|
|
| 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.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 10:19:00 -
[2]
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.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 16:53:00 -
[3]
 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 -
[4]
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.
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 17:33:00 -
[5]
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".
|
La Dudette
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 21:36:00 -
[6]
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.
|
|
|
| |
|