Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar V O O D O O
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 16:22:00 -
[1]
http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf
T2 bpo's gives unfair advantage to people owning them. There is no way to get them now, unless you buy it from another owner. Check market data released like 84% interceptors are made from bpos. There is no way to compete in that market. Most T2 items gives you loss when inventing them.
Solution one: Seed T2 BPO's to market or research agent shops Solution two: Remove or change T2 BPO's into 1 year long run BPC's Soplution three: While inventing you have chance to get T2 BPO
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 16:37:00 -
[2]
No.. let the topic die already.
Inventors actually have an advantage on BPO holders since they can effectively produce more by an exponential amount and also dump stock and switch into a different model at the drop of a hat.
Remember, a BPO holder can only produce off a single print at any given time. A good invention account can literally produce hundreds more of the same item. |
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar V O O D O O
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 16:48:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria No.. let the topic die already.
Inventors actually have an advantage on BPO holders since they can effectively produce more by an exponential amount and also dump stock and switch into a different model at the drop of a hat.
Remember, a BPO holder can only produce off a single print at any given time. A good invention account can literally produce hundreds more of the same item.
Especialy that bpo is 2x quicker per single slot, and owner can invent also ? 60D GTC - shattared link |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 16:53:00 -
[4]
Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/08/2009 16:54:16
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf
T2 bpo's gives unfair advantage to people owning them. There is no way to get them now, unless you buy it from another owner. Check market data released like 84% interceptors are made from bpos. There is no way to compete in that market. Most T2 items gives you loss when inventing them.
Solution 1: Change to a different market. Solution 2: Stop making interceptors and make something else. Solution 3: Accept that your interceptor sales may be slower than a BPO owner and adjust production accordingly.
In EVE as in the real business world, you don't ask the market to change to meet your needs. You change to meet the needs of the market.
Or you go out of business.
Edit: I so fail at spelling some days. --Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Hoo Is
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 17:07:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kazzac Elentria No.. let the topic die already.
Inventors actually have an advantage on BPO holders since they can effectively produce more by an exponential amount and also dump stock and switch into a different model at the drop of a hat.
Remember, a BPO holder can only produce off a single print at any given time. A good invention account can literally produce hundreds more of the same item.
Fail logic is fail
BPO holder has all advantages due to no need for invention (datacores, copies, failure rate) simply stick it on the line and press go.
---- a reply which adds nothing to a thread or results in a thread being bumped with no new discussion worthy content is considered spam and as such warrants a forum ban |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 17:09:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 18/08/2009 17:09:01
Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/08/2009 16:54:16
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf
T2 bpo's gives unfair advantage to people owning them. There is no way to get them now, unless you buy it from another owner. Check market data released like 84% interceptors are made from bpos. There is no way to compete in that market. Most T2 items gives you loss when inventing them.
Solution 1: Change to a different market. Solution 2: Stop making interceptors and make something else. Solution 3: Accept that your interceptor sales may be slower than a BPO owner and adjust production accordingly.
In EVE as in the real business world, you don't ask the market to change to meet your needs. You change to meet the needs of the market.
Or you go out of business.
Edit: I so fail at spelling some days.
This
/Thread ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
I SoStoned
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 17:11:00 -
[7]
As a T2 producer using both BPOs and Invention, I argue that this entire complaint holds no water whatsoever.
With one of my BPO's I can build, at most, 1127 units of a particular item a month using 1 manufacturing slot. Inventing that same module allows me to use the entire available manufacturing capacity of my local station with several accounts. Granted the waste is a little steep at 50%, and it takes me twice as long to build each unit, but at the end of the same month I can produce 15000 units of that item (again, using several characters).
Using just 1 account I can produce 1127 with one build slot and 4300 with my other nine build slots.
The net return is that my Invention far, far outpaces my BPO production and returns me more profit over time than that BPO.
|
Nian Banks
Berserkers of Aesir
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 17:20:00 -
[8]
If this was a real market, there wouldn't be a finite amount of T2 BPO's, corporations would be inventing them.
I have no problem with T2 BPO's existing, I do however have an issue with the fact that there are no new T2 BPO's been released. Bring back the T2 lotteries.
If that isn't acceptable, then increase the invented T2 BPC's Material Efficiency to a decent positive, such as ME25. Also increase the maximum possible runs for the T2 BPC's.
If people want T2 BPO's to stay, then invention needs a hefty buff, thats all there is to it.
BTW: I will be quite honest, anyone who disagrees with T2 producion BPO's and BPC's needing a rebalance, are not thinking of the betterment of EVE but in their own selfish self interest. For those people, I care not what happens to you and your self interest, you can be damned all I care.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 17:37:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Nian Banks BTW: I will be quite honest, anyone who disagrees with T2 producion BPO's and BPC's needing a rebalance, are not thinking of the betterment of EVE but in their own selfish self interest. For those people, I care not what happens to you and your self interest, you can be damned all I care.
This is the same reason I hate political debate a lot of the time. The assumption that people who disagree with you are not misguided, don't have different priorities, but are simply evil is one of the most poisonous aspects of political debate, and it disgusts me how many people adhere to that simplistic a worldview. Do us all a favour - operate on the assumption that most people who disagree with you do so with noble intentions. Not all - jackasses exist - but most.
In this case, I genuinely do feel that this change would utterly defeat the purpose of the invention/BPO split, and genuinely would make the game worse. T2 lotteries in the first place were a mistake, but we're stuck with them. Let's not screw it up further, please.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 17:56:00 -
[10]
WTF
do you really fail at the search function? we just had that topic like 2 weeks ago.
not supported in any form.
(and yes i am heavily doing invention.)
|
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 19:22:00 -
[11]
T2 BPO at 10x - 100x T1 BPO cost , freely available on the market. Invented T2 BPC inherit T1 BPC Me/Pe div 10 or there abouts.
Current situation is lol RP breaking apart from anything else. I'm sure Lai Dai would give away there Cerberus BPO for example and then never bother selling any for profit.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 20:01:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Dav Varan
I'm sure Lai Dai would give away there Cerberus BPO for example and then never bother selling any for profit.
Then you're a fracking idiot. No company is going to just "give away" anything that might earn them a profit - and if they think it gives them a competitive advantage, they won't sell it either, unless they think selling it offers them a larger advantage.
In your logical failspew above, Lai Dai would not only have NOT given away a Cerebus BPO, they would routinely sue the crap out of anyone that even so much as tried to invent a new one.
Dumbass. --Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 20:20:00 -
[13]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
In your logical failspew above, Lai Dai would not only have NOT given away a Cerebus BPO, they would routinely sue the crap out of anyone that even so much as tried to invent a new one.
Dumbass.
That would be one way to move more production to low/null sec.
That being said... I really would like to see SOME path (even if it is long and breaking even takes years) to obtain new T2 BPOs. For me at least I would see it as something to work towards, if not for the ISK generated but for the fun of building up a good solid collection.
|
Grath Telkin
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 20:36:00 -
[14]
Man i love these threads, the t2 BPO holders come out of the woodwork frothing at the mouth at the slightest mention of their precious BPO's leaving the game. Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 20:44:00 -
[15]
did you notice that even non BPO owner tell those people that their logic is flawed?
try to sustain the supply for a decent sized alliance just from T2 bpos.
|
Sun Clausewitz
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 20:47:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Grath Telkin Man i love these threads, the t2 BPO holders come out of the woodwork frothing at the mouth at the slightest mention of their precious BPO's leaving the game.
Seriously!
I am complaining that my RIG BPO collection is almost worthless now, and I have to buy and research and 2 more entire sets...
But heaven forbid you touch a T2 BPO!!!
Pick Three: Caldari/PVP/Solo/Success |
Kalintos Tyl
V O O D O O
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 21:15:00 -
[17]
Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/08/2009 16:54:16
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/pdf/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf
T2 bpo's gives unfair advantage to people owning them. There is no way to get them now, unless you buy it from another owner. Check market data released like 84% interceptors are made from bpos. There is no way to compete in that market. Most T2 items gives you loss when inventing them.
Solution 1: Change to a different market. Solution 2: Stop making interceptors and make something else. Solution 3: Accept that your interceptor sales may be slower than a BPO owner and adjust production accordingly.
In EVE as in the real business world, you don't ask the market to change to meet your needs. You change to meet the needs of the market.
Or you go out of business.
Edit: I so fail at spelling some days.
yes move to that 20% T2 items that make profit inventing, and competition is high, good luck 60D GTC - shattared link |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 21:18:00 -
[18]
there are more ways do adapt and earn money.
after reading the numbers from the QEN i should wonder why we make so much isk with that. see you on the battlefield err market. :D
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 22:14:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Grath Telkin Man i love these threads, the t2 BPO holders come out of the woodwork frothing at the mouth at the slightest mention of their precious BPO's leaving the game.
I've never even seen a T2 BPO, let alone owned one. My primary income source is invention. And I'm telling you that this is a terrible idea.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 22:48:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Grath Telkin Man i love these threads, the t2 BPO holders come out of the woodwork frothing at the mouth at the slightest mention of their precious BPO's leaving the game.
Are you really this stupid? Or are you just trolling us? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter. --Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 23:14:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Nian Banks
If that isn't acceptable, then increase the invented T2 BPC's Material Efficiency to a decent positive, such as ME25. Also increase the maximum possible runs for the T2 BPC's.
Before whining at least inform yourself.
Look the time needed to get a T2 BPO to ME 25. Ans the advantages of doing that.
For modules it modify only the asteroid minerals requirement (and the same for the negative ME), so a negligible part of the cost.
For ships it is a bit more important, but anything above ME 5-10 is mostly a waste of time.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 23:22:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 18/08/2009 23:22:22
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl Check market data released like 84% interceptors are made from bpos.
Why you don't cite the other data?
89% of all the hulks come from BPC, 75% of all the HAC 88% of Cap rechargers II 92% of all the Cov Ops cloak
Easy to argument using only a selected section for the data.
You see my "friend" it work in the reverse. It is not that inventors don't invent interceptors because the evil BPO owners push them away, inventors avoid inventing interceptors because they can use their resources for better things like inventing HACs.
So BPO owner are those left to cover most of the demand as they can't change production.
Remove the BPO and you will still have very few people inventing interceptors as the HAC still pay more for the time and resources used.
Edit: spelling
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 23:53:00 -
[23]
Soulution tree would be good. Make it so every one has a chance to get a t2bpo form invention. 0,00001% chance or so.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 00:20:00 -
[24]
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Soulution tree would be good. Make it so every one has a chance to get a t2bpo form invention. 0,00001% chance or so.
an even worse form of the lottery. just *NO* if you want to buy a t2 bpo. earn the money. buy one. it is as simple as that.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 03:21:00 -
[25]
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Soulution tree would be good. Make it so every one has a chance to get a t2bpo form invention. 0,00001% chance or so.
The T2 BPO lottery sucked because it was chance based. Invention (esp on ships) sucks because it is chanced based.
If any solution for introducing new T2 BPOs into the game is going to not suck, it should not be chance based.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 04:25:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Nekopyat Invention (esp on ships) sucks because it is chanced based.
If any solution for introducing new T2 BPOs into the game is going to not suck, it should not be chance based.
If invention is meaningfully chance-based, you're doing it wrong. Invent within your budget, and regression to the mean is your friend. If a few successes or failures is what will make or break you, you're too close to the edge, back off and try again.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 07:12:00 -
[27]
If this is right (I have some doubt):
Quote: [Interceptors] Due to their fast build time, BPO holders can churn them out quickly in great numbers, filling a large portion of the demand for these ships.
the solution is fairly simple without need for absurd positive ME levels from invention, simply remove the negative PE levels, making invention baseline value for PE 0.
Invention has already a time sink in the invention part of the process, so it can be removed in the build part.
My opinion is that it will only further reduce the margins for inventors without increasing the selection of invented items, but it can be worth a try.
|
Carniflex
Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 11:20:00 -
[28]
|
Brian Khan
Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 11:21:00 -
[29]
|
Vlad Wormwing
StarHunt Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 11:22:00 -
[30]
|
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 16:31:00 -
[31]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Dav Varan
I'm sure Lai Dai would give away there Cerberus BPO for example and then never bother selling any for profit.
Then you're a fracking idiot. No company is going to just "give away" anything that might earn them a profit - and if they think it gives them a competitive advantage, they won't sell it either, unless they think selling it offers them a larger advantage.
In your logical failspew above, Lai Dai would not only have NOT given away a Cerebus BPO, they would routinely sue the crap out of anyone that even so much as tried to invent a new one.
Dumbass.
Companies licence out technology all the time. This is the equivelent of selling production rights.
Its rp breaking that while T1 stuff BPO's can be purchased T2 BPO's cant. T3 BPO's should be available also, leaving production component aquisition as the Player contributed requirement.
|
Nian Banks
Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 17:07:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Nian Banks
If that isn't acceptable, then increase the invented T2 BPC's Material Efficiency to a decent positive, such as ME25. Also increase the maximum possible runs for the T2 BPC's.
Before whining at least inform yourself.
Look the time needed to get a T2 BPO to ME 25. Ans the advantages of doing that.
For modules it modify only the asteroid minerals requirement (and the same for the negative ME), so a negligible part of the cost.
For ships it is a bit more important, but anything above ME 5-10 is mostly a waste of time.
I highlighted and underlined the most important part that you conveniently ignored yet still quoted.
Just because the Material Efficiency is not a great benefit does not mean it shouldn't be improved. Much like one feather is insignificant but when you have enough, its a nice mattress. So it is for one small change amongst many, they stack up.
Still I personally believe that if people invented BPC's that came with more runs in them, their profit would go up nicely. As it should. And if you make the ME to be a positive, then as you say ship production will benefit, but more importantly, its one less thing people can complain about when it comes to invention v's T2 BPO's.
|
Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 01:44:00 -
[33]
Sigh.
Been here, discussed that.
No.
/Ben
|
marie blueprint
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 02:53:00 -
[34]
stop asking for a nerf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ask for a buff a way to get more t2 bpos!!...maybe useing bpos to try and invent a t2 bpo? with -6/-6 stats so you have to resurch them up to a positive?
|
Black Sunder
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:06:00 -
[35]
Originally by: marie blueprint stop asking for a nerf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ask for a buff a way to get more t2 bpos!!...maybe using bpos to try and invent a t2 bpo? with -6/-6 stats so you have to research them up to a positive?
supported.
|
Slave 2739FKZ
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 17:07:00 -
[36]
No, giving more T2 BPO's are an horrible idea to break the production of T2 items and make it as profitless as T1 production.
Maybe what should happend is items not worth inventing being fixed? Also tune a bit the production times of certain items like ceptors, so BPO's can't cover the full demand, and it's fine. |
Kasi Kasai
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 20:18:00 -
[37]
|
hired goon
|
Posted - 2009.08.21 13:26:00 -
[38]
-omg-
|
spear zero
|
Posted - 2009.08.21 21:43:00 -
[39]
wtf you do next ? free titan skills for every noob ? i mean t2 was always expensive isk wise and skill wise, not that you have some skills now u wany to have oportunity to cheap produce ? cmon like if real world we have rich ****s and poor kids but its gonna stay that way, we got a lot by invention now you wanna more ? u got decent iskies in empire you got safe wars in empire ( FW) cmon now u want t2 to be moved away from 0.0 ? i mean in few months you should ask that t2 stuff will be build with tritanium only cmon, put some efford in this game and stop whinning like a *****es cause its really sad, since i joined this game ive achived more and more but now game with those all fixes adds etc got really boring and there is to much monotony in it, every thing is getting ballanced, few more fixed and 10 yrs old players will be balanced with ****ing noobs, you may get more new players but even more old quitting, more tears plz how hard this game is ******s
|
Blackjack Turner
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2009.08.22 00:50:00 -
[40]
Originally by: I SoStoned As a T2 producer using both BPOs and Invention, I argue that this entire complaint holds no water whatsoever.
With one of my BPO's I can build, at most, 1127 units of a particular item a month using 1 manufacturing slot. Inventing that same module allows me to use the entire available manufacturing capacity of my local station with several accounts. Granted the waste is a little steep at 50%, and it takes me twice as long to build each unit, but at the end of the same month I can produce 15000 units of that item (again, using several characters).
Using just 1 account I can produce 1127 with one build slot and 4300 with my other nine build slots.
The net return is that my Invention far, far outpaces my BPO production and returns me more profit over time than that BPO.
This "single T2 BPO, only one manufacturing slot argument" is bull. Anyone reading it knows it. You can make multiple max run copies and be making 30+ runs using alternate characters, and each copy will have the same ME/PE as the original. If you are indeed only using the original for a single factory slot you're being silly. Due to the much better ME/PE on your T2 BPO you can manufacture that item at far less cost than the inventor of the same item who uses a T2 BPC.
|
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.08.22 01:19:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Blackjack Turner
Originally by: I SoStoned As a T2 producer using both BPOs and Invention, I argue that this entire complaint holds no water whatsoever.
With one of my BPO's I can build, at most, 1127 units of a particular item a month using 1 manufacturing slot. Inventing that same module allows me to use the entire available manufacturing capacity of my local station with several accounts. Granted the waste is a little steep at 50%, and it takes me twice as long to build each unit, but at the end of the same month I can produce 15000 units of that item (again, using several characters).
Using just 1 account I can produce 1127 with one build slot and 4300 with my other nine build slots.
The net return is that my Invention far, far outpaces my BPO production and returns me more profit over time than that BPO.
This "single T2 BPO, only one manufacturing slot argument" is bull. Anyone reading it knows it. You can make multiple max run copies and be making 30+ runs using alternate characters, and each copy will have the same ME/PE as the original. If you are indeed only using the original for a single factory slot you're being silly. Due to the much better ME/PE on your T2 BPO you can manufacture that item at far less cost than the inventor of the same item who uses a T2 BPC.
and now please check the stats how long it takes to make a max run copy of a t2 bpo. to help you a bit. it is insanely long. compared to e.g. copying t1.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.08.22 01:33:00 -
[42]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Blackjack Turner
Originally by: I SoStoned As a T2 producer using both BPOs and Invention, I argue that this entire complaint holds no water whatsoever.
With one of my BPO's I can build, at most, 1127 units of a particular item a month using 1 manufacturing slot. Inventing that same module allows me to use the entire available manufacturing capacity of my local station with several accounts. Granted the waste is a little steep at 50%, and it takes me twice as long to build each unit, but at the end of the same month I can produce 15000 units of that item (again, using several characters).
Using just 1 account I can produce 1127 with one build slot and 4300 with my other nine build slots.
The net return is that my Invention far, far outpaces my BPO production and returns me more profit over time than that BPO.
This "single T2 BPO, only one manufacturing slot argument" is bull. Anyone reading it knows it. You can make multiple max run copies and be making 30+ runs using alternate characters, and each copy will have the same ME/PE as the original. If you are indeed only using the original for a single factory slot you're being silly. Due to the much better ME/PE on your T2 BPO you can manufacture that item at far less cost than the inventor of the same item who uses a T2 BPC.
and now please check the stats how long it takes to make a max run copy of a t2 bpo. to help you a bit. it is insanely long. compared to e.g. copying t1.
And even T1 copying takes about 5x as long as producing the same number of runs by straight manufacture.
|
Kaito Haakkainen
|
Posted - 2009.08.22 12:53:00 -
[43]
Supported.
Removal would level the playing field on t2 research and manufacture. True, many t2 BPO owners will take a loss on their investment, they won't be the first or last to lose profit to an act of "God" and have been aware of the possibility of their removal since the end of the lottery. Such a small number of people controlling even 8% of the Cov Ops Cloak market via the existence of a mechanic unavailable to the majority is a mockery of EVE's much lauded player controlled market, let alone the much higher figures seen for other products.
I'm a firm believer that opportunities should be equal and that skill and dedication should be what sorts the wheat from the chaff.
|
Volitaire
|
Posted - 2009.08.22 13:06:00 -
[44]
No, go to another market and stop crying.
|
Kaito Haakkainen
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.22 13:52:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Volitaire No, go to another market and stop crying.
I'm currently involved in neither invention or t2 manufacture, I'm a margin trader pure and simple, I go where the money is. My opinions on this matter are driven by my beliefs regarding good game design and equality amongst players. If there were an effectively indestructible combat item that provided a clear PvP advantage while being unobtainable by the majority of players there would be uproar and it's removal would be almost unanimously agreed. I don't see why competition between players in another format shouldn't be held to the same standard.
Though I must say your fine logic and wit are very convincing.
|
wootonius
Madhatters Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 03:45:00 -
[46]
too many people/isk behind keeping the current system in place, but why not shake things up some more.
|
I SoStoned
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 10:16:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Blackjack Turner
Originally by: I SoStoned As a T2 producer using both BPOs and Invention, I argue that this entire complaint holds no water whatsoever.
With one of my BPO's I can build, at most, 1127 units of a particular item a month using 1 manufacturing slot. Inventing that same module allows me to use the entire available manufacturing capacity of my local station with several accounts. Granted the waste is a little steep at 50%, and it takes me twice as long to build each unit, but at the end of the same month I can produce 15000 units of that item (again, using several characters).
Using just 1 account I can produce 1127 with one build slot and 4300 with my other nine build slots.
The net return is that my Invention far, far outpaces my BPO production and returns me more profit over time than that BPO.
This "single T2 BPO, only one manufacturing slot argument" is bull. Anyone reading it knows it. You can make multiple max run copies and be making 30+ runs using alternate characters, and each copy will have the same ME/PE as the original. If you are indeed only using the original for a single factory slot you're being silly. Due to the much better ME/PE on your T2 BPO you can manufacture that item at far less cost than the inventor of the same item who uses a T2 BPC.
Not particularly bright, are you?
While I'm copying the BPO (which takes 2 to 3 times *longer* than it takes to produce a manufactured good) I'm not manufacturing with it... in other words, it cuts my production on that BPO by over 60% when I finally do start producing all of those BPCs.
And T1 BPOs (for the most part) copy at considerably faster than the time required to produce with one, and you can purchase multiple originals.
So, my argument stands. T2 BPOs are not ISK prints like they once were. Some are still up there, but nothing like they once were. By the large the margins, due to invention, have come down massively. Only the broken moon minerals mechanic is keeping them inflated (and even so meta-4 items are now often far more expensive than T2).
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |