Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 12:04:00 -
[1]
Edited by: La Dudette on 25/02/2010 12:04:12 It is time to close a chapter in Eve's history that started with this
CCP started a transition from BPO to invention, but never finished it. This has consequences: a small number of people are able to circumvent invention and make exorbitant profits that inventors cannot compete with.
You may argue that life is harsh, and that people pay huge sums for T2 BPOs for this privilege, however:
- The system is self-reinforcing, as the owners will naturally make the most money and continue to usurp further BPOs
- The system continues to be fundamentally unfair to new players: there are still people out there with a blank cheque that was won in the lottery, not earned. Every one such person keeps tens to hundreds of inventors out of the market.
- CCP is inconsistent: rare moons have been addressed through alchemy, but this hasn't. Worse, rare moons POSs can be attacked, BPOs are safe in stations.
Proposal:
- Make the market function properly: eliminate T2 BPOs.
- Compensate the owners: convert them into T2 BPCs equivalent to two or three years of continuous production (as many are priced that way), but at -1 ME.
There will be a residual negative shock to the value of the BPOs anyway. That's too bad. We all lose stuff in nerfs aimed at making the game more balanced. As for the price of T2 gear: I have no doubt that the market and competition will take care of it.
Reactions, please. If you have a vested interest, declare it at least: that way we at least we know what you stand for.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 12:54:00 -
[2]
No.
|
Cash McGee
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:15:00 -
[3]
No
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:16:00 -
[4]
* The system is self-reinforcing, as the owners will naturally make the most money and continue to usurp further BPOs
Feel free to buy a t2 bpo if you think they are so great.
* The system continues to be fundamentally unfair to new players: there are still people out there with a blank cheque that was won in the lottery, not earned. Every one such person keeps tens to hundreds of inventors out of the market.
How is it unfair? Invention is the more profitable choice between invention and t2 bpo use. Most ppl with t2 bpo's prolly didnt get them through the lotto- they bought them. Id call that earned.
As for the "each t2 bpo keeps tens to hundreds of inventors out of work" argument- have you done the math? One inventor can produce more then prolly 10 t2 bpos.
* CCP is inconsistent: rare moons have been addressed through alchemy, but this hasn't. Worse, rare moons POSs can be attacked, BPOs are safe in stations.
alchemy is a secondary option to moon mining specific rare moon goos as invention is an option to producing from a specific rare t2 bpo.
|
Mr LaForge
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:27:00 -
[5]
*posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
|
0lly
Minmatar Wheel Of Time Ltd
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:34:00 -
[6]
You do not have to have the lowest price to sell your T2 invented items .
For good profits from them - dont think like a sheep.
Not supported in any way.
0lly
If you were me , You'd want to be somebody else as well . |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:35:00 -
[7]
any decent inventor can outperform a t2 bpo easily. and it happens alot.
i would recommend reading this and this.
that might give you some numbers to see why the whole whine about "t2 bpos are overpowered" is just a sign missing clue.
not supported.
disclaimer: i dont own T2 bpos. i still make fortunes with t2 production. i could buy me t2 bpos but i dont see the need for it.
|
Sir Fourhead
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:36:00 -
[8]
Hey look this thread again Please pardon the prissy overtones that will be found throughout this letter, but the reservoir from which CCP draws its lickspittles is primarily the masses of revolting enemies of the people. |
Miss Xerox
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:37:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
QFT!
People like this always just make me roll my eyes. If they would just try their hand at the entire invention process they'd easily and swiftly see that T2 BPO holders on high volume goods simply can't hold a candle to inventors.
T2 BPOs are different from invented BPCs in only one way: They can build things more cheaply, that is it. They can't produce in nearly the quantity of invention, they can't even come remotely close.
Invention has paid for every one of my own T2 BPOs. Invention is 90% of my production output. I make more money by invention volumes on high demand items than I do with my BPOs though I make more per item with BPOs I have fewer of those items to sell than I do with my invention processes.
The age of the T2 cartel is over, so quit complaining and either buy your own BPO, learn how to invent and produce your own T2 goods, or STFU and buy the production of the inventors all around you.
|
Galen Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 21:04:00 -
[10]
I am all for this. One of the links someone posted against this idea even addmited that 10% of the T2 producers do 33% of the total production with BPOs.
1/10 producers doing 1/3 production.
so 9/10 producers are generating the other 2/3.
Yep can see why the T2 PBOs want to keep their little toys.
Anything that tries to make this game fair or balanced seems to always attempts to be stifled by those that feel entitled just because they started playing earlier. That is one thing I like about the gear resets in WoW it levels the playing field every 1-2 years or almost content patch now.
|
|
Das Brute
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 21:15:00 -
[11]
Only one way to make it balanced. No i dont have T2 bpo's either, but how is giving T2 bpo's away to players long ago and not jack for new players? get rid of them and let the BPC's take precedence while letting T2 prices get higher, like it should be.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 22:12:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 22:33:00 -
[13]
1) learn to use the search function instead of creating a new theread about something that has been proposed hundreds of times;
2) read what you find with the search function before posting, so you will notice that you are wrong on all points;
|
HairySack Hangin
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 22:57:00 -
[14]
[Proposal] - Mods should automatically lock idiot threads like these.
|
Lord Jita
Lord Jita's Big Gay Corp
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 23:35:00 -
[15]
YES
|
Taxesarebad
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 03:19:00 -
[16]
yes to parts, T2 BPO's should be phased out, or put back in but with their own advantages and disadvantages how to do this i dont know.
IMO the reason they should be removed is that they are like isk machines, not Uber fast 1bil per minute, but a decent return on an investment, the problem is other than losing the bpo, little risk. the t2 bpo price wont drop. so your equity is the same, or increasing from profit is better to deal with this now, before they are 100bil each and if u decide to remove them have an massive outrage from players.
|
De Guantanamo
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 03:29:00 -
[17]
Edited by: De Guantanamo on 26/02/2010 03:29:23
Originally by: Taxesarebad
is better to deal with this now, before they are 100bil each and if u decide to remove them have an massive outrage from players.
are you stupid? they are only cost so much because players value them at those figures (if you knew anything you'd know that they are valued on potential profit over a certain amount of time, given current prices, something like 4-6 years?)
op, terrible idea, been brought up before and with same results
as others have stated, invention > T2 bpo
|
Dolm De'Mourne
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 05:02:00 -
[18]
The links presented seem to deal with the issue of quantity produced quite well but not the issue of profitability per unit, especially for BPC's of ships which only yield 1 run. And even though the BPC inventors may dictate market value, BPO holders should still beat them as far as percentage of profit at the same prices, though the amount may be less since quantity produced is essentially bottlenecked as noted above. That aside, the BPO's are something shiny, and I like shiny. Unless stronger arguments can be presented, not supported.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 10:19:00 -
[19]
Well, I did not expect any BPO owner to support it anymore than I expect a turkey to vote for Christmas. At least one of them was honest and talks about wanting to collect shiny objects.
I have no time for responding to juvenile ad hominem attacks. As for the more serious arguments: concentrating only on demand-led, high-volume items does not tell the whole story.
I doubt that all of you believe that either. I see some stories there about how people's (greater) invention profits have financed their T2 BPOs. Why are you buying them since they are making you a comparative loss?
If they are "collectors items", why are they priced on a three/four year ROI? Real collectors items are not priced that way, neither in Eve, nor anywhere else in the world.
Anyway - the arguments are irrelevant. Either this post will be supported, or it will not, that's all there is to it.
|
Cyberman Mastermind
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 13:14:00 -
[20]
Originally by: La Dudette If they are "collectors items", why are they priced on a three/four year ROI? Real collectors items are not priced that way, neither in Eve, nor anywhere else in the world.
Care to explain that? |
|
Mistress Servelan
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 13:31:00 -
[21]
Just do it already.
|
CyberGh0st
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 13:53:00 -
[22]
Sounds reasonable http://www.mmodata.net Favorite MMO's : DAoC Pre-TOA-NF / SWG Pre-CU-NGE |
Xultanis
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 14:08:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Xultanis on 26/02/2010 14:09:18 I would admit that its stupid that T2 BPO's are around because they control the market. However, how do you plan on re-imbursing the people who have them? You do realize those BPO's are like an investment and are valued almost as priceless. Some people pay 30 to 50billion for one BPO, and thats only for the ****ty ones. It's in the game till its gone, deal with it, its tough but they can't just get rid of something so valuable. That's hurting the player who has it. If you really want the market to be fixed then why don't you ask for the removal of alt accounts? No more daul screening or dual boxing. Have a person only run one account at the same time? Mineral prices would go up helping miners and so would the prices for modules. That doesn't hurt anyone as much as that BPO because you can STILL use your account, just not at the same time.
My 2 cents are no. It does suck and it is basically huge lump sum of free money, but their isn't a way for CCP to replace the value of something that can make infinite amounts of money.
|
Mistress Servelan
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 14:32:00 -
[24]
I like the idea of making invented T2 BPCs non-****. Give them a decent default ME/PE before anything else is taken into account.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 15:48:00 -
[25]
Paging Herschel!
Not supported. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
FU22
I like toasters
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 16:17:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
Originally by: Millie Clode Dear santa, for christmas I would like an endless supply of noobs to march across my screen so I can pretend I'm playing duck hunt
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 18:56:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 26/02/2010 19:01:46
Originally by: Xultanis
I would admit that its stupid that T2 BPO's are around because they control the market.
Only if the quantity traded is so small that the BPO can cover all the demand.
To use interceptors as an example, most if not all of the Raptors are made from BPO while a large number of the Crow are made from BPC.
The Raptor is noticeably inferior to the Crow so inventors, that can choose, will produce the Crow and sell for a larger sum. Owners of a Raptor BPO that have to produce the Raptor or not use the BPO will still produce it.
If CCP would remove the T2 BPO the Raptor will still be a worse ship, will still have a production cost near that of a Crow and will still sell for less.
So there will not be more people inventing Raptors, simply they would almost disappear from the game.
Similarly for modules with little use we would see meta 4 or low cost faction variants replace the T2 as there will still be no gain in inventing them.
Originally by: Mistress Servelan I like the idea of making invented T2 BPCs non-****. Give them a decent default ME/PE before anything else is taken into account.
While I would like to see the invented BPC reflect a fraction of the research present on the T1 BPC as it will reward people working to get a better T1 original, it will not really change the profit of inventors.
Simply the item price will be pushed down by the high number of inventors with researched T1 BPO and the new researchers would have a harder time before getting some profit.
|
Voogru
Gallente Massive Damage MACHI MISCHIEF
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 08:37:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
1. Prices are dictated right now by inventors. A lot of stuff without T2 BPO's are unprofitable to make because of other inventors not knowing how to do basic math.
2. Invention came in and dropped the price of T2 by over 97%
3. T2 BPO's will expire all on their own through:
How? 1. Owner quits the game. 2. Exploiter gets billions of ISK and buys up a ton of T2 BPO's for insane prices and gets banned. (See the moon goo exploit).
The impact of the T2 BPO's is pretty much all gone. Removing them would increase prices slightly, but would not increase the profits of inventors. If you want proof of this, just look up the profit margins of stuff that doesn't have a T2 BPO.
You may say "OH VOOGRU U OWN T2 BPOS SO OF COURSE YOUR AGAINST THIS".
So I say, you are probably an inventor and you do not like competing with T2 BPO owners. You think your profit margins suck because of T2 BPO owners, they suck because of other inventors. When invention came out the profits were total awesomesauce. Once everyone and their dog was doing it, the profit margins went down significantly.
But if you think T2 BPO's are the problem why you can't profit...
Invent stuff that doesn't have T2 BPO's.
Invent whats profitable, not what you just have some strange obsession with. Don't fall in love with an item. Of course this is going to fall on deaf ears because you just want to have everything your way.
Hate Farmers? Click Here |
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 10:02:00 -
[29]
I'm gonna go against the flow and support this. Not just because I don't have one, but because it would break open the market a little and put a stop to a virtual risk-free source of income.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 11:03:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Sokratesz I'm gonna go against the flow and support this. Not just because I don't have one, but because it would break open the market a little and put a stop to a virtual risk-free source of income.
How is producing from a BPO less risk-free than invention+production?
|
|
Kilostream
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 12:31:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Kilostream on 27/02/2010 12:55:07
Originally by: Taxesarebad ....T2 BPO's should be phased out, or put back in but with their own advantages and disadvantages how to do this i dont know.....
They already do have advantages and disadvantages.
Advantage: You can research ME level, you can build without datacores and t1 bpc.
Disadvantage: You must build consecutively. By inventing multiple bpc, inventors can build concurrently.
This is a real biggy, folks - BPO have a fixed maximum amount of runs theoretically possible in a month. Lets say Mr BPO has a ship bpo and it can build 30 (one per day). Mr Inventor invents 10 x 3 run bpc - they can all be put in the oven at the same time - unfortunately due to negative PE he can only build one per 2 days instead of one every day like Mr BPO can - but hey look! he's still cranked out all thirty of his ships (that takes Mr BPO a month) in under a week!!
If you're committed to this, it is possible to build in volumes that far outstrip what a bpo can produce.
And before anyone starts on about how inventors can't compete due to the BPO's ME level cutting back margins - these margins are not the fault of BPOs / BPO owners, I'm sorry to say it's our fellow inventors - if it WAS the fault of BPO owners, then we would logically see much more profitable invention on items like HIC, Black OP, Marauder, JF etc that have no t2 BPO equivalent - I've tried inventing all of these and the margins on these are just as tight as on HAC / Recon etc that DO have a BPO equivalent.
No support for this idea from me - it's just sour grapes tbh.
|
Dodgy Past
Amarr Debitum Naturae
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 14:11:00 -
[32]
Yet many people have enough T2 BPOs to fill all their production slots so that limitation isn't relevant to them.
The fact that in some sectors all ships come from T2 BPOs does demonstrate that there is unfair competition.
It is a flawed part of the game that significantly devalues the benefits of the vast amnounts of SP required for efficient invention ( using T2 BPOs also require far far less SP )
The only reason I won't support this is because this proposal is flawed as it doesn't propose a workable way of compensating the T2 BPO owners. If someone came up with that I would support it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- you seem determined to turn it into ******* Hollyoaks for neckbeards. |
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 14:24:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Dodgy Past If someone came up with that I would support it.
how about let them keep their BPOs?
Seriously stop being ridiculous. The razor guy above made it pretty damn clear. Just because you can't meet your full potential as an inventor doesn't mean the BPO owner should be screwed. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Clumsy Pilot
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 14:53:00 -
[34]
You has youself contribute to getting rid of bpo's in game, buy them from their current owners and trash them. What? you don't whant to spend your isk on it? WHy should then the current owners lsoe their long-term investment?
|
Jack bubu
Lyonesse. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 15:19:00 -
[35]
Supported :)
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 15:50:00 -
[36]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Sokratesz I'm gonna go against the flow and support this. Not just because I don't have one, but because it would break open the market a little and put a stop to a virtual risk-free source of income.
How is producing from a BPO less risk-free than invention+production?
Invention takes time (effort) and a bit of luck, bpo's = buy, produce, profit.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Meret'Seger
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 16:15:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Sokratesz Invention takes time (effort) and a bit of luck, bpo's = buy, produce, profit.[/quote
And when that particular item crashes in price due to nerf/change/oversupply? The inventors can simply change to a different item, where as the BPO owner is stuck with that one blueprint. Doesnt seem all that risk-free to me.
Although I didn't start playing until after the T" lottery finished, I can't support this nonsense at all until I actually see some reasonable proof that it would benefit the eve community and ecenomy to get rid of the BPO's.
All Ive seen so far is yet another thread full of the old tired "I dont have one, so no one else should either"
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 17:12:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Meret'Seger
All Ive seen so far is yet another thread full of the old tired "I dont have one, so no one else should either"
CCP themselves admitted that the T2 lottery was a bad way of distributing T2 BPO's. While they will be removed eventually by people going inactive, they still provide a steady source of income for those that own them without requiring much effort aor involving risk. CCP wants an 'emergent sandbox', and T2 BPO's are not part of that anymore.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Mr LaForge
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 17:38:00 -
[39]
T1 BPOs should be gotten rid of then. No risk to them.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 17:49:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Mr LaForge T1 BPOs should be gotten rid of then. No risk to them.
Missing the point, cheap troll.
T1 BPO's are freely available and can be researched by everyone and produce less specialised mods.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 18:22:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Sokratesz I'm gonna go against the flow and support this. Not just because I don't have one, but because it would break open the market a little and put a stop to a virtual risk-free source of income.
How is producing from a BPO less risk-free than invention+production?
Invention takes time (effort) and a bit of luck, bpo's = buy, produce, profit.
1. invention isnt much about luck. it comes down to skills. a dedicated inventor gets easily to the percentage of successful inventions as shown on http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/invention_chance.php. So in the long run the invention costs is more or less a constant factor (varition is in datacore prices but that can be ignored most of the time) and not so much about luck. if you use the API to track your inventions you can easily get some numbers to prove that point)
2. invention are a bit of effort. but largely depends on the volume you want to produce. it all would be so much easier if there would be a decent interface to set up jobs in bulk. (Sokratesz cant you push that please?:p)
pushing through 100 invention jobs on a single day is no fun. but neither is setting up 100 of each other job type.
oh that reminds me ... jobs are done ... brb.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 18:33:00 -
[42]
Originally by: darius mclever
2. invention are a bit of effort. but largely depends on the volume you want to produce. it all would be so much easier if there would be a decent interface to set up jobs in bulk. (Sokratesz cant you push that please?:p)
I've heard this request before..I know little of industry myself but you're welcome to write a proposal about it and I'll support it.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 19:47:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Meret'Seger
All Ive seen so far is yet another thread full of the old tired "I dont have one, so no one else should either"
CCP themselves admitted that the T2 lottery was a bad way of distributing T2 BPO's. While they will be removed eventually by people going inactive, they still provide a steady source of income for those that own them without requiring much effort aor involving risk. CCP wants an 'emergent sandbox', and T2 BPO's are not part of that anymore.
Nice dodge replying to that and not to:
Quote:
And when that particular item crashes in price due to nerf/change/oversupply? The inventors can simply change to a different item, where as the BPO owner is stuck with that one blueprint. Doesnt seem all that risk-free to me.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 19:49:00 -
[44]
And, if that happens, you make less profit?
The point is not the exact amount of income but rather the fact that it's steady and requires very little effort.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 21:39:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Sokratesz And, if that happens, you make less profit?
The point is not the exact amount of income but rather the fact that it's steady and requires very little effort.
less effort yes. very little no.
keeping t2 production running is also a lot of work. especially when you are not just building one thing.
seriously we are talking about a non issue here. invention is fine and t2 bpos are fine.
|
CompactDisc7227
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 23:17:00 -
[46]
In my humble opinion, I think new players should have the chance to get anything older players once had the chance to get. There should be multiple occasions of unique items being handed out or none at all. T2 BPOs were cancelled by CCP, so I would agree that they should disappear, of course with a small refund for the owners.
I find this similar to owning ships that were handed out during some event. I'd say that if all ships of a kind get destroyed there should be new ones issued in order for new players to get a chance to get their hands on one, or perhaps even make them a little less unique, just very hard to get (sorry if I sound a bit clichT here, I understand people want unique stuff, but it's just that new players don't ever get their hands on the cool old-skool uniques ships because they all get destroyed or bought by Entity). Same with unique items of course if there are such left after T2 BPOs (no not the snowballs :p).
I vote PRO CD
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 23:34:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Sokratesz And, if that happens, you make less profit?
The point is not the exact amount of income but rather the fact that it's steady and requires very little effort.
It show you don't know how industry work.
The amount of income is very important. I own 2 T2 BPO (Quake L and Barage M). The hourly profit is 50K for one, 167.500 for the other. I can get more with any of the T1 ship BPO I own, with any of the invented items I normally produce and even with some of the T1 module for wick I own a BPO (and there I am suffering from mission loot as a competitor).
So, to reply to your question: yes if you can't change product and the price change you get less profit.
When you have an asset like a BPO (T1 or T2) that allow the production of a single item, when the price of that item crash you asset lose use value even if you (theoretically) can resell it for its original cost.
With T2 BPO that problem is compound as the item has a large purchase cost against the income it produce.
A T1 ship BPO cost can be recovered in a few months of research and production, a T2 BPO require a few years. Every time the price crashes you should choose between continuing production (and losing from the production of potentially more rewarding items) or discontinuing it and further delaying the recover of your purchase cost.
Beside that, what I feel ius the most important point hasn't yet been replayed by the pro removal people:
Some T2 item will totally disappear from the game as it will never become profitable to invent them. You feel that it will enrich the game to see them disappear?
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 23:43:00 -
[48]
Originally by: CompactDisc7227 In my humble opinion, I think new players should have the chance to get anything older players once had the chance to get. There should be multiple occasions of unique items being handed out or none at all. T2 BPOs were cancelled by CCP, so I would agree that they should disappear, of course with a small refund for the owners.
I find this similar to owning ships that were handed out during some event. I'd say that if all ships of a kind get destroyed there should be new ones issued in order for new players to get a chance to get their hands on one, or perhaps even make them a little less unique, just very hard to get (sorry if I sound a bit clichT here, I understand people want unique stuff, but it's just that new players don't ever get their hands on the cool old-skool uniques ships because they all get destroyed or bought by Entity). Same with unique items of course if there are such left after T2 BPOs (no not the snowballs :p).
I vote PRO CD
you are really that stubborn? you are new? you want a t2 bpo? Sell Orders Forum is your place. i would bet a large number of the current t2 BPO owner bought their bpos.
what we dont need a new version of the lottery.
|
Mioelnir
Minmatar Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 02:25:00 -
[49]
Originally by: CompactDisc7227 There should be multiple occasions of unique items being handed out or none at all.
Could you please explain how something that is handed out more than once still qualifies as unique to you? And what is 'a little less unique'? Is it a comparable concept to 'a bit pregnant'?
New players want the old shinyshiny toys. Of course. With barely 3 years of EVE, I'm still drawn towards that bling. But the reason it blings so bright is that fact that it is so rare. Handing them out regularly just diminishes it.
And back to the real topic, I prefer to invent items for which there are T2 BPOs. Less math-challenged inventors ruining my margins. The invention-only items are swarmed by instant-gratification prod-newbs, that do not have the fiscal stamina to wait for a product to sell, cutting their profit margins by millions per hour (because they also do not understand how the eve market works).
Is having one/multiple T2 BPO more convenient than 700 drone inventions in 7 days? Hell yes (been there and done it). But thats really all there is. Convenience. If you are up to speed as an inventor, you can easily outperform the profits of pretty much 80%+ of the T2 BPOs and keep up with even owners of multiple T2 BPO of the medium-high range. There are a few players who have a decent amount of the absolute top T2 BPOs, yes, which they collected and worked for over the years, yes. And they will out-profit me. BU-HU! How mean of them.
The top daytraders in Jita out-profit me too, because I do not nearly have the same amount of liquid ISK to work the market like they do. And chances are they earned their initial money from static 10/10s are somesuch. Which I won't ever be able to do. But seriously, that doesn't mean CCP should seize their wallets.
You all seem to suffer from what in colloquial german is called '*****neid'.
EVE is a persistent game universe. Past successes as well as faults cast their shadows upon todays gameplay. This is what makes EVE EVE. Grow a pair, use your elbows and stop mimimimimimimi-ing about the game being unfair to you.
It's intended.
CCP does not even dare to fully reimburse a dreadnought that an account hacker sold for 2 million ISK on the regular market, because it interferes with the player market. But removing legitimately traded items with a trade volume in the hundreds of billions of ISK, that's just fine? How do the players get reimbursed? What about original owners that won them themselves? Are they cut short because they never sold them? What about people that stole them, sacrificing the one thing ISK can't buy - trust - and got branded thieves to acquire it? What value is attached to that?
In conclusion: - poorly presented - poorly thought out - lacking fundamental understanding
-> absolutely not supported
|
Irongut
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 03:25:00 -
[50]
Some of us invested time and a lot of isk to buy our T2 bpos so No.
--
|
|
Sonja Miner
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 11:33:00 -
[51]
I don't have one, so Yes! lol, actually, invention should take precedence because the skill is there to be learned and not some cash cow that was given long before many ever started the game. Others may have bought them, but look at the prices being able to own one of those, compared to the time it takes to be able to invent.
I have never owned a T2 BPO, but can they or can they not be researched like any other BPO? I ask this since the costs for higher ME on multiple BPO's far outweigh costs for simply copying (if T2 BPO's can be copied and researched like regular BPO's?).
If so, a max run T2 BPO copy with an ME50 compared to the highest an invented T2 BPC can go with number of runs? If not, disregard, but still approved
|
Kilostream
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 12:01:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Sonja Miner I don't have one, so Yes! lol
This pretty much sums up the mentality of people supporting this thread - at least you haven't tried to fabricate some thinly-veiled disguise to dress your sentiment up in.
Originally by: Sonja Miner I have never owned a T2 BPO, but can they or can they not be researched like any other BPO?
Yes, they can - however, this fact is not responsible for why the margins are so tight on invention - my earlier post explains why.
Originally by: Sonja Miner ....if T2 BPO's can be copied and researched like regular BPO's?).
If so, a max run T2 BPO copy with an ME50 compared to the highest an invented T2 BPC can go with number of runs? If not, disregard....
Sort of, but not really - it is possible to make t2 BPC from a t2 BPO but there is a reason you never see t2 BPC [copied from BPO] on contracts; the copying time is punitive - significantly longer than the time it takes to build the actual t2 item itself. Therefore to make running t2 BPC from bpo worthwhile you would have to sell the BPC for more than the cost of the built items it could produce, which is why you never see them.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 16:53:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Dodgy Past The fact that in some sectors all ships come from T2 BPOs does demonstrate that there is unfair competition.
It is a flawed part of the game that significantly devalues the benefits of the vast amnounts of SP required for efficient invention ( using T2 BPOs also require far far less SP )
The only reason I won't support this is because this proposal is flawed as it doesn't propose a workable way of compensating the T2 BPO owners. If someone came up with that I would support it.
Well, I have tried to address this. Feedback on that would of course be welcome. As I see it, the value of a T2 BPO consists of the following:
- An implicit valuation of the profit to be made with it over a number of years
- A (much smaller) premium for having access to the BPO
So if a certain BPO makes you 5 billion a year at full capacity, you might value it for a three year break even at 15 + 5 (say). This certainly seems to be the way sell order discussions go most of the time. The only reason you would justify a higher premium is if you have additional BPOs and you can control an entire market segment.
In any case, the first part of this value is addressed by this proposal: convert the BPO into enough BPCs to last for X years. The premium is lost, but the profit is not.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 16:59:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Mioelnir CCP does not even dare to fully reimburse a dreadnought that an account hacker sold for 2 million ISK on the regular market, because it interferes with the player market. But removing legitimately traded items with a trade volume in the hundreds of billions of ISK, that's just fine? How do the players get reimbursed?
With "barely three years of Eve" you should know that CCP has, in many cases, withdrawn items from the market with a compensation scheme. I suggest you read through some of the descriptions of POS modules next time you are bored.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 17:16:00 -
[55]
Invention >>> T2 BPO. While I dabbled I made 20B easy in a few months time and supplied myself with T2 mods/ships on top.
* Inventor is not tied to 'one' item so not as badly affected by market fluctuations. * There is no real limit (other than raw skills) to the number of T2 BPCs the inventor can have cooking at any one time. * Most T2 BPOs have, due to their age, been sold/re-sold countless times thus represent significant investments for current owners.
Need any more reasons why it is a silly idea?
The only thing I longed for while I dabbled was for some way to manipulate the ME of the invented BPCs .. for the option of making it positive or at least not as negative. If you allow for that (even a little bit), then BPO owners will be forced to become inventors just to compete due to sheer volume, thus effectively removing whatever perceived advantage they might have.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 17:23:00 -
[56]
Originally by: La Dudette
Originally by: Mioelnir CCP does not even dare to fully reimburse a dreadnought that an account hacker sold for 2 million ISK on the regular market, because it interferes with the player market. But removing legitimately traded items with a trade volume in the hundreds of billions of ISK, that's just fine? How do the players get reimbursed?
With "barely three years of Eve" you should know that CCP has, in many cases, withdrawn items from the market with a compensation scheme. I suggest you read through some of the descriptions of POS modules next time you are bored.
A single, nearly unused, POS module got removed from the game by flipping all the NPC sell orders to buy orders. That had the virtue of being exact and explicit in its compensation value, as opposed to T2 BPOs, whose value swings wildly and is very hard to determine. Also, there's enough value of them in the game that we could expect their removal and replacement with cash to cause a really notable spike of inflation.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 17:30:00 -
[57]
No such thread would be complete without me voting 'yes' for this one, right ? So here I am putting it in. When I suspend my accounts I still put T2 BPO's are reason for that btw. At least someone reads those I assume. I ofc have many accounts and they kinda blink on and off on semiregular basis.
Overall I would not hold my breath over it. Arguments for and against have been presented many times already and I'm sure CCP guys have read em also already on several occasions.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 17:33:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto A single, nearly unused, POS module got removed from the game by flipping all the NPC sell orders to buy orders. That had the virtue of being exact and explicit in its compensation value, as opposed to T2 BPOs, whose value swings wildly and is very hard to determine. Also, there's enough value of them in the game that we could expect their removal and replacement with cash to cause a really notable spike of inflation.
It's hard enough responding to the real criticism without having to answer this sort of stuff. But let's do it as a one off: go back up to the first post and read the proposal; point out the part where it says "replace them with cash".
|
Mioelnir
Minmatar Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 18:43:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Mioelnir on 28/02/2010 18:44:12
Originally by: La Dudette In any case, the first part of this value is addressed by this proposal: convert the BPO into enough BPCs to last for X years. The premium is lost, but the profit is not.
That is a lie and not what is proposed.
Please present a math proof that replacing a ME15 BPO with X years worth of ME-1 BPCs preserves the BPO's profit over these X years.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 21:36:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Mioelnir Please present a math proof that replacing a ME15 BPO with X years worth of ME-1 BPCs preserves the BPO's profit over these X years.
Instead of accusing people of lying, stop making assumptions. I did not specify a fixed amount of BPCs/length of time in my proposal: CCP would have to work that out. CCP has specifically asked that proposals should not provide details of solutions.
Your mistake is to assume that the profit of a BPO over X years will have to be provided for with X years of BPCs. This does not have to be the case, it can be Y years.
|
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 23:33:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 28/02/2010 23:35:58
Originally by: La Dudette
Originally by: Mioelnir Please present a math proof that replacing a ME15 BPO with X years worth of ME-1 BPCs preserves the BPO's profit over these X years.
Instead of accusing people of lying, stop making assumptions. I did not specify a fixed amount of BPCs/length of time in my proposal: CCP would have to work that out. CCP has specifically asked that proposals should not provide details of solutions.
Your mistake is to assume that the profit of a BPO over X years will have to be provided for with X years of BPCs. This does not have to be the case, it can be Y years.
Yes, after all if someone has thought to tie up his capital for 3 years it make no difference is you tie it up for 10 years . After all we will be still here in 10 years.
And if BPO owners get multiple BPC to cover those Y years so the capital is not tied up for the full period you have the net effect of increasing T2 production.
You seem to have a hard time grasping the aftereffects of your suggestions.
Originally by: La Dudette
Compensate the owners: convert them into T2 BPCs equivalent to two or three years of continuous production (as many are priced that way), but at -1 ME.
Originally by: La Dudette I did not specify a fixed amount of BPCs/length of time in my proposal
This seem a fairly precise amount of time and a specific ME.
Maybe you should redo your proposal?
|
Tellenta
Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 23:41:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Sokratesz I'm gonna go against the flow and support this. Not just because I don't have one, but because it would break open the market a little and put a stop to a virtual risk-free source of income.
.
As someone that makes darn near all the isk I have in game through invention I find the concept that the T2 market would be broken open by getting rid of T2 BPO's questionable at best. While I am not sure how much research cuts the cost for BPO owners their effect on profit for the inventor is negligible at best. Though with the build requirements for ships being adjusted oh so many patches ago I assume a T2 ship bpo owner is rolling in isk as the ME effects the armor plate requirements the most, unless CCP thought of that and adjusted T2 ship BPO's. However that assumes forethought on the side of CCP which we all know through experience is a laughable jest.
Oh and not supported, why are there so many people want this game to be fair? Stop trying to ruin this game you bastards!
|
Omega Flames
Last Resort Inn SYSTEM SHOCK INITIATIVE
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 00:31:00 -
[63]
------------------------- "Forsys > WAR Forsys > HUH Forsys > WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR Harry Sunday > loot Forsys > touchT" |
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 09:43:00 -
[64]
Citing that invention scales as argument for keeping T2 BPOs is kinda meh. Since you have to scale in volume to achieve similar profits gained from a smaller number of items produced by T2 BPO, it means the markets become saturated with less people doing invention -> more competition -> lower margins, while people with BPOs are largely unaffected.
I would refrain from voting for the abolishment of T2 BPOs if invented BPC ME's could be brought to levels > 5. There are enough proposals for this. If that was done, BPOs would still have an advantage, but at least the disparity of the production costs is reduced. And this would ofc bring T2 ship prices down, which I would welcome.
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 09:45:00 -
[65]
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 13:15:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Aineko Macx Citing that invention scales as argument for keeping T2 BPOs is kinda meh. Since you have to scale in volume to achieve similar profits gained from a smaller number of items produced by T2 BPO, it means the markets become saturated with less people doing invention -> more competition -> lower margins, while people with BPOs are largely unaffected.
I would refrain from voting for the abolishment of T2 BPOs if invented BPC ME's could be brought to levels > 5. There are enough proposals for this. If that was done, BPOs would still have an advantage, but at least the disparity of the production costs is reduced. And this would ofc bring T2 ship prices down, which I would welcome.
As already pointed out in page 1, 1 BPO is approximately the equivalent of 2,5 PE-4 BPC for production.
I.E. 1 BPO do the same work of 2,5 production lines of BPC.
So the 40 BPO that were seeded for each ship (if they are all still in game) are the equivalent of 100 production lines for that ship, i.e. 9,09 inventors with 11 production slots.
Probably banned and inactive accounts hold a large percentage of the best BPO.
During the second seeding of T2 BPO there was a blog about them where it was said that a RTM cartel holding several BPO was banned en masse. At least some of those BPO were re-seeded with the second wave, but the BPO that were on banned accounts after that date have been removed from the game.
The banning after the POS exploit probably had several good BPo banned as the people using the POS cheat to produce moon minerals were producing directly T2 stuff to reduce traceability.
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 15:15:00 -
[67]
Well the only reason T2 BPOs are being kept as-is to not screw the owners. Apart from that, there is no argument for not fixing bad gamedesign.
So, to protect the holy cows (somewhat), just let the T2 BPOs be, but make invention more competitive by allowing for improved ME. Yeah, invention is fine, yadda yadda, but I want to see T2 ship prices drop.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 15:24:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Aineko Macx Well the only reason T2 BPOs are being kept as-is to not screw the owners. Apart from that, there is no argument for not fixing bad gamedesign.
So, to protect the holy cows (somewhat), just let the T2 BPOs be, but make invention more competitive by allowing for improved ME. Yeah, invention is fine, yadda yadda, but I want to see T2 ship prices drop.
let me tell you ... just because my costs drop, it doesnt mean i lower my prices. it just means i will make more profit. ;)
business 101. works irl. works in eve.
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 16:53:00 -
[69]
Originally by: darius mclever let me tell you ... just because my costs drop, it doesnt mean i lower my prices. it just means i will make more profit. ;)
It's great, isn't it? Thank you for supporting my cause.
|
Kilostream
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 17:56:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Kilostream on 01/03/2010 18:07:03
Originally by: darius mclever
let me tell you ... just because my costs drop, it doesnt mean i lower my prices. it just means i will make more profit. ;)
business 101. works irl. works in eve.
I'd dispute this - with direct competition for sales in a free market, margins get squeezed - you might decide not to drop your prices, but your competitor will in order to nick sales off you. Someone else will do the same in order to nick sales off him, and you will at some stage be forced to do the same or your invesment in building materials will become tied up in stock you cannot shift, and you will therefore have no liquidity to invest in more materials for your next batches of production.
It's these market forces that are keeping profit margins on t2 production tight, NOT t2 BPOs. This is why you make no higher percentage margins prodicing HIC / Black Op etc than you do items that have a t2 BPO equivalent. A lot of people seem convinced that removal of t2 BPOs will somehow allow them to realise greater profit with their invented gear - it won't - if anything, having everyone building using invented neg ME BPC will result in increased demand for materials to build the same number of finished products - if anything, your costs would most likely go up.
The way to make money in t2 production right now is 'pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap' - this is why invention > BPO, because you can produce in volumes that dwarf what a BPO can produce - I'm not saying it's easy (especially if you build your own components) you need to be committed - but speak to anyone who owns a t2 BPO (or more) that is not exactly a logistical walk in the park, either.
|
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 18:52:00 -
[71]
it works. ;)
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 20:45:00 -
[72]
Originally by: La Dudette
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto A single, nearly unused, POS module got removed from the game by flipping all the NPC sell orders to buy orders. That had the virtue of being exact and explicit in its compensation value, as opposed to T2 BPOs, whose value swings wildly and is very hard to determine. Also, there's enough value of them in the game that we could expect their removal and replacement with cash to cause a really notable spike of inflation.
It's hard enough responding to the real criticism without having to answer this sort of stuff. But let's do it as a one off: go back up to the first post and read the proposal; point out the part where it says "replace them with cash".
You didn't propose replacing them with cash, you proposed shafting the people who own them. They're currently priced at something like 5 years profits at 0% waste. You propose giving them 2 years production at 20% waste. That's not compensation, that's a calculated insult. There is exactly one way to compensate them that wouldn't simply be a screwjob, and that's with cash(or goods, I suppose, but that'd be even more problematic).
|
Sonja Miner
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 05:54:00 -
[73]
Cash shouldn't really be an option. They should leave the same way they came in. Look at it like anything else in this game, investing in anything is a gamble. Did the people who originally recieved them pay anything for them? I honestly don't know because I don't think I was around then.
Eve is a game of chances, just like undocking. When the time comes, devblog the time and date it'll happen. Then at that time, they become max run BPC's. Problem solved. If you bought em from someone else, that person made a hefty profit and the buyer made a bad investment (I'm sure they made a nice profit while they had it anyway). If the person who received them never sold them, it never really benefitted anyone but that person anyway and no harm done.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 07:45:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 02/03/2010 07:45:57
Originally by: Sonja Miner Cash shouldn't really be an option. They should leave the same way they came in. Look at it like anything else in this game, investing in anything is a gamble. Did the people who originally recieved them pay anything for them? I honestly don't know because I don't think I was around then.
Eve is a game of chances, just like undocking. When the time comes, devblog the time and date it'll happen. Then at that time, they become max run BPC's. Problem solved. If you bought em from someone else, that person made a hefty profit and the buyer made a bad investment (I'm sure they made a nice profit while they had it anyway). If the person who received them never sold them, it never really benefitted anyone but that person anyway and no harm done.
1) they were brought with RP, everything you had with the agent the moment you accepted the offer. At the time of the first seeding datacores were not an option (they were introduced 2 year later) so training those skill was a hit or miss proposition.
2) can I turn all your BPO to max run BPC? Can I turn your ships to a version that will last 100 undocking? that is what you are suggesting.
|
Sonja Miner
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 08:26:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Sonja Miner on 02/03/2010 08:29:18 1) Then pay the owner in RP as repayment. Paying out what people pay for the item isn't solid value. If someone paid an amount more than it was worth to have it, that shouldn't give them the right to claim what they paid.
2) can I turn all your BPO to max run BPC? Sure go ahead lol. The undocking part of your post is nonsense tbh. These items
for ISK value though, and though there isn't one, I used the armageddon and redeemer for an example. 596,250,000 ISk for a geddon BPO. geddons go for around 45mil or so, we'll say the avg is 45mil. 596,250,000/45,000,000= 13.25
13.25x695,000,000(is random current price of a redeemer)= 9,208,750,000.
BPO owner can be awarded just over 9bil if they owned the Redeemer BPO. This is an example, so don't get your panties in a wad about a Redeemer BPO. People who invested in more valuable items will get a substantial payback but not near what they did pay for it. Will people get screwed? Sure. It's Eve, get over it. It will not break the bank of those who own them if they paid a huge sum already. If investors get ****ed, talk to those people who invested in Enron and borrow a tissue. These BPO's shouldn't be in the game unless everyone can be able to get their own. For the trolls to come, kleenex? Fly safe.
|
Naomi Knight
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 09:25:00 -
[76]
Who cares about their loss , come on every change in eve affects people and many of us lost isk due to changes many times, why should they be exceptioned from this? Why should keep items in for some privileged "elit" who were lucky when these bpos were shared? Also bpo-s effect markets maybe not the modules,but ships/ammos definitely. Is that right ? I dont think so . If they want to make money they should be join the inventors ranks or something else like the rest of us.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 09:40:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Naomi Knight Who cares about their loss , come on every change in eve affects people and many of us lost isk due to changes many times, why should they be exceptioned from this? Why should keep items in for some privileged "elit" who were lucky when these bpos were shared? Also bpo-s effect markets maybe not the modules,but ships/ammos definitely. Is that right ? I dont think so . If they want to make money they should be join the inventors ranks or something else like the rest of us.
do you have any clue about how much value you are speaking off? just as an example... Cap recharger II BPOs sell for 70-80bn. for easier math lets say plexes are 250m for $15. we are talking about $4200-4800. sabre bpo was 50bn, hulk over 100bn.
When CCP wanted to reduce the cost of motherships to like 6bn they were already thinking on how to reimburse the owners for the loss in value. and that was just a price reduction of 9-10bn.
Some people worked really hard to actually *buy* their bpos.
and the hulk bpo is actually funny. only 11% of the hulks come from bpos. so 89% are build by happy inventor. seems like the market is fine?
but of course whining about "i dont have a t2 bpo, so others shouldnt have either" is so much easier than actually doing research and producing the right things.
|
Naomi Knight
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 10:32:00 -
[78]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Naomi Knight Who cares about their loss , come on every change in eve affects people and many of us lost isk due to changes many times, why should they be exceptioned from this? Why should keep items in for some privileged "elit" who were lucky when these bpos were shared? Also bpo-s effect markets maybe not the modules,but ships/ammos definitely. Is that right ? I dont think so . If they want to make money they should be join the inventors ranks or something else like the rest of us.
do you have any clue about how much value you are speaking off? just as an example... Cap recharger II BPOs sell for 70-80bn. for easier math lets say plexes are 250m for $15. we are talking about $4200-4800. sabre bpo was 50bn, hulk over 100bn.
When CCP wanted to reduce the cost of motherships to like 6bn they were already thinking on how to reimburse the owners for the loss in value. and that was just a price reduction of 9-10bn.
Some people worked really hard to actually *buy* their bpos.
and the hulk bpo is actually funny. only 11% of the hulks come from bpos. so 89% are build by happy inventor. seems like the market is fine?
but of course whining about "i dont have a t2 bpo, so others shouldnt have either" is so much easier than actually doing research and producing the right things.
Maybe that 70-80bill is overpriced , but still who cares? I dont. They made their choices when bought the bpo. Just like that bad investment. So they should get special treatment just because they are t2 bpo owners? Also this math about isk-->$ is against eula ,you cant trade isk to realmoney legally.
So for hulk it is 11% ,then what? Does it somehow proove that t2 bpos are fine then ,no absolutly not. T2 bpos are a bad game design they should gone just like the seed of them. There are these items which are unavailable for newcommers to eve just because they werent playing when bpos were seeded, only possible way to get them is to buy them from their current owners willing to sell them at a very overpriced rate.
Oh if ccp thinks they should get reimbuse then do so but still they should remove them from game.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 11:16:00 -
[79]
how is a t2 bpo unavailable to you? you can buy them. will it cost you lots of money? sure. you think it is too much money? you dont want it enough. it is easy enough to earn 50-100bn with invention in a year and buy yourself a t2 bpo.
hell there are some nice t2 missile bpos for sale atm that go below 5bn buyout.
was the idea bad to introduce them through a lottery style? mostlikely. (even without the t20 thingie) do we need more t2 bpos? no. but all that doesnt mean you should rip them out of the game either. they are not game breaking either.
i just wonder naomi ... do you actually do t2 production?
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 13:05:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Sonja Miner
2) can I turn all your BPO to max run BPC? Sure go ahead lol. The undocking part of your post is nonsense tbh.
Both thing have exactly the same sense (or better, lack of it) of your proposal: turning a permanent item into a limited use one.
I would prefer to see my BPO turned to an unusable but collection worthy "framed T2 BPO" to hung in my room when Incarna become active that have it turned to a consumable with a limited number of uses.
You find turning your ship to a item with a finite number of uses nonsense, but it is exactly what you are suggesting for the BPO.
|
|
Sonja Miner
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 15:31:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Sonja Miner on 02/03/2010 15:33:33 Venkul, you truly do not know what you mean. According to you, if you undock, you automatically lose a ship. Not just the chance, thereof. Everyone undocks, not just me and a select few.
darius, All T2 BPO's aren't available for sale, so how are ALL of them available for me to buy any one of them I want? I have no chance to buy a particular one I may want. Which makes the T2 BPO control monopolizing and unfair.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 15:51:00 -
[82]
The broken part is not that they exist and give advantage over invention.
The broken part is they cant be taken by force ( assuming owner has half brain and farms it at station ).
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 15:51:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Sonja Miner Edited by: Sonja Miner on 02/03/2010 15:33:33 Venkul, you truly do not know what you mean. According to you, if you undock, you automatically lose a ship. Not just the chance, thereof. Everyone undocks, not just me and a select few.
darius, All T2 BPO's aren't available for sale, so how are ALL of them available for me to buy any one of them I want? I have no chance to buy a particular one I may want. Which makes the T2 BPO control monopolizing and unfair.
leaving out BPOs that werent seeded (marauders, EAF), i am sure if you wave with enough money you will find someone who will sell you that seeded bpo.
|
0bi one
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 16:49:00 -
[84]
Im a bit bored so will join in.
Quote: This has consequences: a small number of people are able to circumvent invention and make exorbitant profits that inventors cannot compete with.
Actually wasnt invention was brought in to circumvent bpo holders who were being pilloried for price fixing (re sellers and critical supply shortages - were not to blame at all of course)
Quote: The system continues to be fundamentally unfair to new players: there are still people out there with a blank cheque that was won in the lottery, not earned. Every one such person keeps tens to hundreds of inventors out of the market.
So what you are implying there is that the lowest priced t2 item in any station is made from a bpo and is not invented. Wow never knew that - care to back it up with some data? And I would say your 'tens of hundreds' of would be inventors would blame lack of lab slot availability than prices at this point in time.
Quote: CCP is inconsistent: rare moons have been addressed through alchemy,
Agree with you on the inconsistency part. However, were not the t2 bpos (especially ships) material requirements significantly changed recently due to the failure of alchemy and rare moon shortage.?
Here are some approximate figures for a well researched hac bpo .(No its not mine- wish it was though)
Basing purely on buy order prices - after all you want it to sell immediately.
Not going anywhere near data core prices etc how you get them / value them is up to you. Average Buy order price 100M
Cost to build ( not including base ship) 65M (27M on plates 17M on microprocessors)
Profit around 30M ( taxes and ship taken into account) Time it takes in station to build 1.25 days approx so lets say 6 a week
Thus 6/7 of 30M = 25M a day. Quote: exorbitant profits
Not really.
Thus at a Me -4 bpc (50% waste) 97.5M
Yes at that me you are not going to compete . However you would not build a battleship at Me0 either and expect to be profitable. Hence the use of decryptors .
Smaller items sell very well ( as long as you dont do the hub routes) Most older players are lazy and dont want to travel 10+ jumps to save a few K isk I myself invent ( lab slots permitting) and where the average is around 600k I sell mine for 900+K easily. Allowing decryptors to become more readily available would be nice though.
Im sorry I cannot support the motion.
0bi
I started with Sweet FA, & have most of it left. |
Jonah Pod
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 22:26:00 -
[85]
No. Not at all.
Leave the choice to everyone, they don't do any harm at all. Buy a T2 BPO and compete with inventors if you want to or buy and research its T1 equivalent, do the copies and the research jobs if you want to.
But please, do us a favour and use only NPC facilities when inventing! ...
|
SolarKnight
Gallente ORIGIN SYSTEMS Shadows of Light
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 04:55:00 -
[86]
Invention was the fix to the T2 BPo problem, and its heavily impacted the profitability of most of the old "big profit BPos", it also killed a significant portion of the cartels that used to exist.
(remember 10mill+ cap recharger 2s anyone?)
T2 BPos are not anywhere near as damaging as they sued to be now that anyone and everyone can invent, and the sheer number of R+D jobs going on in empire is an indication that a lot of people are either inventing or getting ready to.
In short, the situation isn't broken. so no fix is really needed. The Light in the Darkness
|
domitesting
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 11:29:00 -
[87]
Yes they should of been removed when they stopped the lotterly this clearly gives older players a huge advantage over other players. Only the people reaping the benefits of this will not support it...
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 13:55:00 -
[88]
Originally by: domitesting clearly gives older players a huge advantage over other players.
half the people I know with T2 bpos are about as old as me (2 years playing) and bought their BPOs after farming lots and lots of isk
Quote: Only the people reaping the benefits of this will not support it...
This sort of assumption makes you look stupid. I and many others do not have any T2 bpos (nor have I partook in invention for quite some time) and I still think removing these items is stupid. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 14:21:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
|
Sig Sour
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 05:31:00 -
[90]
Sucks for the people who own them, but it fixes the game mechanics.
|
|
Corbeau Lenoir
ZER0. IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:44:00 -
[91]
No. I don't own any of t2 BPOs and don't need them. This was discussed lots of times already. If you don't understand how you could earn more than t2 bpo holder - you suck at economics.
|
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia Here Be Dragons
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:02:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Hertford on 13/04/2010 11:01:50
Originally by: Sig Sour Sucks for the people who own them, but it fixes the game mechanics.
Much like deep safe spots... |
Laxyr
Chamsin Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:13:00 -
[93]
Originally by: La Dudette
You may argue that life is harsh, and that people pay huge sums for T2 BPOs for this privilege, however: [list]The system is self-reinforcing, as the owners will naturally make the most money and continue to usurp further BPOs
Money generates more money, it has always been that way and it will be until the end (I suppose) This proposal is a lost cause in my opinion
|
Ryunosuke Kusanagi
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 23:26:00 -
[94]
no, just no
dont own one, dont plan on owning one.
that said, ccp has stated in one of either their dev blogs or in a random post somewhere that they were at least thinking of (if not actively planning) changing the meta levels and bonuses/etc. of T1/T2 mods. That being said, why dont you stfu and wait until AFTER an expansion to ***** and moan that you dont have a bpo, or better yet, QFT.
|
D melanogaster
The Fruit Flys
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 23:34:00 -
[95]
It isn't fair to us poor new players. They should all be destroyed on the 18th!
|
Tibalt Avalon
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 01:41:00 -
[96]
Supporting as an Owner. Hardstyle Ambassador |
Ovella
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 09:44:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
|
Gunnanmon
The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 11:45:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Hertford Edited by: Hertford on 13/04/2010 11:01:50
Originally by: Sig Sour Sucks for the people who own them, but it fixes the game mechanics.
Much like deep safe spots...
Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 12:18:00 -
[99]
Edited by: Ban Doga on 14/04/2010 12:21:25 Okay, you convinced me - T2 BPOs are inferior to T2 invention!
So let's get rid of that useless crap!!
BTW, did you see these??
Originally by: QEN_Q2-2009, page 41
During Q2 2009, approximately 350,000 Tech II ships were manufactured by 6,920 different characters. 56% of these ships were produced with BPOs, and the remaining 44% were manufactured with BPCs, giving us a wildly different picture of the distribution between Tech II jobs performed with BPOs and BPCs than the previously cited split of 33%/67% in Figure 22.
Originally by: QEN_Q2-2009, page 47
In Q2 more than 2.6 billion units of 100 different types of Tech II Ammo (including mining crystals) and five million units of 23 different types of Tech II Drones were manufactured. The five most popular Tech II drones produced accounted for almost 70% of the total production, with the Hammerhead II and Hobgoblin II both having over one million units produced each. 64% of all Tech II drones are produced with BPOs.
http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf
|
MichaelJackson RIP
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 15:13:00 -
[100]
Edited by: MichaelJackson RIP on 14/04/2010 15:13:29 T2 bpo's are like safespots. They are not fair vs the newer players on anyway u can think of. CCP nerfed safespots so why not t2 bpos'
|
|
Wyke Mossari
Gallente Staner Industries
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 16:13:00 -
[101]
Opposed.
|
Llyandrian
Amarr Livestock Science Exchange
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 16:22:00 -
[102]
Next they will demanding we get rid of officer mods and implants, pirate factions and navy ships, this is stupid.
|
Leedha Lemour
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 17:42:00 -
[103]
Against.
|
Orree
Dynaverse Corporation Sodalitas XX
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 17:57:00 -
[104]
Not at all supported.
I believe enough has been done to reduce the impact of T2 BPOs.
---------- "How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct." ---Benjamin Disraeli |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 20:47:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 14/04/2010 20:48:46 Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 14/04/2010 20:48:29 it is accurate
the exact wording regarding the reason deep safes are being removed is:
Originally by: CCP Lemur
This creates a division between older "haves" and newer "have-nots": as a new player coming into the game, the only way you'd be able to reach points outside the system proper would be to acquire a bookmark from an older player.
There is no amount of complaining, backpedaling or otherwise that can deny the ONLY way to obtain a BPO is from an older player.
This is a division between the older "haves" and newer "have-nots". There really is no two ways about it.
Originally by: Llyandrian
Next they will demanding we get rid of officer mods and implants, pirate factions and navy ships, this is stupid.
yes, because you can't go get these things on your own without assistance from others.
"A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game." |
Gunnanmon
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.04.15 11:07:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia ... but if ccp is going to make a stance like this and change the game over it, there is absolutely no reason they shouldn't have to hold their axiom to be true across the board.
You are using too much logic. Please refrain from the use of said logic; it's against the EULA. Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.04.15 21:44:00 -
[107]
Well, if CCP is saying that a majority off all T2 products are coming from T2 BPO's I'm going to have to support the removal of them.
It would be different if is was like 10% or less, but the sheer amount a person has to invest to make something via inventions vs. the ISK printing press of T2 BPO's is absurd.
Sorry BPO owners, but the printing press has got to go.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.15 22:01:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Marlona Sky Well, if CCP is saying that a majority off all T2 products are coming from T2 BPO's I'm going to have to support the removal of them.
It would be different if is was like 10% or less, but the sheer amount a person has to invest to make something via inventions vs. the ISK printing press of T2 BPO's is absurd.
Sorry BPO owners, but the printing press has got to go.
Marlona, say you have atleast run some inventions yourself ...
|
I SoStoned
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.04.16 01:18:00 -
[109]
CCP has already made their stance on this issue abundantly clear: T2 BPOs are here to stay. They'll eventually be culled due to attrition.
Mods should automatically lock/delete threads like this.
--- [i]It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set |
z0de
The Bastards The Tusker Bastards
|
Posted - 2010.04.16 01:31:00 -
[110]
Edited by: z0de on 16/04/2010 01:31:21 Supported for balance on the same arguments used by ccp for the removal of deep safes. į į
|
|
Mr LaForge
|
Posted - 2010.04.16 13:26:00 -
[111]
Edited by: Mr LaForge on 16/04/2010 13:26:25 Lol I just started inventing last night and have already made alot more than I started with. Keep the BPOs, they arn't harming me. I can also outproduce a BPO owner as well, even with a -PL.
|
Thela Swiftwind
Gallente Dark Legacy.
|
Posted - 2010.04.16 13:45:00 -
[112]
No.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.16 14:11:00 -
[113]
Lets say they were replaced with 2-3 years worth of BPCs; The previous BPO holders will now have the ability to build using all their production slots instead of just one per print.
- Prices in the short term will crash and inventors are effectively out of business for a year or more until BPCs are depleted. - All that extra ISK earned by the flood can be invested in traditional market whoring and make even more ISK immediately since inventors are unable to compete due to their isk-flow being crippled, tied up in now worthless invention chains. - With next to no invention going on the datacores and other invention materials will plummet as suplly vastly outstrips demand and it is stockpiled by the previous BPO holder wallets, guaranteeing them staggering profits upon BPC depletion.
End result: You have just managed to give BPO holders such an insane amount ISK for their BPOs that the gap can never, ever be closed and they will increase their domination of the markets, now just through buy/sell mechanics instead of production making T2 prices sky-rocket.
Do you really want to be forced to grind missions or rat just to make a living for a year or more? I sure as hell don't. My invention, even after I turned it down to a simmer, is pulling in a billion plus per month with hardly any work done.
|
javer
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:36:00 -
[114]
not signed! -------------------------------------------- Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their Level and beat you with experience. |
Brengholl
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:41:00 -
[115]
i suport this for 2 reasons... of witch no1 is the important one
1. im tired of seeing this idea pop up every few weeks by a new inventor who dosent see the whole picture
2. since deep-safe holders are geting f***ed in the next patch because of "It's not fair to new players." argument, maybe t2 bpo owners should get ****ed just to be consistent
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 19:22:00 -
[116]
Edited by: Ban Doga on 17/04/2010 19:23:06
Originally by: Mr LaForge Edited by: Mr LaForge on 16/04/2010 13:26:25 Lol I just started inventing last night and have already made alot more than I started with. Keep the BPOs, they arn't harming me. I can also outproduce a BPO owner as well, even with a -PL.
You - and others as well - seem to forget that a T2 BPO owner can do invention as well. It's not like you have to choose between one or the other.
Just look at it that way: One of your production lines is producing at below 1% waste instead of 20% - 70% waste like the other lines. And not only that you also save the invention costs for that 1 line.
Still think you're better off without a T2 BPO?
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 19:49:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Ban Doga Edited by: Ban Doga on 17/04/2010 19:23:06
Originally by: Mr LaForge Edited by: Mr LaForge on 16/04/2010 13:26:25 Lol I just started inventing last night and have already made alot more than I started with. Keep the BPOs, they arn't harming me. I can also outproduce a BPO owner as well, even with a -PL.
You - and others as well - seem to forget that a T2 BPO owner can do invention as well. It's not like you have to choose between one or the other.
Just look at it that way: One of your production lines is producing at below 1% waste instead of 20% - 70% waste like the other lines. And not only that you also save the invention costs for that 1 line.
Still think you're better off without a T2 BPO?
yes.
|
Sig Sour
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 20:30:00 -
[118]
The problem is that T2 bpo's are unbalanced game mechanics. Nobody can pose a valid argument that they are a balanced game mechanic. The only argument for keeping them around is "someone paid a lot for them". If someone paid an extra $5 in their favorite FPS to always be in god mode, would it be fair game play because they paid an extra $5?
Out of all the suggestions I have read over the years, there are 2 of them that I like:
1. Chance of getting a T2 BPO from invention. 2. Delete them all together.
Action does need to be taken to repair a mistake made long ago and only becomes deeper rooted every passing day.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 20:44:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Sig Sour The problem is that T2 bpo's are unbalanced game mechanics. Nobody can pose a valid argument that they are a balanced game mechanic. The only argument for keeping them around is "someone paid a lot for them". If someone paid an extra $5 in their favorite FPS to always be in god mode, would it be fair game play because they paid an extra $5?
Out of all the suggestions I have read over the years, there are 2 of them that I like:
1. Chance of getting a T2 BPO from invention. 2. Delete them all together.
Action does need to be taken to repair a mistake made long ago and only becomes deeper rooted every passing day.
those are the 2 most useless ideas around this topic. the best idea is ... have input ME/PE affect the output ME/PE.
|
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.18 13:49:00 -
[120]
No.
I'll support it if they remove all capitals, supercapitals (especially!), and wallets over 5B ISK, and any SP over 35M too, because I don't have any of those and it's also unfair somehow. What? It creates a division between the haves and the have nots!
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
Voogru
Gallente Massive Damage MACHI MISCHIEF
|
Posted - 2010.04.18 18:27:00 -
[121]
Edited by: Voogru on 18/04/2010 18:29:08 Let's remove the unique ships too since those are worth too much money and it's unfair to new players since they can't obtain the unique ships.
While we're at it let's just remove anything that's really hard to get.
An even better idea, how about CCP just give everybody 100 billion ISK and all level 5 skills then things are really an even playing field.
Hate Farmers? Click Here |
Aleena Doran
|
Posted - 2010.04.19 08:10:00 -
[122]
Supported. Gives established players/powerblocs an unreasonable advantage over newcomers. Other than the economic benefit it enables them to avoid the hassle factor of acquiring datacores, which aren't reliably available out of hisec.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.04.19 08:34:00 -
[123]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 19/04/2010 08:37:55
Originally by: Aleena Doran ..... it enables them to avoid the hassle factor of acquiring datacores, which aren't reliably available out of hisec.
Half of my R&D agents are in low sec. While low sec agents aren't uniformly better than high sec there are plenty of good low R&D sec agents.
If you meant "out if empire" it is another matter but generally there are few reason to invent out of empire as T2 items are produced mostly in empire space and then shipped in 0.0.
|
Amarr12345
|
Posted - 2010.04.19 12:02:00 -
[124]
Supported. Burn all Tech 2 BPOs, they are a economical disease. ppl with billions of isk should explode ships in combats, instead of just increase their income even more.
|
Cang Zar
|
Posted - 2010.04.19 20:20:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Voogru Edited by: Voogru on 18/04/2010 18:29:08 Let's remove the unique ships too since those are worth too much money and it's unfair to new players since they can't obtain the unique ships.
While we're at it let's just remove anything that's really hard to get.
An even better idea, how about CCP just give everybody 100 billion ISK and all level 5 skills then things are really an even playing field.
Ridiculous hyperbole aside, you really seriously believe that this the same thing?
Anyway, supported.. Along with learning skills, the T2 lottery is probably one of the worst game-design decisions ccp has made.
|
Voogru
Gallente Massive Damage MACHI MISCHIEF
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 07:33:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Voogru on 20/04/2010 07:35:30
Originally by: Cang Zar Ridiculous hyperbole aside, you really seriously believe that this the same thing?
Anyway, supported.. Along with learning skills, the T2 lottery is probably one of the worst game-design decisions ccp has made.
T2 BPO's were fixed a few years ago, I think it's called invention. Profits of T2 BPO's down 97%. T2 production available to everybody.
Pretty good sized nerf, would you agree?
Imagine a rare gun that does 1000 DPS, people whine and CCP nerfs it to 30 DPS.
Hate Farmers? Click Here |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 09:38:00 -
[127]
The T2 BPO whiner flowchart:
(1) I don't have a T2 BPO. -> (2) I want a T2 BPO -> (3) I don't have the ISK to buy a T2 BPO. -> (4) OR (5) OR (6)
(4) Whine on forums to remove T2 BPOs. (5) Make ISK to buy a T2 BPO. (6) Realize that T2 BPO ROI makes it a horribad investment if you have the ISK
OBVIOUSLY CCP should cater to (4), that is the EVE way.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Marlona Sky
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 09:52:00 -
[128]
I see a lot of post in here saying that one can be as, if not more, profitable to do invention than being the owner of a T2 BPO.
If that is the case, then why do T2 BPO's go for as much money as they do when being sold?
|
TheBlueMonkey
Gallente Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 09:53:00 -
[129]
Originally by: La Dudette exorbitant profits
Who? Where? Facts?
NO! --
Nothing is worthless, you may have gotten it for free but it still has an inherent value
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 10:02:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Marlona Sky I see a lot of post in here saying that one can be as, if not more, profitable to do invention than being the owner of a T2 BPO.
If that is the case, then why do T2 BPO's go for as much money as they do when being sold?
Because people pay for them with like 3-5years return of investment time. 3-5 years is just braindead. IRL such a longterm for an investment might make sense (not so much when you are a hedgefond, but not my fault they only aim for short term profit), but in a game?
|
|
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 11:28:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Marlona Sky I see a lot of post in here saying that one can be as, if not more, profitable to do invention than being the owner of a T2 BPO.
If that is the case, then why do T2 BPO's go for as much money as they do when being sold?
I don't know who would buy them at current prices. With it taking literally years to return the investment, I don't "get" anyone who would spend that much ISK on one, since you can get much much better return for little risk once you have that much capital.
Plus, with such a long-term investment horizon, real risk in owning T2 BPOS exists since CCP might introduce more changes to T2 production/etc, lowering the margins and increasing the time to pay off a T2 BPO even more. People who bought a T2 BPO just before invention hit definitely got majorly shafted; this sort of thing could happen again when you look at 3-4 years time.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Jade Knight07
|
Posted - 2010.05.01 07:53:00 -
[132]
Bottom line is everyone that is opposed to this idea either has t2 bpo's or has access to them thru, corp, alliance or friend. They are spewing sheer propaganda at everyone in hopes they can keep their massive advantage over the newer player base/all other industrials. Crying for facts is plain stupid unless you failed grade school math. Its not that hard to figure out. For all you simpletons out there I will even do it for you.
The basics: T2 bpo base waste factor is -10% base Production lvl -10% vs. base waste factor of an invented bpc -50% and production -50%. T2 bpo's can be research just like t1's. essentially they have less than 0.01% waste factor an production level modifiers. T2 invented bpc's using a decryptors (which cost between 5 million for one that wont do much up to and well over 50 million for the best ones.) you could get -30% ME and PE roughly, maybe a couple extra runs. T2 bpo's can be copied, giving full max runs in the end. T2 invented bpc's w/o decryptores will yield a maximum of 10% the t2 max run number or lessą most of the time far less. T2 bpo's owners donĘt have to waste time waiting for the invention process or the extra copying time it takes to get the t1 bpc's to run invention on. Again no time wasted with failed invention jobs and no loss of isk from wasted datacores. And again t2 bpo owners don't have to waste slots to run the invention jobs. Using a decryptor cost 10's of millions per job, also in most cases it also lowers the chance of success and will never even come close to offering the ME, PE, or amount of runs as a t2 bpo has. Let alone all three anywhere a t2 bpo's lvl.
Bottom line: T2 Deimos Bpo: with >0.1 ME and PE would cost the owner 69 million to build, these items are all bought from the market and at prices that are all higher than jita pricesą and thatĘs it, owner has a 10 run copy and it costs him less than 70 million to build it will sell for over 100 million on the market. Quick and super easy 30 million profit.
Now lets look at a newer player building the same ship inventing from a t1 bpo. First and foremost there is also a tonne more skills the newer player will need just to attempt an invention on the t1's bpo's bpc's. Secondly inventing a ship has less than a 25% chance of success WITH ALL RELEVANT INVENTION SKILLS MAXED.
First things first: The invention process. Each attempt at invention will require 16 data cores, 8 gallenean starship engineering ones, and 8 Mechanical engineering ones. Each attempt at invention will cost the new player 4.8 MILLION ISK, and going by best case chances one in four should be a success, let me tell you that is rarely the case 1 in 10 in my experience. So total cost to get a single run t2 Deimos bpc for this is a minimum of 19.5 MILLION ISK.
Step two: ship components. Are you ready this is where things get really bad. On a stock t2 invented bpc there is a 50% waste factor so if that ship cost 70 million to build it will cost the newer player 100 million to build. I subtracted 5 million since you will not need two thoraxes. So 19.5 million pluse 100 million equals 120 million.
Now I know some dumba** is going to say, well you could have used a decryptor and I am not inclined to go into all the different kinds of decryptors but again bottom line you will get no significant decrease in ME and PE. And with the sheer cost of the good decryptors, 50+ million for one and its consumed on the job you use it on, will simple present a dead wash for any potential benefits it might grant FOR THAT ONE JOB AND ONLY IF IT WORKS.
These are facts generated on an excel sheet with the market prices from this evening.
The T2 market is broken because of t2 bpo's either ccp needs to nerf their abilities, for instance make them have a -4 me lvl, and reduce their max runs per copy or they need to be removed from game.
I will not respond to any flamers, ragers, or whiners. Don't even bother.
For all those who are new to eve and even just invention do not be swade by the liars. There is a lot of purely psychopathic people in eve and they will tell lies about anything, some time for their own gain, come times because they find it fun. They will eve n lie about things that can be easily researched and confirmed.
/signed total agree something needs to be done about t2 bpos. Either nerf or complete removal.
|
Lupra Nermona
|
Posted - 2010.05.01 08:41:00 -
[133]
no
But I have some other proposals to "equalize" all players: CCP Request 1: delete all event rewards (unique items) CCP Request 2: delete randomly Titan a/o other Capitals CCP Request 3: delete randomly Outposts
|
Russel Trish
|
Posted - 2010.05.02 06:27:00 -
[134]
I am now starting charity fund which will be used to purchase T2 BPO's and then trash them. Please send your donations in support of this cause to Russel Trish.
Thank you in advance for your support. No seriously those who wish to see T2 BPO's gone should put their money where there mouth is, purchase the T2 BPO from its rightfull owner and then trash it. This way the owners are fairly compensated because if it wasnt fair the owner will not sell the T2 BPO.
I have nothing againts T2 BPO but hey if you send me your isk you can rest assured that when enough isk is accumlated you can scratch 1 T2 BPO from the game. On video for all to see. Actually I'm serious now....or let someone else do this, would be interesting I think.
|
Zachary Sikorsky
|
Posted - 2010.05.02 13:05:00 -
[135]
Well if invention is so superior, then scrapping the BPOs wouldn't be such a big issue now would it? Rid eve of them.
|
Don Pellegrino
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2010.05.02 15:35:00 -
[136]
Edited by: Don Pellegrino on 02/05/2010 15:39:44 Hi, I am a pvper.
I have invention alts and I made enough money with invention to buy several T2 BPOs, but I don't want to because they are terrible.
They can't scale like invention and it takes years to come out even.
Apparently, you are unaware of how fast people were getting rid of them back in the lottery. Too much effort for the reward, it's not an isk printing machine.
T2 BPOs are easy to acquire, just have a look at the Sell Orders subforum.
If they are so awesome, why don't you just buy a few of them? Is it because you are poor and want to prevent others from having things you can't afford? or is it because they aren't worth the money? The answer is both.
Edit: I forgot to mention that T2 BPOs were a terrible idea and should never have been implemented, but it is now too late to fix that (same as learning skills). Invention made t2 production "fair" and T2 BPOs are an investment like any other (probably the worst thing to ever invest money in, unless you get a HUGE bargain).
|
Prof Pain
SmokingGuns Corp
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 08:25:00 -
[137]
Edited by: Prof Pain on 03/05/2010 08:35:30 Edited by: Prof Pain on 03/05/2010 08:34:17 supported.
erase the remnants of one of the worst game feature decisions ccp has ever made.
on a side note: i can not by any stretch of my imagination comprehend, why people argue, that bpos are overpriced, therefore have a bad return for the investment, hence are generally worthless and take this as proof for invention being superior. people the whole point is, that these bpos are simply owned by players that won them and dont require any investment. their enormous price tags further show, that even if you would buy them the return seems to be not shabby either.
|
Naomi Knight
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 09:24:00 -
[138]
At least change all of them to -4 ME or less.
|
Jish Ness
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 09:53:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Jade Knight07
Bottom line is everyone that is opposed to this idea either has t2 bpo's or has access to them thru, corp, alliance or friend.
You're an idiot, as with everyone else supporting this thread. T2 BPOs aren't hurting you, its everyone else who invents that hurts you. The more people inventing, the lower the price of the product. EVERYONE can invent while a select few have BPOs. Its the people who invent that decide the market price, not the BPO holders.
FYI, I don't have a T2 BPO. I invent and undercut people like you on the market every 5 minutes, and make you cry tears when you can't understand why you're failing so hard, so that you all can come to the forums and whine about how the game isn't easy enough for you. :)
|
Jobby
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 11:09:00 -
[140]
Yes.
|
|
Chesty McJubblies
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 11:10:00 -
[141]
|
Galgacus
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 11:26:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Cang Zar Anyway, supported.. Along with learning skills, the T2 lottery is probably one of the worst game-design decisions ccp has made.
Agreed, hence they got rid of them. I want my chance to win the lottery, or the removal of the BPOs.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 13:28:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Jade Knight07 Edited by: Jade Knight07 on 01/05/2010 08:03:58 Bottom line is everyone that is opposed to this idea either has t2 bpo's or has access to them thru, corp, alliance or friend. Quote:
Bottom line is that I dont.
|
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 13:41:00 -
[144]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 03/05/2010 13:43:17
Originally by: Jade Knight07 Edited by: Jade Knight07 on 01/05/2010 08:03:58 Bottom line is everyone that is opposed to this idea either has t2 bpo's or has access to them thru, corp, alliance or friend.
I don't own any T2 BPOs and I think it's a horrendous idea, deleting something which does not present a imbalance of any sort and was very expensive to obtain just because of jealousy.
Besides, what's the point with discussing things with someone stupid enough to believe T2 BPO owners "break the T2 market" somehow? Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Don Pellegrino
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 13:45:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 03/05/2010 13:43:17
Originally by: Jade Knight07 Edited by: Jade Knight07 on 01/05/2010 08:03:58 Bottom line is everyone that is opposed to this idea either has t2 bpo's or has access to them thru, corp, alliance or friend.
I don't own any T2 BPOs and I think it's a horrendous idea, deleting something which does not present a imbalance of any sort and was very expensive to obtain just because of jealousy.
Besides, what's the point with discussing things with someone stupid enough to believe T2 BPO owners "break the T2 market" somehow?
OMG, this so much.
|
Richard Christy
|
Posted - 2010.05.03 14:49:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Don Pellegrino
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 03/05/2010 13:43:17
Originally by: Jade Knight07 Edited by: Jade Knight07 on 01/05/2010 08:03:58 Bottom line is everyone that is opposed to this idea either has t2 bpo's or has access to them thru, corp, alliance or friend.
I don't own any T2 BPOs and I think it's a horrendous idea, deleting something which does not present a imbalance of any sort and was very expensive to obtain just because of jealousy.
Besides, what's the point with discussing things with someone stupid enough to believe T2 BPO owners "break the T2 market" somehow?
OMG, this so much.
OMG |
Zedia Zhane
|
Posted - 2010.05.04 02:44:00 -
[147]
Originally by: La Dudette Compensate the owners: convert them into T2 BPCs equivalent to two or three years of continuous production (as many are priced that way), but at -1 ME.
1) Conversion should be into a single BPC with sufficient runs on it to be put into continuous production for roughly that length of time. This would require eliminating software caps to the number of production runs on T2 BPC items, which wouldn't be an issue since the only way to get them in the future would be invention. (Obviously, all BPOs for the same item should be converted into BPCs with the same number of runs, regardless of PE level of the specific BPO.)
2) I think ME on the BPC should remain the same as the original BPO. ME is an important aspect of the BPOs, and expensive to research. (For every day you spend researching ME, you're not building items).
With the caveat that I would prefer to see those things, supported.
|
Fenrill Nerkata
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 22:40:00 -
[148]
support, die T2 BPO !
|
The Alchemyst
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 22:41:00 -
[149]
+1 |
Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 02:09:00 -
[150]
Ridiculous suggestion that has already been discussed more than once in the past. T2 BPOs haven't been the free isk printers that the OP thinks they are, ever since invention was introduced.
Not supported.
/Ben
|
|
Krathos Morpheus
Legion Infernal
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 04:30:00 -
[151]
Originally by: Jade Knight07 T2 bpo base waste factor is -10% base Production lvl -10% vs. base waste factor of an invented bpc -50% and production -50%. T2 bpo's can be research just like t1's. essentially they have less than 0.01% waste factor an production level modifiers. T2 invented bpc's using a decryptors (which cost between 5 million for one that wont do much up to and well over 50 million for the best ones.) you could get -30% ME and PE roughly, maybe a couple extra runs. T2 bpo's can be copied, giving full max runs in the end. T2 invented bpc's w/o decryptores will yield a maximum of 10% the t2 max run number or lessą most of the time far less. T2 bpo's owners donĘt have to waste time waiting for the invention process or the extra copying time it takes to get the t1 bpc's to run invention on. Again no time wasted with failed invention jobs and no loss of isk from wasted datacores. And again t2 bpo owners don't have to waste slots to run the invention jobs. Using a decryptor cost 10's of millions per job, also in most cases it also lowers the chance of success and will never even come close to offering the ME, PE, or amount of runs as a t2 bpo has. Let alone all three anywhere a t2 bpo's lvl.
EVEwatch Sidebar soon "It is the unofficial force ł the Jita irregulars. " |
Baka Lakadaka
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 05:14:00 -
[152]
Firstly, I don't own a T2 BPO.
But no!
T2 BPOs don't influence the market nearly as much as people think. Read up on the QEN articles about production.
Arguments about something being too good and therefore should be made worse are generally bad.
You'd do better arguing the Invention is a poor cousin and needs a buff. I'd support that. Cheaper decryptors, better ME/PE results from invention, etc. would be better outcomes in my view. ______________________ Agony Unleashed Home of the PvP University. |
Gho Toh
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 13:45:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Baka Lakadaka
T2 BPOs don't influence the market nearly as much as people think. Read up on the QEN articles about production.
Arguments about something being too good and therefore should be made worse are generally bad.
You'd do better arguing the Invention is a poor cousin and needs a buff. I'd support that. Cheaper decryptors, better ME/PE results from invention, etc. would be better outcomes in my view.
Dude,
A tiny amount of BPO manufacturers produce more than half of the T2 ships in the game, a tiny amount of BPO manufacturers produce more than 1/3 of the total number of T2 items in the game and that's excluding T2 drones and ammo, of which a tiny amount of BPO manufacturers produce more than 60%
I think it's you who need to read the QEN
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 13:49:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Gho Toh
Originally by: Baka Lakadaka
T2 BPOs don't influence the market nearly as much as people think. Read up on the QEN articles about production.
Arguments about something being too good and therefore should be made worse are generally bad.
You'd do better arguing the Invention is a poor cousin and needs a buff. I'd support that. Cheaper decryptors, better ME/PE results from invention, etc. would be better outcomes in my view.
Dude,
A tiny amount of BPO manufacturers produce more than half of the T2 ships in the game, a tiny amount of BPO manufacturers produce more than 1/3 of the total number of T2 items in the game and that's excluding T2 drones and ammo, of which a tiny amount of BPO manufacturers produce more than 60%
I think it's you who need to read the QEN
Those numbers are so utterly useless, there are so many crap modules i wouldnt even think about producing as the profit margin is non existant. same goes for many ships.
If you strip out the bpos for those crap items ... they would just disappear from the market. (e.g. shield recharger. just to name one). the real interesting numbers are missing in the QEN. like percentage break down for all items. that would give us a real picture of the impact.
but then again ... how can we trust an economist that isnt really playing the game and doesnt understand why prices move to what direction in eve. (pye prices e.g.)
|
Furb Killer
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 13:52:00 -
[155]
They should be removed without doubt
|
Gho Toh
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 14:31:00 -
[156]
Forgot to support this, do'h
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Gho Toh
Originally by: Baka Lakadaka
Dude,
I think it's you who need to read the QEN
Those numbers are so utterly useless, there are so many crap modules i wouldnt even think about producing as the profit margin is non existant. same goes for many ships.
If you strip out the bpos for those crap items ... they would just disappear from the market. (e.g. shield recharger. just to name one). the real interesting numbers are missing in the QEN. like percentage break down for all items. that would give us a real picture of the impact.
Iraqi information minister: Nothing to see here, T2 BPOs have no impact on the market! I repeat, no impact impact on the market and the statistics are probably wrong anyway!
Yeah, like the interceptors, all those crap interceptors with no profit, where the tiny number of BPO manufacturers produce a whopping 84% of the total number produced.
Iraqi information minister: But it's probably different for everything else! I repeat different for everything else!!
|
Li Oiti
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 14:38:00 -
[157]
Change T2 BPO into BPC with a number of run equivalent to Jita monthy sell average. T3 production process the opposite way to get T2 BPC.
Same skills but not Magic chance factor.
Then :
T1 everyone. T2 Empire and you need to Pos invest. T3 Lowsec and lower.
|
Anonymous Trader
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 14:55:00 -
[158]
It's really time for them to die now... |
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 15:18:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
+1 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Peter VonThal
Raygun Technologies
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 15:37:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
This.
Topic not supported.
|
|
Exostema
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 15:54:00 -
[161]
Not supported
|
Tau Dades
Caldari Electrostatik
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 16:05:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Mr LaForge *posting in a "I don't have a T2 BPO so no one else should either" thread*
|
Turmio Taivas
Amarr Financial Removal
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:35:00 -
[163]
No. Because all T2 stuff, modules, ships and ammo will get more expensive. No thanks.
|
Marconus Orion
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 20:44:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Gho Toh Forgot to support this, do'h
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Gho Toh
Originally by: Baka Lakadaka
Dude,
I think it's you who need to read the QEN
Those numbers are so utterly useless, there are so many crap modules i wouldnt even think about producing as the profit margin is non existant. same goes for many ships.
If you strip out the bpos for those crap items ... they would just disappear from the market. (e.g. shield recharger. just to name one). the real interesting numbers are missing in the QEN. like percentage break down for all items. that would give us a real picture of the impact.
Iraqi information minister: Nothing to see here, T2 BPOs have no impact on the market! I repeat, no impact impact on the market and the statistics are probably wrong anyway!
Yeah, like the interceptors, all those crap interceptors with no profit, where the tiny number of BPO manufacturers produce a whopping 84% of the total number produced.
Iraqi information minister: But it's probably different for everything else! I repeat different for everything else!!
It truely is funny to see all kinds of T2 BPO owners running in here making claims about how invention is better than being a T2 BPO owner,T2 BPO's have no affect on the market, if removed the market would crash without them and its even funnier the ones that have T2 BPO's claim they don't and think they have no affect on the market.
I have talked to many T2 BPO owners and having one, is simply an ISK printing press.
|
Julia Venatrix
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 00:20:00 -
[165]
Removing T2 BPOs won't affect the market for popular items, where T2 BPOs can't produce volumes matching the market demand.
However, removal will broaden access to market-based PvP for unpopular items.
Supported. --- Some days you are the pigeon, and some the statue. |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 00:30:00 -
[166]
I understand both sides of this issue. However, I think that ultimately we have a problem where the game would be better off without them, but that they don't play enough of a role in the game to justify destroying the absolutely massive incredible investments built around them. People complain, for example, that they can't get into the T2 market because T2 BPOs keep them out. However, I think it's eminently clear that there is plenty of competition for T2 modules that actually have a market to speak of to start with!
IMO, HTFU... it's a lot easier to say "delete the other guy's 650 billion ISK!" than it is to say to delete your own.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire |
Don Pellegrino
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 00:55:00 -
[167]
Many people apparently don't realize that buffing invention won't make invention more profitable, it will only bring crash both market prices and cost prices. So nothing will change, margins won't be better. Those margins are already good enough, to be honest.
|
TheBlueMonkey
Gallente Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 16:05:00 -
[168]
People need to stop quoting a hack who's dropped back to doing economic break down for a computer game.
Saying 50% of T2 is made from bpo's means nothing because it's not in context.
How many mods\ships\ammo items are there first?
Things like mining crystals take a ages to burn out so the demand for them is limited and BPO's will dominate that market BUT if the bpo holders decided to charge 50mil a crystal, the inventors would rush in and bring the price crashing down in seconds.
Actual, in context numbers are needed before you can call this.
so
Stop *****ing about something that a preschool level economist is talking about.
I mean, if he was good at his job then surely he'd be getting paid alot more than a videogame company could pay him.
Also, If he were doing both and had eve as a side project, what do you think he'd spend more time on? A game or a job that pays x hundread k a year?
Out of context data is irelivant it's like basing a car company around "we buy any car" so? I'll buy any car too, I'll give you ś500 for a perfectly working year old bently.
Out of context data, pay attention. --
Nothing is worthless, you may have gotten it for free but it still has an inherent value
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari TerraNovae
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 16:29:00 -
[169]
Oddly enough I took a bet with a friend of mine who owns a nice T2 BPO. he would build from that one and I would do the same by invention with my alt and we would see who made better profit in the course of a month.
I beat him because my volume way outperformed his volume. He could build cheaper but I could mass produce due to having a lot more BPC's
So I made my profit in volume instead of by trying to get mucho ISK per sale.
|
Julia Venatrix
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 17:40:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Killer Gandry Oddly enough I took a bet with a friend of mine who owns a nice T2 BPO. he would build from that one and I would do the same by invention with my alt and we would see who made better profit in the course of a month.
Which BPO? That makes rather a lot of difference. --- Some days you are the pigeon, and some the statue. |
|
RedLion
State Constructions
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 22:59:00 -
[171]
this, or start reseeding t2 bpo either way is ok by me
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The Gallenteans must be destroyed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
dontknowaboutmyships
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 00:16:00 -
[172]
ITT: People whining about things they want but can't afford.
Why doesn't everyone get a free titan!
Not supported.
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 02:45:00 -
[173]
Originally by: La Dudette CCP started a transition from BPO to invention, but never finished it. This has consequences: a small number of people are able to circumvent invention and make exorbitant profits that inventors cannot compete with.
You're missing it. Invention wasn't supposed to replace BPOs, it was supposed to turn ridiculously high profits into moderate ones. It has succeeded in this beyond anyone's greatest expectations, and actually gone further, turning ridiculously high profits into below-average ones in most cases.
Quote:
- The system is self-reinforcing, as the owners will naturally make the most money and continue to usurp further BPOs
T2 BPOs are about 5th or 6th on the list of things that make the most money in this game. Suggest you try the first five.
Quote: The system continues to be fundamentally unfair to new players: there are still people out there with a blank cheque that was won in the lottery, not earned. Every one such person keeps tens to hundreds of inventors out of the market.
The lottery was unfair, but those cheques have been cashed. Now you are left with people who paid good isk for items that removing would be fundamentally less fair, than continuing to allow new players a goal to strive towards. Every inventor can easily replace the output of multiple BPOs. There are over 10,000 T2 BPOs, there are tens of thousands of inventors. Inventors keep inventors out of the market by working to lower and lower margins as they continually become more efficient at it.
Quote: CCP is inconsistent: rare moons have been addressed through alchemy, but this hasn't. Worse, rare moons POSs can be attacked, BPOs are safe in stations.
Alchemy didn't at all address rare moons in the way T2 BPOs have ALREADY been addressed though invention. Alchemy moons can be attacked, just like rare moons. BPOs can remain safe, just like invention. On the other hand, any T2 BPO owner who needs to come close to making a return within A DECADE, needs to use a POS array, making them vulnerable to attack, and also reducing the efficiency of their BPO to worse than the ME-1 possible with invention for a lower investment.
Quote: [list]Make the market function properly: eliminate T2 BPOs.
The market is already functioning properly, it's just that you do not want to pay what others have for the same thing, you would rather kick over their sandcastle than spend time building one.
Quote: Reactions, please. If you have a vested interest, declare it at least: that way we at least we know what you stand for.
I have a Hemorphite Mining Crystal II BPO, I BOUGHT it, many years ago, and have not built off it for several years, as they currently sell for 75% of the BPO build cost (and sadly do not refine to their component parts). I would stand to gain HEAVILY though removal of T2 BPOs, because I have quite a stock, in fact, I could solo supply the market for this item for many years, and without other BPOs out there, I would make much more isk than owning the BPO or selling it, would ever make.
Removal of BPOs wouldn't gain anything for people who do not have one, not a single isk. Invention profit is the least amount of isk people are willing to accept, and no more. You see this when every time a new item is introduced, the market floods with inventors, and then dissipates as profits evaporate in increasingly small time frames.
The problem is simply a psychological one. Someone else has something, they worked hard for it, you do not want to do the same, so they shouldn't have it either, even though you gain no benefit at all in the destruction of their hard work.
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 03:02:00 -
[174]
Originally by: Dodgy Past Yet many people have enough T2 BPOs to fill all their production slots so that limitation isn't relevant to them.
I have one T2 BPO, which actually never fills any slot because it's not worth building off. Meanwhile I fill 50-60 production slots at all times, and could potentially fill 30 more if I honestly wanted to spend the RL time.
Very few people who have T2 BPOs have enough to fill all their production slots. There are more people with T2 BPOs that make no isk AT ALL than there are people with more than a handful of them.
Most T2 BPOs are less profitable occupying a slot than occupying that same slot with invented BPCs or something T1. Only the very few make 'reasonable' profits, and those sell for the profit they would otherwise make in the better part of a decade.
Quote: Therefore to make running t2 BPC from bpo worthwhile you would have to sell the BPC for more than the cost of the built items it could produce, which is why you never see them.
I have done this with my T2 BPO, because you actually lose money to build off it, selling a BPC for 'anything' is better than that.
Quote: So if a certain BPO makes you 5 billion a year at full capacity, you might value it for a three year break even at 15 + 5 (say). This certainly seems to be the way sell order discussions go most of the time. The only reason you would justify a higher premium is if you have additional BPOs and you can control an entire market segment.
In any case, the first part of this value is addressed by this proposal: convert the BPO into enough BPCs to last for X years. The premium is lost, but the profit is not.
I don't know of any T2 BPOs that are only going for 3 years profit, most are 7-10 years of continuous building at a POS array. Honestly, do you think there is any difference between retaining BPOs, and converting them into 10 years worth of BPCs? Your advantage is only going to come after 10 years if it was one really big BPC, and you will shoot invention in the foot if you convert them into multiple BPCs which allow people to do their production in parallel.
Quote: There is no real limit (other than raw skills) to the number of T2 BPCs the inventor can have cooking at any one time.
There actually isn't a limit at all, as long as the profit you are making exceeds the cost of buying GTCs, you can have infinite slots going. This is why invention profits for casual inventors don't look super great, they're competing against people that only need to make about 13,000 isk/hr per slot to break even, anything about that is profit.
Quote: I would refrain from voting for the abolishment of T2 BPOs if invented BPC ME's could be brought to levels > 5. There are enough proposals for this. If that was done, BPOs would still have an advantage, but at least the disparity of the production costs is reduced. And this would ofc bring T2 ship prices down, which I would welcome.
No they wouldn't, the effective level of T2 BPOs is less than -1 ME as they need to be built at rapid facilities to generate the amount of isk for even 5-10 year break even points. Invention, which is low risk, low investment would be 'better' than the BPOs. Not to mention there would be less profit in invention because it would be easier.
Quote: There are these items which are unavailable for newcommers to eve just because they werent playing when bpos were seeded, only possible way to get them is to buy them from their current owners willing to sell them at a very overpriced rate.
So what you are saying, is that T2 BPOs are overpriced, and not worth how much people pay for them. Isn't that an argument for boosting them? If they're not worth it, then surely the can't be overpowered, given the disparity being argued is one of cost, and not utility, since the end product is the same.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 04:55:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Krathos Morpheus
Originally by: Jade Knight07 T2 bpo base waste factor is -10% base Production lvl -10% vs. base waste factor of an invented bpc -50% and production -50%. T2 bpo's can be research just like t1's. essentially they have less than 0.01% waste factor an production level modifiers. T2 invented bpc's using a decryptors (which cost between 5 million for one that wont do much up to and well over 50 million for the best ones.) you could get -30% ME and PE roughly, maybe a couple extra runs. T2 bpo's can be copied, giving full max runs in the end. T2 invented bpc's w/o decryptores will yield a maximum of 10% the t2 max run number or lessą most of the time far less. T2 bpo's owners donĘt have to waste time waiting for the invention process or the extra copying time it takes to get the t1 bpc's to run invention on. Again no time wasted with failed invention jobs and no loss of isk from wasted datacores. And again t2 bpo owners don't have to waste slots to run the invention jobs. Using a decryptor cost 10's of millions per job, also in most cases it also lowers the chance of success and will never even come close to offering the ME, PE, or amount of runs as a t2 bpo has. Let alone all three anywhere a t2 bpo's lvl.
QFT
|
Llyandrian
Amarr Livestock Science Exchange
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 10:26:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Turmio Taivas No. Because all T2 stuff, modules, ships and ammo will get more expensive. No thanks.
Less competition = higher prices. NO!
|
Ka choop
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 11:46:00 -
[177]
T2 BPO's should go in some way because they corner the market. How much they corner the market depends on the volume traded.
For products where T2 BPO owners can cover 5% invention will cover 95%. But, If demand is at a point where T2 BPO owners can cover 95% of the market, invention, while dictating the price can only ever cover the remaining 5%.
There is no way any non T2 BPO owner (the inventor) can push out a T2 owner. Not by doing it better not by making better deals with mineral suppliers, not by investing more time. It's just not going to happen. For a dynamic market this is what you would want and T2 makes the market less dynamic, hence a bad thing.
It's long overdue that the market dinosaurs hit their extinction.
|
Kyo Haku
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 13:43:00 -
[178]
Nope, works fine as it is. A lot of T2 stuff is expensive enough already, we don't need prices higher.
-- "Far be it from me to stand in judgment. I prefer to sit." -Stephen Colbert |
Xahara
StarFleet Enterprises Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 14:08:00 -
[179]
If anything, as mentioned before, boost invention. Taking away T2 BPOs would raise the price of T2 items and that's exactly what CCP tried to bring down after the moon exploit scandal, with alchemy. Not supported.
|
xavier69
Stark Enterprises LLC
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 01:57:00 -
[180]
Edited by: xavier69 on 10/05/2010 01:57:14 In my exp over the past 1 1/2 years doing invention, I have made 70% - 80% profit margin continually. That's covering my cost and 70-80% more.
Some things to consider in T2 production,
#1 Who can use what your making is it a mainstream item or is this a small market item that requires tons of skill points ? This is going to effect how much you sell and in the end your profit margin as items that don't sell fast get flooded on the market and there prices drop horribly.
#2 Knowing your market and where to sell, If you sell your stuff in Jita you better be a volume seller as the profit margins in that area are the sux.
#3 I think the biggest mistake people make here is they train up the relevant skills with out doing any research for the demand of a product or where to sell it to maximize profit and when they get the news flash that its already a flooded item on the market with nearly no profit margin they get angry. You should watch the market in the region you want to sell pick the item in question figure out the costs involved and how much you will make and then research how much dose the sell price fluctuate in a 2-3 month period generally you need to create a excel spread sheet to properly calculate this complex equation.
Invention is not for everyone some people are more suited to role of miner its alot simpler.
In the end I think this has little to do with BPO and more to do with supply and demand and the lack of research of those getting into Invention and item creation.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |