EVE Search - A change to t2 bpos

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

A change to t2 bpos

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.04 20:47:00 - [1] That we all know and hate. The change? Make invention more able to compete with t2 bpos. My proposal is basically shifting the ME levels of invented bpos so that they use less resources than the bpo. Thus, a bpo is only useful when the prices are still above me0, nerfing t2 bpos. And we all love nerfing things, right? This suggestion brought to you by Syila Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails so i'm pretty much anti cat at the moment (lol) x
coolruningc	Posted - 2010.10.04 21:15:00 - [2] Edited by: coolruningc on 04/10/2010 21:17:16 We have asked for this 100 times but devs still have not descided to chane the proess of invtion. only thing would sujest atm would be contack the eve consoil and try that route since its the only way to get things done now adays.
Valarre	Posted - 2010.10.04 21:23:00 - [3] Originally by: coolruningc Edited by: coolruningc on 04/10/2010 21:17:16 We have asked for this 100 times but devs still have not descided to chane the proess of invtion. only thing would sujest atm would be contack the eve consoil and try that route since its the only way to get things done now adays. LOL eve consoil. Pretty much describes them perfectly. They con you, you soil yourself.
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.04 21:32:00 - [4] pretty please at least have the common courtesy to troll my thread with semi-readable spelling? Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails so i'm pretty much anti cat at the moment (lol) x
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.04 22:10:00 - [5] uhm ... you know ... BPOs can be researched right? so ... if you do give invented BPCs a ME of 10. i could just research the bpo to 20. also ... did you notice that invented BPCs and BPOs (ME 0) use the same amount of t2 components? so they mainly differ in mineral usage. (verified with a 650mm arty BPC i had) all in all your proposal doesn't make much sense. a more useful proposal would be preserving a certain amount of the input ME/PE.
Valarre	Posted - 2010.10.04 22:20:00 - [6] Edited by: Valarre on 04/10/2010 22:20:47 Actually Darius this guy does know what he's talking about. It's your inability to agree with anything that doesn't make sense to me.
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.05 02:20:00 - [7] well, hes kinda right - with current methods, there is no way to make a bpc use less than a bpo, because there is that 'perfect' me. Im suggesting we throw this method out the window and find one that allows there to be an efficiency factor of some sort that can give the bpc material requirements that are better than perfect. Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails so i'm pretty much anti cat at the moment (lol) x
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.05 04:36:00 - [8] Originally by: Valarre Actually Darius this guy does know what he's talking about. It's your inability to agree with anything that doesn't make sense to me. We can be happy lance put more thought into his last posting than you. And given I pay for all my pvp with t2 production, I am kinda sure i know what I talk about and it didnt make sense. Originally by: Lance Fighter well, hes kinda right - with current methods, there is no way to make a bpc use less than a bpo, because there is that 'perfect' me. Im suggesting we throw this method out the window and find one that allows there to be an efficiency factor of some sort that can give the bpc material requirements that are better than perfect. why would they need to be better? personally i would be happy if we can catch up to the me/pe of the t2 bpo to even the field a bit. yes we would still have the extra costs of inventions, but we saved those billions for the bpo. I just saw a Heavy Pulse II bpo on sale for 27bn. did you ever do the math how many Heavy Pulse II, you would need to invent to pay more money for invention then you did for the BPO? though maybe 10% of the t1 ME/PE getting preserved would make a good start to even out the bpos and inventions a bit more.
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.05 15:10:00 - [9] Originally by: darius mclever why would they need to be better? personally i would be happy if we can catch up to the me/pe of the t2 bpo to even the field a bit. yes we would still have the extra costs of inventions, but we saved those billions for the bpo. I just saw a Heavy Pulse II bpo on sale for 27bn. did you ever do the math how many Heavy Pulse II, you would need to invent to pay more money for invention then you did for the BPO? though maybe 10% of the t1 ME/PE getting preserved would make a good start to even out the bpos and inventions a bit more. Mostly because, looking at many of the ships on the market (well, the amarr t2 cruisers/similar,) I can not find profit in inventing any of them. Ive written a few spreadsheets on the matter to do the math for me, and from what I can see, the inflated material costs kills any chance of making a profit, when added onto the invention cost of datacores and such(and decryptors..). I have not looked at t2 bpos, simply because the startup cost is considerably more than I have. Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails so i'm pretty much anti cat at the moment (lol) x
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2010.10.05 16:25:00 - [10] Originally by: Lance Fighter Originally by: darius mclever why would they need to be better? personally i would be happy if we can catch up to the me/pe of the t2 bpo to even the field a bit. yes we would still have the extra costs of inventions, but we saved those billions for the bpo. I just saw a Heavy Pulse II bpo on sale for 27bn. did you ever do the math how many Heavy Pulse II, you would need to invent to pay more money for invention then you did for the BPO? though maybe 10% of the t1 ME/PE getting preserved would make a good start to even out the bpos and inventions a bit more. Mostly because, looking at many of the ships on the market (well, the amarr t2 cruisers/similar,) I can not find profit in inventing any of them. Ive written a few spreadsheets on the matter to do the math for me, and from what I can see, the inflated material costs kills any chance of making a profit, when added onto the invention cost of datacores and such(and decryptors..). I have not looked at t2 bpos, simply because the startup cost is considerably more than I have. The main difference is exactly that: - BPO have a high start up cost and a a fixed production and a smaller production cost - invention has a small start up cost, allow you to change what you produce in a few days at worst so you can adapt what you produce to the market demands but has a higher production cost for unit. For curiosity what T2 cruisers have you checked?
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.06 19:54:00 - [11] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Lance Fighter Originally by: darius mclever why would they need to be better? personally i would be happy if we can catch up to the me/pe of the t2 bpo to even the field a bit. yes we would still have the extra costs of inventions, but we saved those billions for the bpo. I just saw a Heavy Pulse II bpo on sale for 27bn. did you ever do the math how many Heavy Pulse II, you would need to invent to pay more money for invention then you did for the BPO? though maybe 10% of the t1 ME/PE getting preserved would make a good start to even out the bpos and inventions a bit more. Mostly because, looking at many of the ships on the market (well, the amarr t2 cruisers/similar,) I can not find profit in inventing any of them. Ive written a few spreadsheets on the matter to do the math for me, and from what I can see, the inflated material costs kills any chance of making a profit, when added onto the invention cost of datacores and such(and decryptors..). I have not looked at t2 bpos, simply because the startup cost is considerably more than I have. The main difference is exactly that: - BPO have a high start up cost and a a fixed production and a smaller production cost - invention has a small start up cost, allow you to change what you produce in a few days at worst so you can adapt what you produce to the market demands but has a higher production cost for unit. For curiosity what T2 cruisers have you checked? if your still watching this.. zealot/sac curse/pilgrim, the prorator.. think ive got the numbers for paladins around here somewhere.. Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails so i'm pretty much anti cat at the moment (lol) x
Dharh Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2010.10.06 20:50:00 - [12] Edited by: Dharh on 06/10/2010 20:54:21 IMO research as it pertains to making BPO/BPC should probably be scrapped. Rather id like to see a combination of how PI works and how regular non-PI production works. Instead of researching for faster BPCs (which wouldn't exist in this system anyway) and more efficient production, a whole set of skills would be added for various types of production. The time sink would be offloaded to skills and for the patient among us, eventually, we could reach the levels current BPO/BPC's provide in a more permanent fashion. All the data cores and other stuff reserved for invention could be used as direct components for production of T2 items. In other words, you can't make T2 items without 'invention' components (they act as fuel or something like that) which last for x products. Roughly speaking it works out almost exactly the same as invention does now except there is no random chance for failure. If that is a little too easy, just increase number of 'invention' components needed for x runs. Research now basically provides the avenue for fuel to create T2/T3 items. It could even go so far as being a part of PI where you can create these items using your already created or brand new processors (the prior cost of buying BPO/BPC's would be in building these processors, just like it is now with PI), these new processors could be called T2/T3 Basic/Advanced/Elite Industry Facilities. And/or new Production Plants on empire stations that you buy. You can buy X number of slots on a station, that remain yours, until you 'delete' them to buy a new slot on a different station. And/or POS modules, with a UI sorta similar to PI. A Production Plant module, roughly equivalent to command centers, with the requisite skill and number of processors depending on type of command center you buy and install on your POS. In some ways this is simpler than the way BPO/BPC's work (which I think suck) and in other ways it adds a customization to production that is currently very lacking.
Betty Boom Caldari SPECTRE Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.06 21:51:00 - [13] To buff Invent i would remove the possiblilty to copy a T2 BPO. Would be a first step in the right direction. But guys, go on. ;-)
MECHcore Saiyans United death from above..	Posted - 2010.10.06 22:10:00 - [14] What about people that worked their asses of to get an original T2 BPO ? Invention allready comes close enough , keep it as it is. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Hango ([email protected])
Dharh Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2010.10.06 22:59:00 - [15] Originally by: MECHcore What about people that worked their asses of to get an original T2 BPO ? Invention allready comes close enough , keep it as it is. They can keep using their crap BPO while the rest of do something new. Nothing lasts forever, sometimes things need to change to make way for something better. T2 production is a pain in the ass and most people do not and cannot make a profit from it. It sucks and is not fun.
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.06 23:08:00 - [16] Lance: if you dont make any profit with inventing Zealots atm, you are doing something really wrong.
Joe Phoenix	Posted - 2010.10.06 23:13:00 - [17] GREAT IDEA, this is why it will never happen.
Rupicolous Higher Ground	Posted - 2010.10.07 00:41:00 - [18] Edited by: Rupicolous on 07/10/2010 00:42:55 Originally by: Lance Fighter Mostly because, looking at many of the ships on the market (well, the amarr t2 cruisers/similar,) I can not find profit in inventing any of them. Ive written a few spreadsheets on the matter to do the math for me, and from what I can see, the inflated material costs kills any chance of making a profit, when added onto the invention cost of datacores and such(and decryptors..). I have not looked at t2 bpos, simply because the startup cost is considerably more than I have. Great debate although by now i'm sure you realize T2 BPO's are still in the game to keep older players motivated. Also, I can only assume "inflated material costs" means your buying materials off the market. In which case NO, there will be very little profit if any even with competitive buy orders. Perhaps you are working in the wrong part of the production chain for ISK revenue ?
Tarron Sarek Gallente Biotronics Inc. Initiative Mercenaries	Posted - 2010.10.07 08:23:00 - [19] Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 07/10/2010 08:24:56 The sad truth is: The reason for the small/nonexistent profit is the excessive competition, not the T2 BPOs. T2 BPO holders always aim for the highest possible price, not the lowest. The people who constantly undercut each other and don't factor in 'free' datacores is the throng of inventors. Even if invention costs would fall, profits would remain the same. Maybe there would be even more inventors... ___________________________________ Balance is power, ~~guard~~ hide it well "Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam"
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.07 10:36:00 - [20] Originally by: Tarron Sarek The sad truth is: The reason for the small/nonexistent profit is the excessive competition, not the T2 BPOs. T2 BPO holders always aim for the highest possible price, not the lowest. The people who constantly undercut each other and don't factor in 'free' datacores is the throng of inventors. Even if invention costs would fall, profits would remain the same. Maybe there would be even more inventors... sadly yes. I still dont understand why people drop their products on the jita market barely over production costs.
Random Tickle	Posted - 2010.10.07 13:56:00 - [21] Originally by: darius mclever Originally by: Tarron Sarek The sad truth is: The reason for the small/nonexistent profit is the excessive competition, not the T2 BPOs. T2 BPO holders always aim for the highest possible price, not the lowest. The people who constantly undercut each other and don't factor in 'free' datacores is the throng of inventors. Even if invention costs would fall, profits would remain the same. Maybe there would be even more inventors... Sadly yes. I still dont understand why people drop their products on the jita market barely over production costs. Because they value their time so little that they are soem what happy with the small margins they get or they are just ignorant and dont understand a thing about finding the best mod or ship for invention to make more isk. There is actually ships that have no tech 2 bpo. Perhaps they should start with those.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 14:42:00 - [22] Remove T2 BPOs. They are an anachronism and on a decline anyway, and in order for any change to make sense would CCP need to introduce new T2 BPOs. --
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.07 15:39:00 - [23] Originally by: Rupicolous Also, I can only assume "inflated material costs" means your buying materials off the market. In which case NO, there will be very little profit if any even with competitive buy orders. Perhaps you are working in the wrong part of the production chain for ISK revenue ? er. Inflated mineral costs being that the best bpc you can make through invention has 20% waste. And yeah, im assuming market price for materials. Because well frankly, theres no reason to invent using materials i make myself if I dont increase the price of those materials somehow, and I am just not seeing how. Remember people, materials you mine yourself arent free Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails so i'm pretty much anti cat at the moment (lol) x

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.