| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hans Roaming
   |
Posted - 2005.09.30 15:42:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Hans Roaming on 30/09/2005 15:43:10
With all things in Eve the prices on desireability goes through the roof, remember when advanced learning skills came out and people bought them up and resold them? The resellers are putting the prices up through the roof.
Sure T2 moves you up a class, i.e. a frig that is as tough as a cruiser coupled with frig advantages but then there are alternatives, fly BS or have a couple of complimentary T1 ships for taking down that T2 ship. A Deimos fighting two Vigilants (~40mil Faction Thorax) would loose I feel if the Vigilants fly with thier 4th mid fitted with a tracking disrupter, the range of the Deimos turrests would be around 29% of it's original value. Never tried this but it might work.
BPC production seems to be too long and should be maybe 25 - 50% of what it is now, you're just copying data after all, what's the time problem?
Outreach Executive
Huzzah Foreign Affairs
"I need you guys to come right away, or better yet send someone who can fight" |
Resin Kadir
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 15:55:00 -
[62]
Please try to read through the post before you repeat stuff. If you agree with something that's been said, please state the point and emphasize it. This is for a hopeful dev moderation. The flaming needs to stop. Opinions on who the ship should be available for are egotistic and dull. If you can fly one, you should have access jsut like battleships, but not for rediculous pricing. I'm sure CCP never intended HAC to be distributed to the elite few. That's essentially what dreadnaughts are for and why you need "forever" training times on crazy skills.
I personally am moaning about the rediculousness of market availability and pricing of Gallante HAC as an example. No Items with a construction cost of 10-25mil isk should sale for 130mil. The only reason prices can get that high is limited availability and high demand. Very simply, demand will not decrease! So CCP should do something about it. please keep this thread productive. I posted the same thing in the In deveopment forum and it got no replys so this is hopefully a means to express to CCP how we fill on the issue and maybe get some support.
HAC's are the single most over priced commodity. Freighters, Dreadnaughts, even Outposts can be built or purchased within 25-40% of contruction costs. Find a HAC from anyone but a best friend and you will pay SEVERLY over inflated prices. It needs to be fixed and if you're jsut flaming, please stop. This is a product in a game that should be available to any player with the requisits, now you people who THINK you're the elite.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
You sank my battleship!
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Vertigo Coalition - Shoot Squelch first, it was his idea! |
Rivek
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 16:14:00 -
[63]
 Originally by: Resin Kadir
HAC's are the single most over priced commodity. Freighters, Dreadnaughts, even Outposts can be built or purchased within 25-40% of contruction costs.
If Freighters, Dreadnaughts, and Outposts are for the elite why are they obtainable within 25% of construction cost and HACS are not? Well quite obviously because the requisite bpos are available freely. It is the constrictive bottleneck of the tech 2 oligipolies that are killing the tech 2 consumers. CCP needs to find a fair means to release more bpos into the economy and say **** off to the super rich minority who already own these isk printing licenses.
----------------------------------------------
TunDraGon.com |
Resin Kadir
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 16:21:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Rivek
Originally by: Resin Kadir
HAC's are the single most over priced commodity. Freighters, Dreadnaughts, even Outposts can be built or purchased within 25-40% of contruction costs.
If Freighters, Dreadnaughts, and Outposts are for the elite why are they obtainable within 25% of construction cost and HACS are not? Well quite obviously because the requisite bpos are available freely. It is the constrictive bottleneck of the tech 2 oligipolies that are killing the tech 2 consumers. CCP needs to find a fair means to release more bpos into the economy and say **** off to the super rich minority who already own these isk printing licenses.
/signed and I'm glad someone undrestands what I'm getting at. obviously HAC bpo/c aren't readliy available but they are in desperate short supply.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
You sank my battleship!
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Vertigo Coalition - Shoot Squelch first, it was his idea! |
Theta9
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 18:12:00 -
[65]
why not have npc's sell tech 2 bpc's at some high cost (like 20 mill isk for a 1 run bpc for hacs) this will cause prices of deimos's to drop significantly if i can buy a 1 run and build the ship myself for maybe another 20 mill so a demios for 40 while it will not cut overly into bpo profits since they dont A have to spend money on the bpc's can reaserch there bpo's to allow them even better profits. and will boost the tech 2 component market as well since now lots of them are being produced.
|
Resin Kadir
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 18:26:00 -
[66]
Realistically it wouldn't happen. Selling one run BPC is same as selling the ship and 20 mil still more than the production cost. NPC selling 1 run bpc for that price is likely never to happen. However, there should be a possibility of receiving a BPC in a mission or as a reward or offer like the Faction ships. Still this won't solve the problem. It all comes down to copy and build time.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
You sank my battleship!
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Vertigo Coalition - Shoot Squelch first, it was his idea! |
Zembla
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 19:37:00 -
[67]
To all those with the argument of "then buy a BS... they're more available and a correctly kitted BS > a HAC"... Why do you think we trained HAC in the first place? Because we didn't want to fly BS's? Because we just thought spending a month training to get a ship with a nicer color would be cool? No, many of us trained up for HAC's because they got bored with BS's. For the exact same reasons why a BS is better than an HAC an HAC is better than a BS in my opinion. An HAC is just more of a challenge, much more fun to fly.
That besides: I see lots of good ideas here, but I wonder if CCP sees the problem the same way we do. Meaning, I'm not sure if CCP really agrees there's an issue with HAC availability, and if this issue should be addressed.
<Z>
Spread the Z |
Saladir
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 20:23:00 -
[68]
Forgive me, but what's so great about a HAC anyway? Seems like similar battlecruisers are pretty comparable, and much cheaper.
|
Hoshi
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 20:41:00 -
[69]
Comparing a battlecrusiser to a hac is like comparing a destroyer to an Assault frigate... They are in a completely different league.
|
Theta9
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 22:08:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Resin Kadir
Realistically it wouldn't happen. Selling one run BPC is same as selling the ship and 20 mil still more than the production cost. NPC selling 1 run bpc for that price is likely never to happen. However, there should be a possibility of receiving a BPC in a mission or as a reward or offer like the Faction ships. Still this won't solve the problem. It all comes down to copy and build time.
thats why i said charge 20 million for the abillity to PRODUCE It. Its a 0 ME 0PE bpc which means you still have to
A) have the skills to build it
B) take the time to produce it and
C) spend the minerals and other materials in order to produce it.
a person with a hac bpo does not have to spend 20 mill on the ship bp since he has an infinate bpo already so he can charge just 15 mill over production cost and still undercut people that buy bpc's to produce since they would AT LEAST have to put another 20mill on top of the production cost to cover that bp cost. People that dont want to wait on a ship can buy the bpc and produce the ship at a relatively cheap cost while the actuall bpo holders still turn well over 50% profit per product (also i do agree that production time needs to be leseend maybe take 6 hours to produce 1 hac)
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 23:54:00 -
[71]
Would it not be more in keeping with the direction of the economy to make it viable for BPO owners to sell BPCs?
|
Al Thorr
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 00:16:00 -
[72]
As a Hac producer ( yup only a Cerb ) I must admit this figure of cost of production is rather short of the mark .
Have you people actually looked on the ccp database on these pages and actually costed ( is that a word )the ships and not taken the ccp figure of "base cost"?
The 1000% markup as stated is way off the mark by a great deal.
Yes I can sell my ships at a lower price ( and have done) and only make 70% markups but they will be bought and resold for more than I sell them. Now I cut out the resellers profit margins.
As to Bpcs - if the copy time was lower and less skill intesive - why should I produce a copy to sell when I can make and "charge what I like " It would only help me to produce "more" ships. this is the same as a lowering of the build time.
And less face it, the hac is a specialised production. If you want to train all the skills to produce one from a bpc copy ( to save a few mill )then Ihmo you are a rather sad individual
well enough of my inane ramblings - let the discussion continue
Regards Al Thorr
I Am in shape, ROUND is a shape |
Orb Lati
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 00:42:00 -
[73]
i personnally think CCP need to fast track the introduction of the "Reverse Engineering" skill to allow players to produce there own BPOs for ships.
BPOs need to be more common and not just for avaiblity of ships for the Elite pilots that can actualy fly them but also to increas the market for POS materials with I hear is still an issue
(remeber CCP recently increased production of the POS's which coupled with sovernty protection of starbases introduced a glut on the market of material but only a limited BPO owner market to purchase said matierals.)
"We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
|
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 00:47:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Would it not be more in keeping with the direction of the economy to make it viable for BPO owners to sell BPCs?
I really think as proposed earlier that a better solution would be to introduce more BPOs (as well as maybe reducing the copy time). Reason? Quite simple: the lucky ones who got such a BPO in the lottery now have an ISK machine. Increasing their ability to make more ISK would be insane, and it would be better for everybody imho to split this mane between more people.
As said before, how many of the original seeded BPOs are now still ingame/on characters actually played? Maybe CCP should check that first. And the player base and thus demand has increased since release of these BPOs, and then should the number of BPOs be increased too. I must admit i don't have any tech II BPO, but I don't have any research agent either, so more BPOs instead of ability to produce more ships with current BPOs doesn't change anyting for me, but I truly think it would be better for the game to split this ISK mane between more people rather than increasing earnings of a few even more.
Originally by: Mangus Thermopyle
When I started EVE, I thought EVE would require dedication and long term planning. I could never dream that the third ship I piloted would be the end of the line.
|
Akarah Siminova
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 01:07:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Al Thorr
As a Hac producer ( yup only a Cerb ) I must admit this figure of cost of production is rather short of the mark .
Have you people actually looked on the ccp database on these pages and actually costed ( is that a word )the ships and not taken the ccp figure of "base cost"?
The 1000% markup as stated is way off the mark by a great deal.
Yes I can sell my ships at a lower price ( and have done) and only make 70% markups but they will be bought and resold for more than I sell them.
Stop the presses! He only makes 70% margins on a less desirable HAC! Whats the fuss about?
Oh wait, I make 5-15% margins on a good day with competative tech 1 production. 
-----------------------------------------------
Battleship BPC trading and Sales
|
ForeverKnight
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 02:22:00 -
[76]
IMHO the less HAC's I see flying around the better.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 02:47:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Would it not be more in keeping with the direction of the economy to make it viable for BPO owners to sell BPCs?
Er...no?
PS, Cerb is the one HAC where there's not too much demand, agreed.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Liet Traep
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 10:25:00 -
[78]
As someone mentioned before the player base is growing and the existing playerbase is aging and more and more people ar eable to fly HACs. But the supply hasn't gone up. In fact it can't. The sellers aree limited by the high build time. Lower the build times and lower the bpc creation times and sellers will be able to make more HAC's and BPC's and they'll still make a killing. But more ships would be available for eve's expanding player base.
|
Rafein
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 10:36:00 -
[79]
should be agent offers to get built ones. Like there are for frigates.
RnD agents should rarely offer BPC's for all BP's they can give out.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 11:53:00 -
[80]
Point taken on the BPCs
If BPOs are increased, I think it'd be better if there was a proper mechanism for doing so rather than just an injection from CCP. Like for example, if a BPO type is consistently in use then R&D agents drop more until it reaches a certain threshold or something.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |