Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Athar Mu
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 21:12:00 -
[31]
Dunno what you are inventing but I'm making a ton of isk off invention.
Like I always ask in threads like this;
'Why whenever I do the maths for inventing Marauders it is always not profitable? Cos they don't have BPO's, and by following your logic they should be profitable because they don't have a T2 BPO making them unprofitable. Or has someone managed to get a BPO for them and not told anyone?!'
|
Voogru
Gallente Massive Damage MACHI MISCHIEF
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 21:25:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Athar Mu Dunno what you are inventing but I'm making a ton of isk off invention.
Like I always ask in threads like this;
'Why whenever I do the maths for inventing Marauders it is always not profitable? Cos they don't have BPO's, and by following your logic they should be profitable because they don't have a T2 BPO making them unprofitable. Or has someone managed to get a BPO for them and not told anyone?!'
BoB has the T2 Battleship BPO's
True story.
Hate Farmers? Click Here |
SurrenderMonkey
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 21:45:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Athar Mu Dunno what you are inventing but I'm making a ton of isk off invention.
Like I always ask in threads like this;
'Why whenever I do the maths for inventing Marauders it is always not profitable? Cos they don't have BPO's, and by following your logic they should be profitable because they don't have a T2 BPO making them unprofitable. Or has someone managed to get a BPO for them and not told anyone?!'
If the T2 BPO complaints were really about the ability to make money, this would pretty much be the end of it. The complaint isn't centered around the ability to make money, though, nor even around actual "fairness" - merely the perception of fairness. --------------- Faction-Militia:Player-Alliance::Newbie-corp:Player-corp |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 21:59:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Future Mutant Edited by: Future Mutant on 12/03/2010 21:09:04
Originally by: Ghoest Im really not seeing whats incoherent.
Id be happy to have anything useful and valuable, but its not my goal. I think that point was clear.
The incoherent part... You think there is an imbalance between t2 bpo's and invented t2 bpc's. Your solution is to make t2 bpo's worse material wise then invented bpc's. (you dont specify if the t2 bpo's should be "locked" at that me- though i assume thats your intent or its just a complete waste of time)
By your (all too common) complaint it is obvious you have never used a t2 bpo and prolly dont invent either.
My solution? Let the me/pe on the bpc used for invention transfer over to the invented bpc. Alternatively you could make the invented bpc "researchable"
Either is more reasonable then "nerf t2 bpos".
If you looked at my follow up posts youll see I agreed with another poster that -1 was a better choice because that matches the best data core.
My whole intent is to get them even in terms of efficiency.
Whats striking is that none you seem to grasp that lowing the efficiency on BPOs to invention rates is no more a nerf than raising invention effiency.
In a free market relative cost is all that matters.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 00:51:00 -
[35]
Oh for @#^@#^# sake, what is your malfunction ?! Let me repeat this: change T2 BPOs, BAD ; change invention, GOOD.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
SurrenderMonkey
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:00:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Akita T Oh for @#^@#^# sake, what is your malfunction ?! Let me repeat this: change T2 BPOs, BAD ; change invention, GOOD.
Meh. Either one seems premature, imo. The OP's assertion is the following:
-Margins on invention are insufficient. -The reason for this is due to BPO holders, who can produce T2 ships more efficiently due to ME research, which allows them to attain profit at a lower price point than inventors.
However, margins for ships for which there are NO BPOs are also poor. This means that the OP's identification of the cause of the problem is erroneous.
There's no need to go dreamin' up solutions to a problem before the cause of that problem has been properly identified. --------------- Faction-Militia:Player-Alliance::Newbie-corp:Player-corp |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:03:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Akita T Oh for @#^@#^# sake, what is your malfunction ?! Let me repeat this: change T2 BPOs, BAD ; change invention, GOOD.
You do understand that there is no difference?
You are making as little sense as the free mineral people.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:15:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Ghoest You do understand that there is no difference?
No, YOU don't understand that there IS a difference.
Let's have the most simplified hypothetical example. Random T2 item X will yield 100 of random T2 component Y when reprocessed perfectly. With a high-enough-ME BPO, you will be able to build X using just 100 of Y. With a -1 ME one, you need 120, and with -2 ME you need 130. That's what you want all BPOs to be like. Default invented at -4 ME needs 150.
YOUR option is to make all BPOs need 120 or 130, but reprocessing it still only yields 100. MY option is to make it so that the invented version could need only 100 to build too (or slightly over it), and the cost of obtaining such a BPC could also be lowered too compared to current BPC creation cost.
So, yeah, there IS a _big_ difference.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Rin Taleda
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 05:21:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Ghoest Not not that they dont require invention - its the great efficiency relative to invented BPOs(even with decryptors).
Word is BPOs are being given limits. Thats fine it will fix the problem eventually. But a simpler solution would be to reset the efficiency on T2 BPOs at -2.
Basically limit the bonus profit to invention savings.
Give it a rest, already.
|
Future Mutant
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 06:45:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Ghoest
Basically limit the bonus profit to invention savings.
Fine- but if you nerf t2 bpos then i want a nerf to t2 bpcs. My reasoning is "the bonus profit to invention" should be nerfed.
Jokes aside- you do realize that invention is MORE profitable then building with t2 bpos?
And that those who have t2 bpos- have basically tied up crap tons of isk they could be investing for a larger profit margin?
That t2 bpos are a convenience and less of an isk making machine?
|
|
Caldari 5
Amarr The Element Syndicate Hand That Feeds
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 07:08:00 -
[41]
Seeing a boost to invention would be awesome, I would personally like to see the Runs/ME/PE of the T1 BPCs effect the Runs/ME/PE of the outputed T2 BPCs.
At the moment there is no effect on ship BPC invention. Lets use frigates for an example if you drop in a Max Run(30)/ME 50/PE 20 BPC you get out by default a 1 run/ME -4/PE -4 T2 BPC, which is exactly the same output that you would get from a 1 run/ME 0/PE 0 T1 BPC, to me this is just all manner of broken.
I think CCP should be encouraging the use of better BPCs for invention, I not sure on the specifics of what they should do, but even seeing a 1/10 output would be a good start. Example if you drop in a Max Run(30)/ME 50/PE 20 BPC you get out by default a 3 run/ME 5/PE 2 T2 BPC.
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 07:08:00 -
[42]
Meh. T2 BPOs are an old and obsolete relict from ancient times. Only real reason to have them removed: Consistency. --------
|
Voogru
Gallente Massive Damage MACHI MISCHIEF
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 12:29:00 -
[43]
If they boosted T2 invention so that it cost 50% less ISK to build the items than that of the T2 BPO's, invention would be just as profitable as it is today.
If they made T2 items cost 1 ISK to make with no materials required, you'd still see people selling their wares for 0.8 ISK. Of course it would take some time for it to happen, but it would get there eventually.
Hate Farmers? Click Here |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 15:12:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Ghoest You do understand that there is no difference?
No, YOU don't understand that there IS a difference.
Let's have the most simplified hypothetical example. Random T2 item X will yield 100 of random T2 component Y when reprocessed perfectly. With a high-enough-ME BPO, you will be able to build X using just 100 of Y. With a -1 ME one, you need 120, and with -2 ME you need 130. That's what you want all BPOs to be like. Default invented at -4 ME needs 150.
YOUR option is to make all BPOs need 120 or 130, but reprocessing it still only yields 100. MY option is to make it so that the invented version could need only 100 to build too (or slightly over it), and the cost of obtaining such a BPC could also be lowered too compared to current BPC creation cost.
So, yeah, there IS a _big_ difference.
So you are saying that you reprocess a large amount of t2 items and thats why your concerned?
If thats the case you are an extreme exception and rather silly.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 15:15:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Ghoest So you are saying that you reprocess a large amount of t2 items and thats why your concerned?
SARCASM Yes, yes, that's exactly what I was saying, now that you have been enlightened, go in peace, be safe from evil. /SARCASM
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.03.13 16:30:00 -
[46]
Well unless you like to reprocess stuff after you build it there is no difference to a producer once they buy the materials and sell the end product.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 03:42:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Ghoest Well unless you like to reprocess stuff after you build it there is no difference to a producer once they buy the materials and sell the end product.
Oh, you mean, no difference except the fact you had to buy 120 or 130 instead of 100 of <thing Y> to build one <thing X> ? And the fact that <thing Y> will also be slightly more expensive in this 120/130 scenario than in the 100-needed scenario, since T2 component raw materials NEVER scale up on the supply side due to the nature of moon mining ? So, you know, the price you will be forced to sell <thing X> would be a lot higher than in the other scenario ? And since the price is a lot higher, less of them would actually be traded as a total on the market ? So not only do you have to invest more (percentage-wise) into materials to make a sale, but your sales will be a bit harder to make since there is a smaller overall market volume being traded due to the higher prices ? Thus not only getting (probably) a smaller absolute profit, but being forced to make it after higher investments.
[sarcasm]Yeah, sure, there's absolutely no difference, bub, absolutely none at all...[/sarcasm]
And, if you MUST know, the only reason reprocessing T2 _ISN'T_ all the rage like reprocessing anything else T1, it's precisely because of the inherent invention waste, on top of the invention cost. If invention had the potential to manufacture T2 items without waste, and if the invention cost per run would be much lower, you can bet your sweet-ass that people WILL start reprocessing even T2 items/ships whenever some "did not do the math" inventors will sell their goods for way too little because "they built the components / got the datacores themselves" or whatnot.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 09:23:00 -
[48]
Short of going back in time 5 years, any attempt to 'fix' a problem which existed as point in time problem, is going to cause more issues than it solves.
Anyone in the game can get their own T2 BPO exactly the same way most people that own them got them. Either people are paying too much for them, and so they are underpowered and need BOOSTING, or they are cheap for what they are, and you should just go out and buy one.
The problem of course being that most people don't want to put time and effort into getting the same advantage others put time and effort into getting, they just want to destroy other people's sandcastle, for absolutely 0 net benefit to themselves.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 09:32:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Akita T stuff
Do you actually use the market? Do you understand the way prices adjust?
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 10:16:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Akita T on 14/03/2010 10:17:33
Originally by: Ghoest Do you actually use the market? Do you understand the way prices adjust?
I do, but you apparently don't. Or, more likely, you're trolling. Either way, the answers are the same.
There is a limited amount of each type of moon mineral in EVE, you can't extract more than that per time unit, so there is a limited amount of T2 components that can be manufactured per time unit. If the same ships require more T2 components overall to build, there will be less ships built overall, and the price of ships will be noticeably higher (and component price will very likely get a bit higher per unit as well).
It's quite simple.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 16:11:00 -
[51]
But the average profitability for builders will be same in the end whether you improve invention or nerf bpo as long as they are equelly efficient(note bpos will still be more profitable than invention because of data cores and decryptor costs and this will also hold true both ways.)
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
SurrenderMonkey
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 16:32:00 -
[52]
Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 14/03/2010 16:33:53
Originally by: Ghoest But the average profitability for builders will be same in the end whether you improve invention or nerf bpo as long as they are equelly efficient(note bpos will still be more profitable than invention because of data cores and decryptor costs and this will also hold true both ways.)
*SIGH* No. It won't be. That's what Akita is trying to explain. The absolute per-unit-profit might be the same, but the margin will likely be lower (e.g., if I spend 800K building something and sell it for 1 million, it's an increase of 25%. If I spend 1m making something and sell it for 1.2m, I've still made 200K, but it's an increase of only 20%. I've made the same amount of money, but I've made a smaller profit RELATIVE TO MY INVESTMENT.
Additionally, since the price will have gone up across the board, the units will sell more slowly, meaning you make less money in any given time frame. If I were selling 5 units per day at 1 million, making a 200K profit each, I'd be making 1m per day from that item. If the price goes up across the board, and I will only be able to move 4 now, I'm still only making a 200K profit per for a total of 800K.
--------------- Faction-Militia:Player-Alliance::Newbie-corp:Player-corp |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 17:49:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Akita T on 14/03/2010 17:52:18
Originally by: Ghoest But the average profitability for builders will be same in the end
Assuming you would be right (which you aren't), why bother making any changes ? You're not really improving anything. Also, no, it's not the same average profitability - it's ever so slightly less profitability for inventors, and a lot less profitability for BPO manufacturers, with less profitability overall.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Salmeria
Advanced Component Research Enterprise
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 08:37:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Salmeria on 15/03/2010 08:42:09 I really hate the idea of nerfing things. Instead, invention should really be improved. It should definitely be easier to invent stuff. Also the profession sites should really be buffed. I heard that the salvage ones dont drop t2 small and medium rig bpcs. And the sites for invention are pretty lame as well.
|
Shana Matika
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 08:56:00 -
[55]
The point is: With inventioned BPC's you need significant more raw materials. Let's take the Golem as subject. A rather expensive ship in any point of view. The invention (just BPC 1 Run + datacores) until success is about 62 Million+- You need materials for about 530 Million @ME0
Now a BPC from invention is about 700 Million in materials + 62 million for the invention process.
End-Cost about 800 Million - And that's not that much as I calculated with best Marketoffers, can be much more when some parts are out of stock.
Ok, whcih one would you sell earlier. Tha one for 610 million or that one for 800+?
When ships/modules get cheaper you WILL sell more. The margin per unit stay the same. But your profit/month will increase.
This negative-me/pe sh*t just increase prices and decreases available goods. As you need about 50% longer to build one item you can't produce as much as possible. With "wasting" average of 50% materials for T2 Items no wonder that the prize don't move down. Just because more want those stuff you can't harvest more raw's for production as akita already mentioned: Fixed number of moons.
The Profit in invention don't need to increase...just the base of it.
Actually a Marauder cost's 50% more then it's worth, not to speak of lolinsurance-payout. THAT is the real issue of invention.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 10:29:00 -
[56]
Invention is just fine, the inefficiency works great at keeping the moon minerals well used and thus a good margin for the respective producers (if they do it the right way) and everyone down the chain.
I loathe the "everything should be about zero margin and made in 1E40 numbers because volume is GOD" because it creates insurance fraud scenarios and less than believable economic system relying in lame artificial price control (insurance) to have the game survive.
- Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Jovialmadness
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 16:41:00 -
[57]
The core issue surrounding the tech 2 bpo debate is that in the beginning bpo holders controlled markets and made huge profits rarely ever selling them. After invention came out they slowly began to offload them till nowadays when you can easily find a nice quantity for sale weekly ranging from mostly ammo to some mods to a ship bpo on occasion.
I think the profit potential is more widely discussed nowadays than it used to be. This ****ed off alot of guys but what they don't realize is the profit now is poop compared to the pre invention profits. In the end a focused inventor can not only out profit a bpo holder he can also change products on a whim when that item takes a market nose dive. Bpo holders are stuck with that item.
Point is stop whining and get one otherwise you lose the debate because you are simply lazy and whining. |
nether void
Caldari Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:42:00 -
[58]
Solution. Keep invention in the game exactly the way it is now. Reintroduce the lottery system. Have both systems active at the same time. That gives everyone the same chances to own a T2 BPO.
If you speculated on the future value of a T2 BPO when you purchased one, well any investment in the future is a risk. You shouldn't be compensated via CCP for your risk laden investment into a guesstimate on future profits from a T2 BPO in an MMO. MMOs are prone to change in the least expected ways.
|
LHA Tarawa
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:17:00 -
[59]
My unforgivable sin is that I discovered EVE 6 months ago instead of 4 years ago. Oh, what an evil, evil person I am. That sin justifies that I forever after be punished with a competative disadvantage. Those greater than me, that discovered the game before me, should forever after be allowed to sit atop their gold mines. They should sit from on high lobbing insults at my futile attempts to assail thier CCP given throwns.
This makes that game better for all.
Or perhaps, the competative advantage should be removed so that with hard work and dedication I may someday have the skills to compete on a level playing field.
No, I'm just a whining baby for suggesting that new players be geven oppertunity to ever sit upon high with the gods.
|
LHA Tarawa
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:22:00 -
[60]
Originally by: nether void Solution. Keep invention in the game exactly the way it is now. Reintroduce the lottery system. Have both systems active at the same time.
Better solution. Exchange all T2 BPOs with enough matching BPCs to total a couple years' manufacturing time. It will take years to level the playing field, but eventually it will get there.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |