| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Will McBlack
   |
Posted - 2003.07.28 12:27:00 -
[1]
I have just tested the licensing on copied BP and I have to say it works excellent!
* Bought an original BP
* Rented Science slot and copied it once with a 2 times production license
* Rented a Factory slot and build 2 items from it
* The production-counter is now at 0 and when i try to use it again it does not show up on the factory-bp list 
I was just wondering what we do now with the used-up copied bp's? I cant recycle/throw away them. So I take these BP's outside jettison them and waste the container? Would be nice if there is an option either in Recycle or in Repacking/Repair buttons where we can get rid of this junk (this would similarly solve the problem with unused Pods and Noob-frigates).
Great job CCP!
|
vyperpit
|
Posted - 2003.07.28 15:31:00 -
[2]
Edited by: vyperpit on 28/07/2003 15:31:32
not testing this my self i am curious to know.
the time it took for you to copy was it the same length of time it normally would? or was it shorter dure to the fact it was a copy only for 2 ships?
----
Fair Fighting 
Quote stolen from Waagaa Ktlehr who borrowed it from ???
"If you end up in a fair fight, you planned it wrong." (Ehm yeah, or CCP ****ed with the scanner again..) |
Askari
|
Posted - 2003.07.28 15:48:00 -
[3]
Good question Vyper....
And, if you do one for 100 production items, will it take longer than normal?
Also, Have CCP said anything about the effect it will have on current BP's?
what would be REALLY sweet, is if :
I make a manufacture BP copy that allows 1000 items to be produced. You give it to a licensee for 50K.
Every time he uses the BP, I recieve a license fee of lets say 10K per item produced.
Allow all those variables to be alterable, and you have a pay-as-u-use licensing system that is dynamic and alterable to fit any kind of situation.
That would be a fantastic addition to the system!
----------------
~= Askari =~
Urza's Factory
http://www.mikeward.uk.com/urzas
|
Will McBlack
|
Posted - 2003.07.28 15:55:00 -
[4]
I was under the impression the copy time was the same as before, about 8 min something for Energy Neutralizer I.
|
Ruffles
|
Posted - 2003.07.28 16:41:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ruffles on 28/07/2003 16:43:59
Sounds kind of familiar to an idea I suggested.
I put forward that you could then aproach the original copier for more licences, and this in itself would be a key that could unlock the copy for more uses. So you can keep the copy, and potentially reuse it at a later date, perhaps after having paid another fee for your new licence key.
I wonder if that will happen or not...
I really hope they cut the copy times if it is, as at the end of the day this is what? 26000 years into the future. Surely data transfer/copy is faster then our data copies these days.
I think the key is the important point for reuse, and would love to see a royalties type approach to copies produced by that sub-contractor/buyer.
|
KillCreep
|
Posted - 2003.07.28 19:58:00 -
[6]
Any info if the copy time increases if you make a copy with more max uses?
|
JGR Mao
|
Posted - 2003.07.28 23:40:00 -
[7]
Any clues as to who is the originator of this idea ( licensing ). Havent seen it on the Idea Lab thread.
If anyone knows plz post a link, i¦d like to see the reasoning behind this idea.
Oh, and yes i do like it.
Hopefully it¦ll stabilize the market a bit. |
KillCreep
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 00:10:00 -
[8]
Perhaps - *gasp* - the devs came to the idea themselves ;)
|
Elithiomel
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 06:50:00 -
[9]
This idea was posted in the dev blog about a month ago, so i suppose that the devs came up with it and got a favourable response from the people who actually saw it and replied to it.
---------------------------------------------
Engineers motto; If it doesn't fit, force it. If it breaks it needed replacing anyway. |
JGR Mao
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 10:57:00 -
[10]
Ty Elithiomel.
|
Ruffles
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 11:50:00 -
[11]
Here is the archive reference of the devblog:
http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=26
You can see all the comments there.
I was pretty sure there were a few discussions about this in the idea lab under the guise of market/factories or something along those lines. Sadly without a search I would have to go back through them all to try to find the references.
I just hope they make the ability to re-licence a copy without having to make another copy. As already pointed out that produce an item you can't do anything with, and it looses the simple, easy means for a company to earn more money from re-licencing.
If you had a private/public key pair, and these were hidden from all, but actually used in the background when licencing, you could have a copy run out. Then they would have to ask for a Key to unlock that copy for more uses, and this key would have to be issued from the originating company, as it was their Copy this person was wanting to re-use. Enter the number given, BAM - Blueprint is available again for X copies.
|
ClawHammer III
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 11:57:00 -
[12]
Edited by: ClawHammer III on 29/07/2003 11:59:18
The number of runs you license the copy for does indeed affect copying time. During my testing a 2 production run Raven BPC copies in under 2 days but a 10 production run BPC (the max for this type of bp) takes over 6 days.
|
Fulmen
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 13:35:00 -
[13]
If I understand this correctly what you are suggesting about relicensing, the problem is an Original owner could make a single license copy, and that only takes (x)time, then sell it and relicense it which would take (0)time. It would defeat the purpose of making multiple License copies.
|
Zoltaris
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 20:02:00 -
[14]
What happen to the original? can it still be copied an unlimited number of time?
|
Thaddius Engle
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 21:01:00 -
[15]
Do used up BP copies change color or anything like that? It'd be nice if they were color coded... say, a blue background for originals, green for copies, red for used up copies?
I have this bad feeling that someone's going to accidentally put an original BP in a container instead of a burned up copy and recycle it (thus destroying the BP). |
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.07.29 21:48:00 -
[16]
ya the original is what it is... you should be able to do everyting with it... and as much as you like 
the thing you pay for when you use it and make copies etc... is TIME and TIME IS ISK
so that means that originals are going to be even more in value now... and you would need maybe more then 1 if you really want to make more profit etc...
support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Griss
|
Posted - 2003.08.03 12:51:00 -
[17]
interesting
i just wonder what they plan to do with the copys in the game right now?
btw long time no see will 
------------------------------------------------
nomad, vagabond, call me what you will. |
Georg Girlausi
|
Posted - 2003.08.03 14:51:00 -
[18]
You don't have to jettison the used up copies. There is a option to trash it if you right-click on the blueprint. You also get this option on the orginal. 
|
Scragg
|
Posted - 2003.08.03 17:11:00 -
[19]
This is an awsome idea but... keep it simple. Make the licensed BPs a little easier to copy based on the license amount.
No need to get fancy with recharging the licenses... just go get youself a new copy.
The key here is the time it takes to produce. if they make the time shorter than it is attractive for a corp that wants to like 10 cruisers and supply their own minerals. Sell the a BP licensed for 10 and off they go. If it takes to long the seller migh not be interested and just tell them to haul the minerals to him or her and they will produce them.
Anyway.. just my two cents. Eiterh way I htink this idea is a winner.
Scragg, Tyrell Corporation
Vice-Director Military Operations |
colla tidet
|
Posted - 2003.08.03 18:21:00 -
[20]
I have an urge to become a burger baron. Let me run to the gas station and pickup Mcdonald's special recipe(bp's).
Would u please explain to me (a non manufacturer) what has changed?
"Let us have faith that right makes right, and in that faith let us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it."
|
Varsuuk
|
Posted - 2003.08.03 19:07:00 -
[21]
Not saying I am right, BUT it appears to me from the MANUFACTURERS point of view - NOT the BYOM-guy that this will only continue to hurt ship prices.
It would seem to negate the point of limiting bp copies.
A manufacturer is happy to supply their own mins for bigger profit. A BP-profiteer (ex a SINGLE guy with no corp and n ability to mine mega) will gain the most from this. If he can copy bps for licensing FAST he will kill at least 25% of the manufacturers (if they don't do this as well) and again bring ship prices to mins + 1 mill or so.
Is this what CCP wants for 'manufacturing' in the game?
If so - no need to limit bp copies in any way - you got that affect already ;) move onto other issues CCP.
But I do NOT think CCP wants to just imporve the life and profits of bp-profiteers, I think they want to improve the economy and hence the game.
|
Griskin Thor
|
Posted - 2003.08.03 19:56:00 -
[22]
Well, first off I'm not sure how much it will hurt ship prices. People doing BYOM deals will simply switch to doing 1-shot copy deals instead. Whereas they might have charged minerals + 20 mil in a BYOM deal, now they'll just require 20 mil for a 1 shot copy. Simple enough. Though I'm sure BYOM deals will continue for those manufacturers who have stock and simply want the minerals to pay for the next ship on the line.
The other thing to consider is how this will affect casual manufacturers and, in turn, the market. I know quite a few people accustomed to picking up copies of ammo and other expendables BPs to manufacture in the field on long hunting trips. Now they'll no longer have that option, either having to settle for buying temporary BPs or hauling a lot more ammo along with them. This itself could have a large effect on the economy, giving a boost to folks producing the lower-end items. Not every manufacturer is building cruisers and BBs, you know.
Griskin Thor
Chief Operations Officer
>Lightwave Enterprises<
-
"Oh yeah? Well, back in my day we had to mine omber with our teeth! And walk back to the station to sell it. Up the gravity well. Both ways!" |
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2003.08.08 19:15:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Bobby Wilson on 08/08/2003 19:18:26
 Quote:
Well, first off I'm not sure how much it will hurt ship prices. People doing BYOM deals will simply switch to doing 1-shot copy deals instead. Whereas they might have charged minerals + 20 mil in a BYOM deal, now they'll just require 20 mil for a 1 shot copy. Simple enough. Though I'm sure BYOM deals will continue for those manufacturers who have stock and simply want the minerals to pay for the next ship on the line.
Anyone who has every hauled 2X minerals for a BS over several jumps will know what I mean when I heartily agree that BYOM deals will become 1 shot copy deals VERY quickly, at least with BSs or multiple cruisers. Not only does BYOM take awhile to move the minerals, it also exposes your already-mined minerals to the depredations of PC pirates, esp. if the manufacturer you're using in <0.4 space.
As for the rest, I do agree with previous posters that all existing copies should be reset at very high max production levels, and that ammo and missile BP copies should indeed have higher maxes that cruisers and BSs.
BW
Oh, and P.S. If copying will become more frequent and longer after the patch, can we PLEASE have lab operations on the market?
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.08.08 20:01:00 -
[24]
Quote:
Well, first off I'm not sure how much it will hurt ship prices. People doing BYOM deals will simply switch to doing 1-shot copy deals instead. Whereas they might have charged minerals + 20 mil in a BYOM deal, now they'll just require 20 mil for a 1 shot copy. Simple enough. Though I'm sure BYOM deals will continue for those manufacturers who have stock and simply want the minerals to pay for the next ship on the line.
The way I see it hurting ship prices is probability that manufacturers will abandon manufacturing. It makes more sense to sell people 1 shot copies. That negates the obligations on the manufacturer to aquire the minerals, deliver the item to market or wait for a sale. It's far more cost effective to sell the 1 shot copy, in terms of time investment.
That being said, especially with the 2x BYOMs going out the door, the market become a bp copy market in reality. With people pricing their 1 shot copies according to the profit they would have received over mineral cost. For example, a Thorax runs about 6m in some areas and costs about 3.9m to make. So the 1 shot copy price would start around 2.1m... Until people start dropping that price as they realize that in terms of time investment, they have no cost whatsoever. So, someone offers theirs for 2m. Someone sees that and goes 1.75m...1.5m....1.2m...1m....Buy One Get One Free....
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Dan Forever
|
Posted - 2003.08.09 11:02:00 -
[25]
what needs to be done is to make corporations aware of their profits, have some kind of bill to pay that makes them worry about breaking even
|
Greyhound Digger
|
Posted - 2003.08.09 11:18:00 -
[26]
What I dont see mentioned in this thread of 'one-off' BP copies, is the extraordinary copy times. Sure, you can sell a battleship 1-time copy for 20 million isk, but is that really worth it for a 7-day copy run?
Currently we can, and do, produce about 1 Typhoon every 2 days (not including BYOMs). Thats 3.5x more that trying to sell single-time copies. Not to mention, at the current state, These one-time (or more) copies will likely still be traded among the Battleship makers, a kind of cross-pollination effect.
I don't see a great effect on the ship production market for that very reason. I do see a much larger effect on the BluePrints that have a much lower copy time. Generally, though, the lower the copy-time of the item, the more liscensing it will need.
Just my 2isk on the subject.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |