited by: Aiko Intaki on 22/04/2009 13:53:00 EDIT: If true, wouldn't the following (mostly) correct this situation:
1. Allow reprocessing of T2 items with sufficiently high reverse engineering skill to yield datacores required for an invention run against the item. (not a 1-for-1 reclamation, but it would help by lowering the costs of datacores).
Not directly possible because of the chance-based nature of invention. Even if they gave it the same chances of yielding cores as the original invention had, not everyone's invention process is the same due to the use of decryptors. Also, people can copy t2 BPOs and create BPCs that never required datacores.
Quote:
Quote: 3. Possibly (if needed) replace T2 BPOs in game with a pair of T1 BPOS and high-run T2 BPCs of equivalent research values to avoid extended exploitation of reverse-engineering for datacores.
I think this is a bad idea, even beyond the fact that many people have beggared their corporate and personal coffers to acquire T2 BPOs. At any rate the BPOs increase competition and market efficiency, and have no meaningful coercive influence.
I actually like the idea of removing T2 BPOs, but agree that it probably isn't required. I was specifically mentioning it as a preemptive counter to the problem you identified in the first suggestion I made.
Quote: These are all solutions to a problem that doesn't really exist. If you can't figure out ways to game people who are behaving irrationally and make a profit, then maybe you need to look at what you're doing.
There is a structural difference to the market controls on T1 pricing vs. T2 pricing. As long as T2 items can't be reprocessed to regain a significant portion (if not all) of the non-mineral costs of invention, the markets for various T2 items will intermittently be subjected to 'free resource' idiocy. It's the ability to reprocess and resell idiocy in the T1 market that keeps it above the cost of production, no? (if only very slightly in some cases) |
wowtard
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 20:14:00 -
[124]
So if I understand the last five pages correctly, anything I mine for myself is basically free?
|
Billy Sastard
Amarr Life. Universe. Everything.
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 20:49:00 -
[125]
Originally by: wowtard So if I understand the last five pages correctly, anything I mine for myself is basically free?
Semantically, yes, it is 'free'... However the minerals you mined have an intrinsic value associated to them based on current market conditions. Because of this value associated with the minerals, if you use the 'free' minerals to build 10 ships and then sell them at 15% below what it would have cost to sell the minerals outright, then you are doing it wrong and could have made a bigger profit from simply selling the minerals outright. <-------------------------------------------------> "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein |
wowtard
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 21:32:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Billy Sastard
"yes, it is 'free'..."
That's all I really needed to know. The rest really didn't make any sense. Free is free.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |