EVE Search - what is it? a bird? superman? No!!! it's a vagabond!!!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

what is it? a bird? superman? No!!! it's a vagabond!!!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Apertotes	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:34:00 - [1] yes, hac prices again. well, not really, but it is related. devs have scheduled reverse engineering for september. and also wrecks and salvaging. since i dont know how reverse engineering will be eventually featured, i will just share some thoughts. first, imagine that reverse engineering can be done on any item, and it gives out a one-run BPC of the object, but the object gets destroyed. well, we would be even, so it would be pointless. second. imagine the same case than before, but the object isnt destroyed. then, BPOs would eventually be worth nothing, cause everybody would just buy one item (vagabond for ex.) and then keep making copies out of it. those were 2 extremes. now lets look at something in between. third case. when you reverse engineer an object, it gives out a two-run BPC but the object is destroyed. this is better than the first two cases, but still, in the end it would make BPOs worth almost nothing, since once you own any object, you can replicate it forever, and even double the numbers each time. fourth case. when you reverse engineer an object, you get a two-run BPC, and the original object is destroyed, but the items made from the copies can not be reverse engineered again. this would be better than the previous options, but probably would be hard to code. in short, it would double the offer of items without changing the demand or production cost (i know it is not exactly that, as some people will not be able to produce some tech 2 items, or even use reverse engineer at all), and this would lower the price of some items. this would end up probably with tech 2 BPOs owners reverse engineering their own items to double their production. so it is not a really good solution. i guess with those 4 cases i've covered almost all simple posibilities. i want to propose a fifth one, that i think has less disadvantadjes than the first four, but retains some of the benefits. i think they should use shipwrecks for this. so everytime a ship is destroyed the design plans of the ship are stored on a small box that can only be recovered using the salvaging skill. if you succesfully recover it (can use level of skill for different chances, like 15% per level) you get a some kind of electronic component that carries the esence of the ship that was blown up. if this small object is succesfully reverse engineered (again make it chance based depending on the level of the skill), one-run BPC of the ship is discovered. this way, the quantity of ships doesnt grow, could only stay even if everytime a ship was lost the "black box" was succesfully recovered and reverse engineered (with the amount of ships that get reborn easily controlled by the bonus of the skills, going from 100% if both skills add 20% per level, to 25% if they add 10% per level, or anything in between, or even below). so the only players able to introduce more ships on the universe would be BPO owners, but at the same time we would reduce some of the demand, since anyone that kill a HAC could be lucky and get a free BPC. well, it can be a HAC, a Ferox, or a Machariel. in short, this would lower the rate at what ships are being lost, lowering some of the demand for most highly priced ships. it would be nice if the same system could be applied to non-ship items. maybe every item not destroyed could leave a one-run BPC on the "black box", too. for this salvaging thing, i think tractor beams would be perfect. well, this idea is not very developed as you can easily see, and it must have lots of holes, but i would like to know your opinion. ps: if devs have already given out information on how salvaging and reverse engineering will work, then just forget about this. Apertotes, the Guybrush Threepwood of New Eve
Swethren	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:38:00 - [2] It's probably gonna be something like you have a 5% chance per level of getting a BPC from the object you are going to reverse engineer and there is a overall 5-20% chance the item gets destroyed. So you might not get a BPC and the item still gets destoryed. Chance you take. Swethren
Manfred Doomhammer	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:42:00 - [3] Edited by: Manfred Doomhammer on 22/05/2006 23:41:54 you probably overlooked that even though the item gets not destroyed the bpo will still be more favorable (and thus not being useless) as you can research it to higher Mineral Efficiency/Production Efficiency than the lowgrade copies obtained from Reverse Engineering would be. ---- Manfred Doomhammer CEO ShadowTec Inc.
Dnol Arendale	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:43:00 - [4] I'd like to see something along the lines of. It gets destroyed and there's X% chance that you'll get a 1-4(or more?) run BPC. But of course there's the chance of getting nothing. This would all be influenced by skills too, but even with max skills you'd most likely end up with a 3 run BPC rather than a 4 or 5, but lets say at lvl 5 of 'Reverse Engineer' there's 0% chance of getting no BPC at all. tries to remember how E&B did their system..
Cairhien	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:58:00 - [5] As you know copies are not always as good as the orginal. So lets say that the bpo has some secret that goes into the construction that can not be duplicated. So the copy as an example has lower resistance or maybe loses some of the bonuses that are available. Maybe in the construction of the copy they forget to put in a bathroom so you have to dock more often, who knows but this may be a way of doing this.
Zyrla Bladestorm	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:59:00 - [6] I believe Oveur said that the term "Reverse engineering" was a little bit of a misnomer, that in actuality when trying to "reverse engineer" a vagabond, you would be taking a stabber and a mass of components, plus new materials they haven't really told us in any detail about yet, and putting researchers to work building a prototype facsimilie of the ship in question, if they succeed they give you a poorly researched BPC with a small number of runs on it (how they think you can build one, albeit with using more parts than the originals) So, in the end its more "engineering" that "reverse engineering". . ----- Apologies for any rambling that may have just occurred.
Swethren	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:59:00 - [7] Originally by: Manfred Doomhammer Edited by: Manfred Doomhammer on 22/05/2006 23:41:54 you probably overlooked that even though the item gets not destroyed the bpo will still be more favorable (and thus not being useless) as you can research it to higher Mineral Efficiency/Production Efficiency than the lowgrade copies obtained from Reverse Engineering would be. You will never get a BPO, you'll probably get X run BPC, X depending on the success and you can't research BPC's. Swethren
Swethren	Posted - 2006.05.23 00:00:00 - [8] Originally by: Cairhien As you know copies are not always as good as the orginal. So lets say that the bpo has some secret that goes into the construction that can not be duplicated. So the copy as an example has lower resistance or maybe loses some of the bonuses that are available. Maybe in the construction of the copy they forget to put in a bathroom so you have to dock more often, who knows but this may be a way of doing this. Then they would have to have a DB of all sub-par ships... not gonna happen. Swethren
chillz	Posted - 2006.05.23 00:08:00 - [9] I would have thought that reverse engineering would also cost research points. ----------------------------------- A gun and a packet of sandwiches. "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - Hunter S Thompson
Mathias Zealot	Posted - 2006.05.23 01:52:00 - [10] Quick idea here: it could produce a BPC with a negative fraction of ME and PE resistance, which would give more wasteful production and longer build times. Though, this assumes that the ME and PE are stored as floating point values. an ME of -0.5 would cause double the waste, -0.75 four times the waste, -0.9 ten times the waste (or double the cost of most items, since waste is normally a tenth the cost) and so forth.
Tubby McEffer	Posted - 2006.05.23 02:59:00 - [11] Make an item produced from a BPC attained through reverse engineering, if reverse engineered, yield no subsequent BPC.
HAC Buyer	Posted - 2006.05.23 03:12:00 - [12] I liked Reverse engineering skills for size ie. cruiser, bc, destroyer, frig with lvl 5 of the specific skill giving mandatory destruction 50% chance you get nothing 30% chance you get 2 run 20% " 3 run 10% " 5 run then like with lvl 1 it'd basicly be 60% for nothing and 5% for 5 run It'll give people a reason to have trained some of the build skills, but bpos I dont think should be givin.
Drasked	Posted - 2006.05.23 03:47:00 - [13] I think that r&d agents should also give out tech II bpc's for a set ammount of rp.
Miss Overlord	Posted - 2006.05.23 03:57:00 - [14] well not sure it might take a bucketload of minerals or something else to reverse engineer or break an item down 20% per time.
Audri Fisher	Posted - 2006.05.23 05:08:00 - [15] higher build cost would severly limit tech I BPO's from being reverse Engineered, but you could increse the build cost on some tech II ships by 5x and still make a nice profit.
Ris Dnalor	Posted - 2006.05.23 05:18:00 - [16] Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 23/05/2006 05:18:45 the % chance thing sucks to be fair. If you're worried about making bpo's unneccessary get rid of bpc's completely. but that'll never happen b/c everyone wants to be their own walmart. so second choice? how to solve the reverse engineering dilemna? easy peasy. Make it so that reverse engineering works but make it take a long time. say 20x the build time for an object... so it takes ~36 hours to build a vagabond, make that 720 hours to reverse engineer a 1 run bpc for a vagabond, & your vagabond is tied up in the research slot the entire time. yea sure, some guy could keep himself in vagabonds if he wanted to... but he certainly won't be flooding the market & making the bpo's worthless, eh? tralala -- Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000 -- heh, remember when this actually was a rare thing? tralala
Ris Dnalor	Posted - 2006.05.23 05:21:00 - [17] Originally by: Drasked I think that r&d agents should also give out tech II bpc's for a set ammount of rp. or perchance, let people bid on the bpo's with their research points ebay style... -- Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000 -- heh, remember when this actually was a rare thing? tralala
keepiru	Posted - 2006.05.23 05:26:00 - [18] Originally by: Ris Dnalor Originally by: Drasked I think that r&d agents should also give out tech II bpc's for a set ammount of rp. or perchance, let people bid on the bpo's with their research points ebay style... Last I heard, that was part of the plan for the new R&D thats coming in kali. ---------------- Please fix BC Sig/Agility!
Lorette	Posted - 2006.05.23 05:28:00 - [19] Could be like SWG's reverse engineering which involves having 2 or more items that combined create a single but more 'powerfull' item.
Miss Overlord	Posted - 2006.05.23 05:35:00 - [20] the SWG idea mmmm nah i think CCP will put a time factor in terms of longer research or manufacture time and a limit on ME and PE on reversed engineered items
Jenny Spitfire	Posted - 2006.05.23 06:16:00 - [21] ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Lori Carlyle	Posted - 2006.05.23 07:10:00 - [22] Why not just have the agents open shop and you can "buy" ingame items from them with the LP/RP. PINK PINK PINK PINK PINK ERISGREEN
Vikram Bedi	Posted - 2006.05.23 07:11:00 - [23] Originally by: Lorette Could be like SWG's reverse engineering which involves having 2 or more items that combined create a single but more 'powerfull' item. That's what I thought I had read somewhere... that Reverse engineering was going to be the method that new items got into the marketplace, through player "design".
Darwinia	Posted - 2006.05.23 07:56:00 - [24] Another way to do it is to get a BPO, but an incomplete one.. so bad that building from it fails most of the time (say 80%) and you lose the minerals/components. Would people still build from.. yes, but at a much greater cost. Would the original BPO owners still make money? yep ------------------------ I don't believe in sigs.
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.05.23 08:23:00 - [25] I'm gonna put my money on reverse-engineered copies having incredibly bad ME and PE stats. And I mean BAD ones. It's the only way to keep bpo's worthwhile yet at the same time make reverse engineering worth it as well depending on what your goal is (availability of item or low purchase cost of item). Reverse engineering for selling of the item is probably not gig to be an option once prices on the most wanted object calm down to the same markup over item cost as the ME penalty of the reverse-engineered copies. All in all I'd say it's mroe then fair to make a reverse engineered BPC have a 50-70% higher cost for the item it produces then an original with realistic research done on it. You either factor that in to the ME and PE or you factor it in into the chance of destruction of the item you use as basis for the reverse egnineering. Either way I doubt reverse egnineering can ever be the holy grail of salvation for producers looking to make isk using the system, unless CCP involve the need for other resources and professions and make it all complicated enough that only the most organised/connected part of the playerbase can be succesfull at it. In short: it'll provide a price ceiling but not a new lease on life for producers I'd guess. Old blog
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.05.23 08:27:00 - [26] Originally by: Lori Carlyle Why not just have the agents open shop and you can "buy" ingame items from them with the LP/RP. Because that's again the least desirable solution: having people play the game solo and getting the better rewards. As ooposed to a complicated production process where people work together and need to provide stuff to eachother to succeed. I do think tech2 bpc's for RP (NOT LP) could be a nice idea, but you;d have to make doing the R missions mandatory and all but qench the natural growth of RP for researchers. Otherwise every alt is a T2 BPC producer three months from now. Old blog
Laythun	Posted - 2006.05.23 09:02:00 - [27] Originally by: Zyrla Bladestorm I believe Oveur said that the term "Reverse engineering" was a little bit of a misnomer, that in actuality when trying to "reverse engineer" a vagabond, you would be taking a stabber and a mass of components, plus new materials they haven't really told us in any detail about yet, and putting researchers to work building a prototype facsimilie of the ship in question, if they succeed they give you a poorly researched BPC with a small number of runs on it (how they think you can build one, albeit with using more parts than the originals) So, in the end its more "engineering" that "reverse engineering". if this is indeed the case, then i think CCP have the right idea. 400x120@24000 bytes Max please. -Capsicum If im flaming or not contributing, im sorry. But im trying to get into the [23]
Apertotes	Posted - 2006.05.23 16:53:00 - [28] well, first of all, thanks everybody for your flameless answers. 27 replies already, and all of them helpful and meaningful. i guess we've set a new record from reading all the answers i take that devs havent really explanained how exactly is reverse engineering going to work. so maybe we still got time to influence a little. Originally by: Swethren It's probably gonna be something like you have a 5% chance per level of getting a BPC from the object you are going to reverse engineer and there is a overall 5-20% chance the item gets destroyed. So you might not get a BPC and the item still gets destoryed. Chance you take. Swethren swethren, i quoted you cause you were the first to reply, and it is a good example of what i want to say next. almost everybody that replied here, each one with a different idea of his own, assumed that to reverse engineer an object, you need to own said object. i see this as a problem. i mean, if i really want a vagabond, but i dont have 200 millions to buy it, then i can not reverse engineer it. so i am at the same point than now. but with the system i proposed, i dont need to own a vagabond, all i need is to "capture" (or destroy) one, and then use my salvagin skill to retrieve the ship information, and give it to a scientific to reverse engineer it. this way, i could get a vaga bpc without expending money, and at the same time the market wouldnt be flooded with tech 2 bpcs, since the bpc only drops each time a ship is destroyed and you are succesful both at salvaging and reverse engineering. of course, the bpc would have really low ME and PE, but still, would be worth it. and since only bpo owners would be able to increase the global amount of items on the universe (and of course build much more eficiently), bpos would still be very profitable. Apertotes, the Guybrush Threepwood of New Eve
Neyne Dten	Posted - 2006.05.23 21:36:00 - [29] Originally by: Apertotes i see this as a problem. i mean, if i really want a vagabond, but i dont have 200 millions to buy it, then i can not reverse engineer it. so i am at the same point than now. but with the system i proposed, i dont need to own a vagabond, all i need is to "capture" (or destroy) one, and then use my salvagin skill to retrieve the ship information, and give it to a scientific to reverse engineer it. I'm quite certain that this is how CCP intended reverse engineering from the beginning. The way I see it is once you blow up a ship, you use your salvaging skills (and maybe a special salvaging ship) to retrieve--in the case of our running Vagabond example--"Scrap Vagabond Parts". The better your skills and salvaging equipment, the more units of Scrap Vagabond you can retrieve from the wreck of the Vaga you just wasted. So think of it like ore. Then you hand it off to a researcher. To reverse engineer a ship, the researcher needs a certain quantity of scrap parts (kind of like needing X amount of ore to reprocess it), and the more parts the researcher has beyond the minimum required, the better the BPC which the research will ultimately yield. There'd be some diminishing returns much like research levels on a BPO, but salvaging the wrecks of 2 Vagabonds and researching both as a single unit would still be worth it.
Apertotes	Posted - 2006.05.24 09:57:00 - [30] Originally by: Neyne Dten Originally by: Apertotes i see this as a problem. i mean, if i really want a vagabond, but i dont have 200 millions to buy it, then i can not reverse engineer it. so i am at the same point than now. but with the system i proposed, i dont need to own a vagabond, all i need is to "capture" (or destroy) one, and then use my salvagin skill to retrieve the ship information, and give it to a scientific to reverse engineer it. I'm quite certain that this is how CCP intended reverse engineering from the beginning. mmm... can you back it up with any link? it be great if you were right Apertotes, the Guybrush Threepwood of New Eve
Jenny Spitfire	Posted - 2006.05.24 10:21:00 - [31] Shouldnt this be the Cerberus price thread? ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Wade32	Posted - 2006.05.24 10:23:00 - [32] Edited by: Wade32 on 24/05/2006 10:24:18 The eve playing community can discuss this all they want but all arguments are so biased. This needs to be considered carefully by neutral parties. The current owners of t2 bpos' will argue for the cases that maintain the astrenomical value of their bpos' and those people who do not use reasearch agents and dont own a t2 bpo will argue any case that reduces the value of bpos' and makes attaining t2 ships easy and cheap. You can read every post in this thread an tell if the poster has a t2 bpo or not. I personally believe that it's not fair to become a multi billionaire in an instant. And i also beleive that the introduction of reverse engineering is not simply to add some more content but to address and imbalance in aqusition of wealth, but then again.......i dont own a t2 bpo :)
Ast3r0iD	Posted - 2006.05.24 10:40:00 - [33] I think more than likely they will just make it very very skill heavy. That way even if you dont get lucky with a bpo, the peeps that have played forever (and who are notoriously hard to keep in games) can make some well earner money withh there pwnage skills. Sound fair to me really. Hac prices drop but not to much and everyone still makes a buck, but some for the right reasons.

Pages: 1 2 :: [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.