Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 70 post(s) |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1550
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 18:55:00 -
[181] - Quote
Aluka 7th wrote:Could some one please explain me what is the problem with T2 BPO and Galente/Caldari outpost copy time bonus? Not sure I get it On the other note, lets get serious. People cry about Marauder and JF BPOs (that don't exist) and based on CCP stats this: http://k162space.com/2012/07/17/percentage-of-items-from-invention-vs-tech-2-bpo/This was 2 years ago, and BPOs get destroyed, stuck on banned account ... IMHO people not counting their invention cost right undermine the market. I had 1400mm II BPO but still invented same gun for the sheer benefit of volume that comes from invention and from that experience I really don't get the T2 BPO issue people raise on forums. Inventors will get good boost of end product with ME -4 becoming ME0 not sure whats the dillio with T2 BPO still/again/over and over again.
You do not understand the "dillio" because you do not understand the copy time. They are coming up because they are the edge case that keeps causing issues. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Aluka 7th
156
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 19:01:00 -
[182] - Quote
Aryth wrote:Aluka 7th wrote:Could some one please explain me what is the problem with T2 BPO and Galente/Caldari outpost copy time bonus? Not sure I get it On the other note, lets get serious. People cry about Marauder and JF BPOs (that don't exist) and based on CCP stats this: http://k162space.com/2012/07/17/percentage-of-items-from-invention-vs-tech-2-bpo/This was 2 years ago, and BPOs get destroyed, stuck on banned account ... IMHO people not counting their invention cost right undermine the market. I had 1400mm II BPO but still invented same gun for the sheer benefit of volume that comes from invention and from that experience I really don't get the T2 BPO issue people raise on forums. Inventors will get good boost of end product with ME -4 becoming ME0 not sure whats the dillio with T2 BPO still/again/over and over again. You do not understand the "dillio" because you do not understand the copy time. They are coming up because they are the edge case that keeps causing issues.
What issues? |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1443
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 19:12:00 -
[183] - Quote
Feels really good to see pretty much all my points on your to-do list :) GRRR Goons |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3347
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 19:23:00 -
[184] - Quote
Aluka 7th wrote:Aryth wrote:Aluka 7th wrote:Could some one please explain me what is the problem with T2 BPO and Galente/Caldari outpost copy time bonus? Not sure I get it On the other note, lets get serious. People cry about Marauder and JF BPOs (that don't exist) and based on CCP stats this: http://k162space.com/2012/07/17/percentage-of-items-from-invention-vs-tech-2-bpo/This was 2 years ago, and BPOs get destroyed, stuck on banned account ... IMHO people not counting their invention cost right undermine the market. I had 1400mm II BPO but still invented same gun for the sheer benefit of volume that comes from invention and from that experience I really don't get the T2 BPO issue people raise on forums. Inventors will get good boost of end product with ME -4 becoming ME0 not sure whats the dillio with T2 BPO still/again/over and over again. I got more ISK/day doing nothing and owning ONE moon (large POS getting free R32 moon goo) then from T2 BPO. Think about that. You do not understand the "dillio" because you do not understand the copy time. They are coming up because they are the edge case that keeps causing issues. What issues?
Right now, invention beats T2 BPOs except in the smallest of markets. This is because Invention can out produce it.
Adjusting T2 BPOs to have short copy times would lead to a greater output from the T2 BPOs, allowing them to squeeze out invention produced modules by undercutting them. (no invention costs) Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Aluka 7th
156
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 19:29:00 -
[185] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Aluka 7th wrote:Aryth wrote:Aluka 7th wrote:Could some one please explain me what is the problem with T2 BPO and Galente/Caldari outpost copy time bonus? Not sure I get it On the other note, lets get serious. People cry about Marauder and JF BPOs (that don't exist) and based on CCP stats this: http://k162space.com/2012/07/17/percentage-of-items-from-invention-vs-tech-2-bpo/This was 2 years ago, and BPOs get destroyed, stuck on banned account ... IMHO people not counting their invention cost right undermine the market. I had 1400mm II BPO but still invented same gun for the sheer benefit of volume that comes from invention and from that experience I really don't get the T2 BPO issue people raise on forums. Inventors will get good boost of end product with ME -4 becoming ME0 not sure whats the dillio with T2 BPO still/again/over and over again. I got more ISK/day doing nothing and owning ONE moon (large POS getting free R32 moon goo) then from T2 BPO. Think about that. You do not understand the "dillio" because you do not understand the copy time. They are coming up because they are the edge case that keeps causing issues. What issues? Right now, invention beats T2 BPOs except in the smallest of markets. This is because Invention can out produce it. Adjusting T2 BPOs to have short copy times would lead to a greater output from the T2 BPOs, allowing them to squeeze out invention produced modules by undercutting them. (no invention costs)
Oh, you could copy T2 BPO in bonused outpost (Gal/Cald) then produce in other bonused outpost (Amarr) from BPC! I get it. Thank you!
***CCP Greyscale Keep copy time 3x manufacturing time or actually make it 2.5x to compensate for 60% reduction of Gal outpost. so that empire T2 BPO owners can compete with 0.0 owners of same BPO Also max run BPC of small rig should be 120 not 100 to be in line with other rigs. |
Sales Alt negrodamus
SalesAltCorp
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 21:20:00 -
[186] - Quote
NO MORE T2 BPO DISCUSSIONS PRETTY PLEASE
This thread is good. Don't break it. |
Throwaway Sam Atild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 21:37:00 -
[187] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
The suggestion to try and normalize job lengths around play sessions (4-6 hours or 20-24 hours) is a very good one, and exactly the sort of "next steps" balancing I was hoping to get out of this discussion. I'm going to go away and see if there's an easy way to make that stuff line up. (I don't want to get into what are effectively decimal ranks if I can help it purely because I'm concerned about the mess of multiplying 105 by non-integer amounts for the purposes of research times, but we can always fudge this if needed.)
Rather than change the blueprints to match play sessions, let us chain together jobs in a sensible way. Right now we can control the length of the copy step and the build step (up to 10x runs) to a certain degree.
If you increase the inventors flexibility and ability to tie jobs together, you'll be free to ignore the factor completely and focus on the more important economic principles while balancing.
I suspect this may be too complicated a change code-wise to do for this next iteration, but if you could simply increase the mats and time consumed based on the # of runs on the T1 BPC used in the invention process you'd hit a home run I think.
For example, instead of making 10x heavy flux widgets (fictional t2 module) I want to make 50x. I would then make a 5x T1 BPC, and invent it at the same % success. The invention time would be 5x as long and it would consume 5x the datacores/decryptors or whatnot. I think decryptors would be the messy part in this setup and since I'm not aware of what the decryptor re-work entails, I'll hold my tounge on the subject. |
Sales Alt negrodamus
SalesAltCorp
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 21:50:00 -
[188] - Quote
Greyscale, some thoughts on the new stuff:
* Why half integer ranks on certain modules?
Isn't that messing up the nice clean integer math you seem to be going for? Perhaps I am misunderstanding rank.
* JF production baseline is nearly 70 days now.
This is nearly 3x what it is currently. With an industry 5 character that gets trimmed down only by 20%. Even with one of the new production arrays its' still twice what it is now.
Is this a deliberate choice in terms of time to market as how you were discussing earlier?
JF's are something I only produce rarely so this is one of those "no real skin off my back" issues, but yikes.
* JF invent time is better
32 day baseline, but 16 days in a pos. Still a pretty big change tho!
* Rig timings seem screwy
For example:
Capital rigs invent in 4 hours
This turns into 2 hours in a pos. Current in-pos invent time is 26 hours.
Capital rigs build in about 8 hours. After pos and skills, that's closer to 4 I think. Current baseline for a TE 0 capital rig is 10 hours with skills and pos bonus applied.
I'm having a big of difficulty referencing between the pos timings I know well and the timings you are putting up which are blueprint baselines before bonuses, so things might be odd looking and estimated.
This same idea seems to repeat with large rigs as well. Full disclosure: I pay attention to capital/large because those are what I build. So take what I say with that in mind.
* Have you decided on how to handle invention blueprint ME/TE levels?
This has been discussed a lot but I'm not clear if you settled on an answer.
For example, I own a -4/-4 and a -3/-5 widget BPC - will these get an across-the-board uptick to 0/0? Or the equivalent levels post-patch after a successful invention run with that decryptor?
Also, where do I get a perpetual motion unit?
|
Sigras
Conglomo
774
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 23:56:00 -
[189] - Quote
Aluka 7th wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Aluka 7th wrote:Aryth wrote:Aluka 7th wrote:Could some one please explain me what is the problem with T2 BPO and Galente/Caldari outpost copy time bonus? Not sure I get it On the other note, lets get serious. People cry about Marauder and JF BPOs (that don't exist) and based on CCP stats this: http://k162space.com/2012/07/17/percentage-of-items-from-invention-vs-tech-2-bpo/This was 2 years ago, and BPOs get destroyed, stuck on banned account ... IMHO people not counting their invention cost right undermine the market. I had 1400mm II BPO but still invented same gun for the sheer benefit of volume that comes from invention and from that experience I really don't get the T2 BPO issue people raise on forums. Inventors will get good boost of end product with ME -4 becoming ME0 not sure whats the dillio with T2 BPO still/again/over and over again. I got more ISK/day doing nothing and owning ONE moon (large POS getting free R32 moon goo) then from T2 BPO. Think about that. You do not understand the "dillio" because you do not understand the copy time. They are coming up because they are the edge case that keeps causing issues. What issues? Right now, invention beats T2 BPOs except in the smallest of markets. This is because Invention can out produce it. Adjusting T2 BPOs to have short copy times would lead to a greater output from the T2 BPOs, allowing them to squeeze out invention produced modules by undercutting them. (no invention costs) Oh, you could copy T2 BPO in max. bonused outpost (Gal -60% copy time/Cald -50% copy time) then produce in other max bonused outpost (Amarr) from BPC! I get it. Thank you! ***CCP Greyscale Keep copy time 3x manufacturing time or actually make it 2.5x to compensate for 60% reduction of Gal outpost. Also max run BPC of small rig should be 120 not 100 to be in line with other rigs. if a T2 BPO owner has the balls to move his T2 BPO out to 0.0 where he could possibly lose it, why shouldnt he get a slight bonus to production? Maybe not 60% but maybe 10% |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2306
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 01:17:00 -
[190] - Quote
Imma reply to all the actual blueprint-related content tomorrow or Friday, this is just a post to say "stop talking about T2 BPO stuff or I'll start deleting posts" :) |
|
|
Numerius Valerius
Sons of Olsagard
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 01:39:00 -
[191] - Quote
Perhaps BPO's could be researched to increase their Max runs, that could help industrialists use their game time more efficient with 'fast' BPO's like modules. |
Sales Alt negrodamus
SalesAltCorp
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 05:58:00 -
[192] - Quote
Greyscale, on further thought, the invented blueprint market for rigs is kinda goofy with exploration drops being 0/0 while invented ones - at best - are -1/-1.
Please leave exploration drops alone, and don't buff them. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
417
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 06:17:00 -
[193] - Quote
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Greyscale, on further thought, the invented blueprint market for rigs is kinda goofy with exploration drops being 0/0 while invented ones - at best - are -1/-1.
Please leave exploration drops alone, and don't buff them.
that would kill the exploration bpc's- they need to be at least comperable to new "-4/-4" version Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
61
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 06:24:00 -
[194] - Quote
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Greyscale, on further thought, the invented blueprint market for rigs is kinda goofy with exploration drops being 0/0 while invented ones - at best - are -1/-1.
Please leave exploration drops alone, and don't buff them.
Remember, no more neg BPC for anything, so exploration ones may change numbers but prolly not overall materials |
Sales Alt negrodamus
SalesAltCorp
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 07:35:00 -
[195] - Quote
Um, why should exploration drops beat what I can do via invention?
It completely kills markets for invention that are low volume because exploration drops are more than sufficient to handle supply for production. |
Aluka 7th
156
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 08:30:00 -
[196] - Quote
Invention is like alchemy! Way to curb overpricing and not the main thing. It should be very dynamic. You go into it for specific mod/ship when it is profitable and move to something else when its not. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Drunk 'n' Disorderly
187
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 08:36:00 -
[197] - Quote
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Um, why should exploration drops beat what I can do via invention?
It completely kills markets for invention that are low volume because exploration drops are more than sufficient to handle supply for production.
Because
Explorer builds ship takes it out flying for 1 hour fights off npc hacks container and if in low/null sec risks death at hands of Nasty Pies
you press button get stuff
|
Elena Thiesant
Sun Micro Systems
1352
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 09:19:00 -
[198] - Quote
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:Um, why should exploration drops beat what I can do via invention?
If it doesn't, it makes an entire category of exploration loot worthless (and there's already enough worthless BPCs from exploration). With invention we can get exactly what rig BPCs we want. With exploration there's a chance of something useful and a chance for something worthless (like BPCs for a low-volume, barely used rig).
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3574
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 12:20:00 -
[199] - Quote
Since I forgot to post these, the new numbers. Corrected some errors in my sheet along the way as well, so these should be more accurate.
Mining Crystals: Just over an hour (-99%, lol) Drones: Light Drones 1.74 Hours (-64%), mediums 3.48 hours (-30%), large & sentry: 5.3 hours (+1%) Small rigs: 2.7 hours (-66%) Frigate modules: 4.45 hours (-30 to -35%) Medium rigs: 5.56 hours (-65%) All small ammo: 7.29h (unchanged) Large rigs: 8.34h (-74%) Medium/cruiser modules: 9.82h (+25% to +50%, depending on module) Capital rigs: 10.9h (-83%) All medium ammo: 14.57h (+24%) Large battleship guns: 14.71h (+66%) Other large modules: 16.01hh (+80% to +130%) All large ammo: 21.78h (+6%) Frigate hulls: 48.6 hours (+12% to +21% depending on class) Interdictors: 85.59 hours (+55%) Cruiser, Transport & Exhumers: 95.8h (Blockade Runners +5%, DSTs -11%, Recons -4%, Logistics +5%, Hictors -7%, HACs -11%. Exhumers vary from +55% to +93%) Command ships: 135.72h (-11%) Tech II BS: 175.23h (-11%) Jump Freighters: 2527h (105.3 days, +72%) Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 12:21:00 -
[200] - Quote
There is some variance in the capital ship component BPO's
most are at 60 while a few are at 4.
these are at 60:
Capital Propulsion Engine Blueprint Capital Turret Hardpoint Blueprint Capital Sensor Cluster Blueprint Capital Armor Plates Blueprint Capital Capacitor Battery Blueprint Capital Power Generator Blueprint Capital Shield Emitter Blueprint Capital Jump Drive Blueprint Capital Cargo Bay Blueprint Capital Drone Bay Blueprint Capital Computer System Blueprint Capital Construction Parts Blueprint Capital Siege Array Blueprint Capital Launcher Hardpoint Blueprint
while these are at 4:
Capital Doomsday Weapon Mount Blueprint Capital Ship Maintenance Bay Blueprint Capital Corporate Hangar Bay Blueprint Capital Jump Bridge Array Blueprint Capital Clone Vat Bay Blueprint |
|
Theng Hofses
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
64
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 12:45:00 -
[201] - Quote
Having perused the new proposed blueprint file, it becomes inescapable to come to the conclusion that the approach that CCP is taking to solve the click fest that invention is by simply extending the time it takes to invent. Instead of using a technology solution like stacking, a bureaucratic solution has been proposed.
Still, it also remains clear that CCP looks at the industry problem from the perspective of the small scale producer who now and then dabbles in industry as the frame work proposed falls apart when you look at industry from a large scale. Is nobody at CCP doing some kind of analysis what happens when people not build one carrier or other capital at a time, but five, ten, twenty? What happens when you don't build 10 or 20 T2 Sentry Drones, but hundreds or thousands per day?
Disappointing to say the least. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3575
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 14:51:00 -
[202] - Quote
You seem to be operating under the flawed assumption that this is it for invention changes when it's been said many times over that a full rework for invention is still coming after Crius. The purpose of these changes is on the first page of the thread, if you would be so good as to educate yourself. I would note they while it has not been mentioned, these changes also have the upsides of a) closing the competitive gap between T2 BPOs and invention and perhaps more significantly and certainly more importantly b) placing a greater emphasis on the higher skill parts of invention (the actual inventing) as opposed to the copying. After all, specialization should be rewarded. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Lady Gwendolyn Antollare
Federal Logistics Initiative Conglomerate United Interests
9
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 16:06:00 -
[203] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Hi everyone, Following on from the discussion in the devblog thread here, I've decided it's probably time to create a proper thread to discuss revisions to blueprint data, rather than continuing it at the tail end of a 60+ page thread. Here is the situation: - What we are talking about is any "static" blueprint data, eg times and materials for different job types, plus the max runs attribute - We are already going to have to change every blueprint in the game, and to this end have tools set up so that any systemic change to existing numbers takes a couple of minutes to implement, provided it's doing math based on other attributes that are in the same data or otherwise easily available - We do have our fingers in the industry code right now, so small changes to eg formulas are on the table if we can justify them; larger sweeping changes are *not* on the table - We are erring on the side of maintaining the current balance for things that are not on our list of goals (below), but we are happy with any reasonable balance disruptions in pursuit of those goals - We are erring on the side of preserving the status quo in invention over preserving the status quo for T2 BPOs; note that, as previous point, we are not specifically targeting T2 BPOs in any particular way - We are expecting to mechanically rework invention following the Crius release, so we do not want to create wasted work by making too many changes to it for Crius - Simple things that make industry better are very much in our ballpark! Specific goals we are currently pursuing: - We would like to make copy times consistently lower than build times, so building from copies is the optimal play (dovetails with our starbase changes, for example) - We are rebasing invention TE/ME values to all be positive or 0 at all times, removing negative ME/TE from invention outputs, as this solves a number of issues with removing extra materials - We would generally like all blueprint data to follow a coherent pattern; we're still discussing how far we would like to take this - For at least non-invention blueprints, we are reviewing max run numbers to alleviate issues in certain areas eg cap construction, nanite paste - We need to deal with the interaction between the first point on this list, Gallente Outpost copy-time bonuses and T2 BPOs - Removal of waste necessitates an increase in all manufacturing costs - Removal of negative TE/ME probably requires an increase in T2 build costs to balance out component demand before and after Specific changes I am looking at making right now: - Copy time to 80% of build time base; TE and skills mean it works out slightly faster copying than building - Setting rank to equal size*metalevel; rank is defined in this devblog, and I will explain "size" below - Possibly changing build times to be a function of rank; otherwise modules and charges (among other things) may need to break the copy/build paradigm to avoid a big nerf - I'm considering changing invention times so that build time is generally twice copy+invention, to maintain balance across character manufacture and research slots; this also has the advantage of giving invention time a clear driving force - As above, normalizing max run count on things that aren't invented from to make them less tedious to build from in some cases So, with all that said... discuss, and also suggest! We're looking for two things in this thread: discussion of things proposed in this post, and also suggestions for other things we could do to improve the overall blueprint dataset or elements thereof. If there's something in the way the numbers relate to each other, either generally or for specific products, that's always bothered you, please explain it in this thread and we'll look at changing it :) Things we would prioritize if we were making suggestions in this thread, in descending priority: - Explain what the problem is, and why. This is the most important thing for us as developers: to understand what you're trying to solve - Explain a simple, clear solution - preferably one that doesn't require code changes :) - Give specific examples and/or numbers! Thanks, -Greyscale SIZE: 1 - frigate/destroyer modules (power draw between 2 and 34) 2 - cruiser/battlecruiser modules (power draw between 35 and 299) and all "unsized" modules (power draw below 2) 3 - battleship modules (power draw between 300 and 4999) 4 - capital modules (power draw above 5000) 20 - frigates 30 - destroyers 40 - cruisers 50 - battlecruisers 60 - battleships 200 - most capitals 400 - supercarriers 600 - titans Still working out how this will apply to eg structures, it shouldn't be hard, it just needs the math doing :)
wow once again Greyscale pounds a game aspect into the ground with the nerf hammer. "We want to make industry fun!" Ha!
Nerfing Hisec has never fixed Losec or Nullsec |
Theng Hofses
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
64
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 16:25:00 -
[204] - Quote
mynnna wrote:You seem to be operating under the flawed assumption that this is it for invention changes when it's been said many times over that a full rework for invention is still coming after Crius. The purpose of these changes is on the first page of the thread, if you would be so good as to educate yourself. I would note they while it has not been mentioned, these changes also have the upsides of a) closing the competitive gap between T2 BPOs and invention and perhaps more significantly and certainly more importantly b) placing a greater emphasis on the higher skill parts of invention (the actual inventing) as opposed to the copying. After all, specialization should be rewarded.
Having 20+ characters that can do invention with at least 4s, but mostly 5s in the relevant skills where I invent, I still fail to see the reward. Maybe I am just really bad at this game. Wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last time. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1443
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 18:16:00 -
[205] - Quote
Quote:Still, it also remains clear that CCP looks at the industry problem from the perspective of the small scale producer who now and then dabbles in industry as the frame work proposed falls apart when you look at industry from a large scale. Is nobody at CCP doing some kind of analysis what happens when people not build one carrier or other capital at a time, but five, ten, twenty? What happens when you don't build 10 or 20 T2 Sentry Drones, but hundreds or thousands per day?
wait, they just reduced the clicks necessary to perform that task by about 98% and you complain about nerfing large scale invention businesses ?
lol GRRR Goons |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3575
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 18:41:00 -
[206] - Quote
Theng Hofses wrote:mynnna wrote:You seem to be operating under the flawed assumption that this is it for invention changes when it's been said many times over that a full rework for invention is still coming after Crius. The purpose of these changes is on the first page of the thread, if you would be so good as to educate yourself. I would note they while it has not been mentioned, these changes also have the upsides of a) closing the competitive gap between T2 BPOs and invention and perhaps more significantly and certainly more importantly b) placing a greater emphasis on the higher skill parts of invention (the actual inventing) as opposed to the copying. After all, specialization should be rewarded. Having 20+ characters that can do invention with at least 4s, but mostly 5s in the relevant skills where I invent, I still fail to see the reward. Maybe I am just really bad at this game. Wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last time.
Aight, so I have to spell it out for you. That's fine. The reward is that with an emphasis on invention rather than copying, you are (going to be) on a higher footing with 20+ invention characters than someone who has five invention characters being fed by 15 copy alts. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1550
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 20:45:00 -
[207] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Theng Hofses wrote:mynnna wrote:You seem to be operating under the flawed assumption that this is it for invention changes when it's been said many times over that a full rework for invention is still coming after Crius. The purpose of these changes is on the first page of the thread, if you would be so good as to educate yourself. I would note they while it has not been mentioned, these changes also have the upsides of a) closing the competitive gap between T2 BPOs and invention and perhaps more significantly and certainly more importantly b) placing a greater emphasis on the higher skill parts of invention (the actual inventing) as opposed to the copying. After all, specialization should be rewarded. Having 20+ characters that can do invention with at least 4s, but mostly 5s in the relevant skills where I invent, I still fail to see the reward. Maybe I am just really bad at this game. Wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last time. Aight, so I have to spell it out for you. That's fine. The reward is that with an emphasis on invention rather than copying, you are (going to be) on a higher footing with 20+ invention characters than someone who has five invention characters being fed by 15 copy alts.
I don't know why you bother. At this point we should just have an black obelisk and ape graphic for these threads. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
69
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 22:23:00 -
[208] - Quote
Money Makin Mitch wrote:Just flat-out remove the T2 BPOs or seed them on market. Compensate owners with a bunch of copies. They've had more than enough time and opportunity to capitalize off their originals already. Further compensation is not needed as the values of T2 BPOs are due to the Greater Fool theory in action.
The greater fool theory states that the price of an object is determined not by its intrinsic value, but rather by irrational beliefs and expectations of market participants. A price can be justified by a rational buyer under the belief that another party is willing to pay an even higher price.Or one may rationally have the expectation that the item can be resold to a "greater fool" later.
Simply put, some people might lose isk because they speculated on the prints gaining in value without end - that is their own fault and such greed should not be rewarded.
I fully support this, assuming it is done right. Removal of T2 BPOs, not sure what compensation might be, but its sure not going to be a cash prize. |
Theng Hofses
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
64
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 22:54:00 -
[209] - Quote
Some people are happy and content with halfway measures, incomplete features, compromises that just perpetuate a poorly thought through design that falls apart when brought to its logical conclusion. Considering that it will be at least another five years if not more, judging by history, that someone will look at industry again, I'd rather have this done right. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1443
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 23:40:00 -
[210] - Quote
have you read the part where greyscale said that an overhaul of invention is planned for a post-crius release ?
have you also read the part where greyscale said that this is supposed to be a band-aid solution until then ? GRRR Goons |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |