| 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?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |