Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Honz
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 05:04:00 -
[1]
I would like to know if anything is going to be done regarding T2 bpo's. Currently I have zero options available to me to acquire a T2 bpo!! Yet at the same time there are multiple T2 bpo's out in the systems that under the current system make it difficult to market anything I might invent since those people that still have them can do research and provide a better product than I ever can. Honestly, when you took the lottery away, it sounded like all T2 bpo's were going to go away, apparently such is not the case. Is there going to be a way to get a T2 bpo in the future or are all T2 bpo's going to go away, and everyone is going to be on the same playing field. As it is now, certain players have an advantage, and there is no way to even the odds. Either give us the opportunity to use a bpo to get a chance at a T2 bpo, or get rid of all of them altogether, the current system benefits those that have been playing forever!!!
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 05:12:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Honz I would like to know if anything is going to be done regarding T2 bpo's. Currently I have zero options available to me to acquire a T2 bpo!! Yet at the same time there are multiple T2 bpo's out in the systems that under the current system make it difficult to market anything I might invent since those people that still have them can do research and provide a better product than I ever can. Honestly, when you took the lottery away, it sounded like all T2 bpo's were going to go away, apparently such is not the case. Is there going to be a way to get a T2 bpo in the future or are all T2 bpo's going to go away, and everyone is going to be on the same playing field. As it is now, certain players have an advantage, and there is no way to even the odds. Either give us the opportunity to use a bpo to get a chance at a T2 bpo, or get rid of all of them altogether, the current system benefits those that have been playing forever!!!
I give this post 95% fail for the wall of text, and 5% fail for the content.
|
Whey
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 05:23:00 -
[3]
I agree, funny that Jinx said that, must be a T2 bpo owner and trying to save his butt.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 05:25:00 -
[4]
Check contracts, because they do go on sale. Saw a Crow BPO up a while back - going price was about 14 billion.
As for removing them, not without at least three years advance warning. My understanding is that their going price is about a year and a half's profits, and we need to give recent buyers enough time to unwind their investments accordingly. Since scheduling any patches to an MMO three years in advance is insanity, I can't support this. The original T2 lottery was flawed as all hell, but it's several years too late to fix it. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 06:58:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Jinx Barker on 07/06/2008 06:59:38
Originally by: Whey I agree, funny that Jinx said that, must be a T2 bpo owner and trying to save his butt.
I am fairly certain that my T2 BPOs are safe and are going to be safe for a very long long time. Invention did this thing... by devaluing some BPOs and actually boosted the value of others, the combination factors altogether pretty much assure the continued existence of T2 BPOs.
But, just because some people are filled to the brim with the green-eyed jealousy because they do not have the T2 BPOs does not bother me a bit. I have my ISK.... /me pats his wallet.
Edit:
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Check contracts, because they do go on sale. Saw a Crow BPO up a while back - going price was about 14 billion.
That was a Scam.... you should check the remaining runs, and it had 1.... Crow would go for no less than 20-25 Bill.
But, they do go on sale yes, I just sold 3 BPOs myself... so yea, we, the greedy T2 BPO holders sometimes sell our BPOs as well.
|
Ethaet
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 11:23:00 -
[6]
Leave the current T2 bpos in the game. There aren't any more being given out, so no problem. |
Sovereign533
Anoint
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 11:39:00 -
[7]
no, there was a problem that t2 bpo owners were getting to rich. and the prices just kept climbing. this was a big issue, and the lottery wasn't able to cope with all this. so, they came up with invention to make the general public capable of building tech 2 stuff. this used to be only for a select few, now it's for the general public. but it can hardly be considered 'fair play' if you take their blueprints away. some payed a LOT of money for them.
and you can hardly consider them overpowered.
however, i'd agree with getting a way of getting tech 2 bpo's. as in, getting the lottery re-instated. at least if one bpo gets lost, another would come back.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 23:34:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Sovereign533 no, there was a problem that t2 bpo owners were getting to rich. and the prices just kept climbing. this was a big issue, and the lottery wasn't able to cope with all this. so, they came up with invention to make the general public capable of building tech 2 stuff. this used to be only for a select few, now it's for the general public. but it can hardly be considered 'fair play' if you take their blueprints away. some payed a LOT of money for them.
and you can hardly consider them overpowered.
however, i'd agree with getting a way of getting tech 2 bpo's. as in, getting the lottery re-instated. at least if one bpo gets lost, another would come back.
Actually, most people did not pay anything for the T2 BPO's they won in the lottery. Others may have paid a little more to aquire them from other players. The vast majority were won, bought and traded early in this game years ago. What the OP and others like him including myself would like to see is a leveling of the playing field concerning T2 invention. We're not asking that all T2 BPO's be removed from the game overnight.
Instead, we'd like to see them converted to max run BPC's that would retain their ME and PE levels. After they are depleted, the owners would then be just like everyone else with regards to T2 invention.
Currently a T2 BPO is an isk making machine. The owners have made their initial investment back many many times over. It's time to even the T2 industry out. T2 BPO ownership is no different than when nano fibers and inertial stabs were nerfed because they presented an unfair advantage in the game. Or when Privateers exploited the war dec system which was subsequently nerfed. T2 BPO owners have little to no competition in the market place because they can always sell their product for less than the guy who had to invent his T2 BPC. I can't see why removing this advantage is any different than the two examples above, or the many examples of balancing that we've seen since day one in Eve.
|
procurement specialist
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 03:59:00 -
[9]
build marauders. no t2 bpos exist. invent and build other items where demand far outweighs supply from bpos. honestly as long as you aren't trying to make something like ammo the t2 bpo effect is negligible or nearly so simply because there are more people buying items than can be made from in game bpos.
not supported. though a better return on me and pe of invention jobs based of t1 bpo they are made from would help. -8 me is frigging ridiculous. :shakes fist:
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 08:01:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Reachok
Currently a T2 BPO is an isk making machine.
How is living in 2006? Try doing a little math before sprouting sentences that were valid 2 years ago.
Originally by: Reachok
The owners have made their initial investment back many many times over. It's time to even the T2 industry out. T2 BPO ownership is no different than when nano fibers and inertial stabs were nerfed because they presented an unfair advantage in the game. Or when Privateers exploited the war dec system which was subsequently nerfed. T2 BPO owners have little to no competition in the market place because they can always sell their product for less than the guy who had to invent his T2 BPC. I can't see why removing this advantage is any different than the two examples above, or the many examples of balancing that we've seen since day one in Eve.
Before saying that the T2 BPO aren't traded and that the current owners have already get back the investment, look the Sell order section of the forum, you will find several T2 BPO traded every day, for a cost equivalent to not less than 2 year of constant production.
|
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 08:44:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Reachok
Currently a T2 BPO is an isk making machine.
How is living in 2006? Try doing a little math before sprouting sentences that were valid 2 years ago.
Originally by: Reachok
The owners have made their initial investment back many many times over. It's time to even the T2 industry out. T2 BPO ownership is no different than when nano fibers and inertial stabs were nerfed because they presented an unfair advantage in the game. Or when Privateers exploited the war dec system which was subsequently nerfed. T2 BPO owners have little to no competition in the market place because they can always sell their product for less than the guy who had to invent his T2 BPC. I can't see why removing this advantage is any different than the two examples above, or the many examples of balancing that we've seen since day one in Eve.
Before saying that the T2 BPO aren't traded and that the current owners have already get back the investment, look the Sell order section of the forum, you will find several T2 BPO traded every day, for a cost equivalent to not less than 2 year of constant production.
Venkul & other sensible folk,
There is no arguing with people like that, really. All they are concerned about is the gnawing feeling they have at the pit of their stomach every time they see someone who has an ability to purchase the T2 BPO, or already has one. What they really want to do is bring everyone and everything to their level, since they do not have it, unable to get it, and would not get it, they feel they need to make it "fair."
Just ignore them, it is not worth arguing with people who have no concept.
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 11:16:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 08/06/2008 11:17:47 delete
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 15:58:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Honz I would like to know if anything is going to be done regarding T2 bpo's. Currently I have zero options available to me to acquire a T2 bpo!! Is there going to be a way to get a T2 bpo in the future or are all T2 bpo's going to go away, and everyone is going to be on the same playing field. As it is now, certain players have an advantage, and there is no way to even the odds.
You can buy one with enough isk when they get sold so id hardly call that not available ever and having zero options tbqh.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 16:26:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Jinx Barker
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Reachok
Currently a T2 BPO is an isk making machine.
How is living in 2006? Try doing a little math before sprouting sentences that were valid 2 years ago.
Originally by: Reachok
The owners have made their initial investment back many many times over. It's time to even the T2 industry out. T2 BPO ownership is no different than when nano fibers and inertial stabs were nerfed because they presented an unfair advantage in the game. Or when Privateers exploited the war dec system which was subsequently nerfed. T2 BPO owners have little to no competition in the market place because they can always sell their product for less than the guy who had to invent his T2 BPC. I can't see why removing this advantage is any different than the two examples above, or the many examples of balancing that we've seen since day one in Eve.
Before saying that the T2 BPO aren't traded and that the current owners have already get back the investment, look the Sell order section of the forum, you will find several T2 BPO traded every day, for a cost equivalent to not less than 2 year of constant production.
Venkul & other sensible folk,
There is no arguing with people like that, really. All they are concerned about is the gnawing feeling they have at the pit of their stomach every time they see someone who has an ability to purchase the T2 BPO, or already has one. What they really want to do is bring everyone and everything to their level, since they do not have it, unable to get it, and would not get it, they feel they need to make it "fair."
Just ignore them, it is not worth arguing with people who have no concept.
It pains me to see people who probably own T2 BPO's, who probably backed the Privateer War Dec nerf, who probably whined about the advantages the Nano pilots had, that will not project the same nerfs t o wning a T2 BPO while the vast makority of the inventors out there have to deal with negative ME and PE. It's called balancing. Can't you wrap your heads around that concept? And, if this truly an argument from 2006, it is still a valid argument today.
And as an owner of a T2 BPO as well as an inventor I can say I'd have no problem if what I have suggested was applied to all T2 BPO owners including myself.
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 16:54:00 -
[15]
IF invention builders were making NO money at all then id say they have a case but the fact is this is about ppl wanting or thinking that they can make more if T2 bpo's are removed and that is rubbish.
Will you whinning cry baby invention muppets be asking ccp to give myself and others the isk we could have made over the years we did not have invention?. You morons have been given a gift that myself and others never had and the first thing you do is cry about the fact that ppl who invested and have been playing the game longer can make MORE isk than you can.
You are pathetic tbh.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 17:05:00 -
[16]
Originally by: lecrotta IF invention builders were making NO money at all then id say they have a case but the fact is this is about ppl wanting or thinking that they can make more if T2 bpo's are removed and that is rubbish.
Will you whinning cry baby invention muppets be asking ccp to give myself and others the isk we could have made over the years we did not have invention?. You morons have been given a gift that myself and others never had and the first thing you do is cry about the fact that ppl who invested and have been playing the game longer can make MORE isk than you can.
You are pathetic tbh.
LOL!! Wow!! Stepping on your toes maybe? BTW, been playing since 2004. I suspect you of being an alt, if so, please post with your main and discuss rather than yell and holler like a little kid. Thanks!
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 17:17:00 -
[17]
Edited by: lecrotta on 08/06/2008 17:24:03
Originally by: Reachok
Originally by: lecrotta IF invention builders were making NO money at all then id say they have a case but the fact is this is about ppl wanting or thinking that they can make more if T2 bpo's are removed and that is rubbish.
Will you whinning cry baby invention muppets be asking ccp to give myself and others the isk we could have made over the years we did not have invention?. You morons have been given a gift that myself and others never had and the first thing you do is cry about the fact that ppl who invested and have been playing the game longer can make MORE isk than you can.
You are pathetic tbh.
LOL!! Wow!! Stepping on your toes maybe? BTW, been playing since 2004. I suspect you of being an alt, if so, please post with your main and discuss rather than yell and holler like a little kid. Thanks!
My main (mid 2003 player) is banned for posting cat pictures on caod and i do not own any bpo's let alone t2.
But if your a 2004 player you should see how lucky you are to have invention instead of complaining that others can make a bit more isk than you can.
PS: i do not invent either im a piwate/pvper and make my isk from loot.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 17:30:00 -
[18]
I had to check to see that I have included the fact that I have a T2 BPO myself, and would be affected by the same thing I'm suggesting. Envious that others are making more isk than I am? Not at all. Oh, and to others who have posted in response to this post, I DO invent some of the newer T2 ship and module BPC's.
I'll not waste everyone's time by repeating what I've already stated.
Cat posts in COAD huh? THAT'S an original reason I give you a +10 on that!
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 17:37:00 -
[19]
Edited by: lecrotta on 08/06/2008 17:40:00
Originally by: Reachok I had to check to see that I have included the fact that I have a T2 BPO myself, and would be affected by the same thing I'm suggesting. Envious that others are making more isk than I am? Not at all. Oh, and to others who have posted in response to this post, I DO invent some of the newer T2 ship and module BPC's.
I'll not waste everyone's time by repeating what I've already stated.
Cat posts in COAD huh? THAT'S an original reason I give you a +10 on that!
So you think that just because you "CLAIM" to own a t2 bpo and have made a rather poor attempt to discredit my point by making a alt comment ( did somebody use the word original). The fact remains the anybody now can invent and make money off T2 items while for years that option was unavailable, and the first thing a few cry babies do is complain that others can make more.
Just because you "CLAIM" to have a t2 bpo does not stop you from being greedy or jealous of ppl who have more or others, in fact it shows that you are a heavy builder and as such massively biased.
Go away.
|
Par'Gellen
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 17:43:00 -
[20]
Converting T2 BPO's to max run T2 BPC's = win. ---
To err is human. But it shouldn't be the company motto... |
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 18:29:00 -
[21]
Originally by: lecrotta Edited by: lecrotta on 08/06/2008 17:40:00
Originally by: Reachok I had to check to see that I have included the fact that I have a T2 BPO myself, and would be affected by the same thing I'm suggesting. Envious that others are making more isk than I am? Not at all. Oh, and to others who have posted in response to this post, I DO invent some of the newer T2 ship and module BPC's.
I'll not waste everyone's time by repeating what I've already stated.
Cat posts in COAD huh? THAT'S an original reason I give you a +10 on that!
So you think that just because you "CLAIM" to own a t2 bpo and have made a rather poor attempt to discredit my point by making a alt comment ( did somebody use the word original). The fact remains the anybody now can invent and make money off T2 items while for years that option was unavailable, and the first thing a few cry babies do is complain that others can make more.
Just because you "CLAIM" to have a t2 bpo does not stop you from being greedy or jealous of ppl who have more or others, in fact it shows that you are a heavy builder and as such massively biased.
Go away.
Alt comment? I am pretty sure I've been posting with my main. Please post with valid points versus high school debating tactics.
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 18:47:00 -
[22]
T2 BPOs are fine as they are now that they are competing with invention. Not supported. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8) |
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 18:50:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Reachok
Originally by: lecrotta
So you think that just because you "CLAIM" to own a t2 bpo and have made a rather poor attempt to discredit my point by making a alt comment ( did somebody use the word original). The fact remains the anybody now can invent and make money off T2 items while for years that option was unavailable, and the first thing a few cry babies do is complain that others can make more.
Just because you "CLAIM" to have a t2 bpo does not stop you from being greedy or jealous of ppl who have more or others, in fact it shows that you are a heavy builder and as such massively biased.
Go away.
Alt comment? I am pretty sure I've been posting with my main. Please post with valid points versus high school debating tactics.
The alt comment you made was against me and my mains ban for posting pictures, or do you have the brains and memory of a goldfish cos i do not claim anywhere that you are posting with a alt. "Ad hominem" attacks are for ppl who have lost their case tbh. But its not unusual for morons to use the "You are a alt get out of jail free card" when they have no argument against a point.
Personally i think everybody should post with alts at least then ppl would be forced to focus on the content instead of the poster and his/her corp/alliance history like you and others who's argument has fallen apart do.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 18:56:00 -
[24]
Originally by: lecrotta
Blah blah...
I'm ending this, you may keep posting however.
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:02:00 -
[25]
Edited by: lecrotta on 08/06/2008 19:03:12
Originally by: Reachok
I'm ending this, you may keep posting however.
Good go away and post on caod thats where ppl insult instead of debate and complain and cry about things instead of taking advantage of opportunities that arise and that others over the years were not lucky enough to have had.
Go play WOW or summat i am sure you can get a job as a gold farmer on one of the servers.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:09:00 -
[26]
Originally by: lecrotta Edited by: lecrotta on 08/06/2008 19:03:12
Originally by: Reachok
I'm ending this, you may keep posting however.
Good go away and post on caod thats where ppl insult instead of debate and complain and cry about things instead of taking advantage of opportunities that arise and that others over the years were not lucky enough to have had.
Go play WOW or summat i am sure you can get a job as a gold farmer on one of the servers.
Ok, one more maybe
By your own definition you should go play WoW. I thought it was funny that you posted cat pictures on COAD and got banned for it. I actually admire that for originality. That wasn't an insult. Apparently that's a sore point with you. At any rate, fly safe, I've posted in several more threads if you'd like to go call me names in them too
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 19:17:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Reachok
Ok, one more maybe
Like anybody is supprised.
Originally by: Reachok I thought it was funny that you posted cat pictures on COAD and got banned for it.
A self claimed 2004 player who thinks that posting cat pictures is original?..yea right pal your lies are getting worse.
Originally by: Reachok
I've posted in several more threads if you'd like to go call me names in them too
No need if your ideas are as moronic as they were on here but il check anyway.
|
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 20:02:00 -
[28]
Originally by: lecrotta
Originally by: Reachok
Ok, one more maybe
Like anybody is supprised.
Originally by: Reachok I thought it was funny that you posted cat pictures on COAD and got banned for it.
A self claimed 2004 player who thinks that posting cat pictures is original?..yea right pal your lies are getting worse.
Originally by: Reachok
I've posted in several more threads if you'd like to go call me names in them too
No need if your ideas are as moronic as they were on here but il check anyway.[/quote
|
Adm Tecumseh
Destructive Influence
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 01:58:00 -
[29]
I spent billions to invent ships and in the process I lost billions, The (minus)ME and chance of sucess rate is far to flawed. Fix the ME and all will be better thereby closing the gap.
Now I only invent a little bit to keep me in my fav ships.
This is expecially true of bigger ships like the JF, Imagine trying to buld an anshar with a -5 me.
Friggin ridiculous
Chris
|
W0RST N1GHTMAR3
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 02:49:00 -
[30]
Either make t2 bpo's available to all or remove them from the game. That way we're all on equal footing. No need to comment on this one, at least not for my benefit, Lecrotta. I always ignore snotty little snips like you.
For the rest, fair is fair.
I believe there was a previous suggestion to set T2 BPOs to a maximum number of runs copy. That sounds reasonable to me and if the number is 1000, isn't that far more than most will ever use?
And just in case you're wondering......this is an alt
|
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 03:07:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh I spent billions to invent ships and in the process I lost billions, The (minus)ME and chance of sucess rate is far to flawed. Fix the ME and all will be better thereby closing the gap.
Now I only invent a little bit to keep me in my fav ships.
This is expecially true of bigger ships like the JF, Imagine trying to buld an anshar with a -5 me.
Friggin ridiculous
Chris
Learn how to use decryptors, already. Toss a Test Reports or Collision Measurements in there, and your Anshar will have only -1 or -2 ME. And given that it's physically impossible to get a better Anshar blueprint, I don't think that's exactly onerous to deal with that. Who cares what the abstract cost is? Perfect research on new T1 is -1 ME. Just add 20% to the base costs and be done with it. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Rat Scout
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 05:07:00 -
[32]
Only option I see is reinstating the lottery, those research agents are preaty boring right now anyway. Tech 2 bpo's stay, and we all get a chance at the lottery again, while prices are stable thanks to invention. So rework this topic to new lottery in the game, and you have my support. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 07:30:00 -
[33]
Originally by: W0RST N1GHTMAR3
Either make t2 bpo's available to all or remove them from the game. That way we're all on equal footing. No need to comment on this one, at least not for my benefit, Lecrotta. I always ignore snotty little snips like you.
Whatever pal your greed and envy are the issue here and neither of them are justification to remove items from the game just cos you wanna make a little more isk. BTW T2 bpo's are available to all as thay pop up on the escrow/auction quite often you just need to check regularly and buy them.
Originally by: W0RST N1GHTMAR3
For the rest, fair is fair.
I believe there was a previous suggestion to set T2 BPOs to a maximum number of runs copy. That sounds reasonable to me and if the number is 1000, isn't that far more than most will ever use?
How is it fair to remove a thing others spent multiple billions on just so a bunch of jealous greedy ppl can make a little more isk?.
|
Khatred
ReallyPissedOff Guinea Pigs
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 07:36:00 -
[34]
No. Am I biased? Probably yes but then again, I don't hide it and try to come up with reasons trying to look like I am not. Wich is what most people do.
As for leveling the playing field, yeah right, what are you going to do next, ask CCP to lobotomize the people smarter than you?
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 15:08:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Jinx Barker on 09/06/2008 15:08:51
Originally by: Khatred As for leveling the playing field, yeah right, what are you going to do next, ask CCP to lobotomize the people smarter than you?
LOL that's pretty accurate of what those people want!
It is all those wow and cs babies coming in with little or no concept of what EVE is about and start spouting off the pearls of wisdom of how a game "should be" and "fairness" and "equal playing field."
EVE has all of it, fairness and equal playing field, one just has to be smart enough to find the way - and take advantage of the ones who are unequal, and be unfair to the ones who are not smart.
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 15:21:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Jinx Barker
Originally by: Khatred As for leveling the playing field, yeah right, what are you going to do next, ask CCP to lobotomize the people smarter than you?
LOL that's pretty accurate of what those people want!
It is all those wow and cs babies coming in with little or no concept of what EVE is about and start spouting off the pearls of wisdom of how a game "should be" and "fairness" and "equal playing field."
EVE has all of it, fairness and equal playing field, one just has to be smart enough to find the way - and take advantage of the ones who are unequal, and be unfair to the ones who are not smart.
/signed
These guys will always find things to complain about while others find the same things and profit from them. I love the comments of "balance" and other crap as well when what they realy want is to play eve in easy mode.
|
Soulita
Inner Core
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:28:00 -
[37]
Very much agreed with the OP.
|
Yara Stone
Southern Productions
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 17:14:00 -
[38]
I would like to see something get done about this in the game. Right now a few old players have items that you cannot obtain ingame, This in my mind would be something akin to developer content for testing. I see a few options to handel it such as change all the bpo's to full run BPC's to remove them from the game or add the ability to create BPO's for these items in game.
Not addressing these in the game because somebody feels that it's unfair to loose all that isk is not smart, it's lowers the gaming experience for the rest of us and should be dealt with. I personally have 2 t2 bpo's and I still want this changed so it's a fair and level gaming for everybody.
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 17:23:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Yara Stone I would like to see something get done about this in the game. Right now a few old players have items that you cannot obtain ingame, This in my mind would be something akin to developer content for testing. I see a few options to handel it such as change all the bpo's to full run BPC's to remove them from the game or add the ability to create BPO's for these items in game.
Not addressing these in the game because somebody feels that it's unfair to loose all that isk is not smart, it's lowers the gaming experience for the rest of us and should be dealt with. I personally have 2 t2 bpo's and I still want this changed so it's a fair and level gaming for everybody.
How does somebody owning something you can buy off them if they decide to sell it lessen your gaming experience???????.
Should i petition ccp for the time i played since 2003 cos invention was not available?, are you and others so pathetic that your jealousy and envy of others is ruining your game time?.
Go farm gold in WOW.
|
Alora Venoda
GalTech Giant Space Amoeba
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 17:24:00 -
[40]
along the lines of the OP's complaint, i find that T2 mining crystals are selling for MUCH less than the invention costs would dictate. the materials to build them are cheap but the datacores are expensive. T2 BPO holders hold the monopoly on these still.
very much /signed ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ Take away the risk and it would make flying around in space utterly pointless.
Take away the flying around part and you make EVE into a space themed spreadsheet application. |
|
Czanthria
Ad Astra Vexillum Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:15:00 -
[41]
I support this, not because I think T2 BPO owners have an unfair advantage, but because it creates cost inequalities which increase the barrier to entry of invention.
In addition, if you actually own a T2 BPO and support this, you can put your money where your mouth is and trash it, you can even wait until you've gotten "max runs" out of it or whatever your proposal would entail. -- Knowledge is Power! |
Killljoy
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:43:00 -
[42]
Why don't they just make invention dual tiered. The current system for makeing BPCs of of T2 gear. And a way more expencive like 100-1000x more data cores and some other new stuff and invention based skills at lvl 5's in the same things you need now. And it will transfer T1 BPOs to T2. Gives poeple a reason to get those high lvl R&D agents. It will remove alot of T1 bpos as they get transfered to T2. It would still take quite a bit of time for new players to get these skills and RP. But it would give some poeple another goal. It doesn't seam like this would be unfair to anyone really, this game is skill and ISK based. And it will feed both really. |
Joe
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 23:58:00 -
[43]
I would only be Satisfied If My Bpos were turned into BPC equal to 3 years worth of production.
Actually i'd only be satisfied if Dev's actually commented on the issue instead of hiding from it. The last peep of info was Ages ago at the last Fanfest (a reply of 'no they won't be changed') But there really is too much Time between actually Dev Comments. Its a constant gamble investing in Assets than can be nurfed becuase of a Forum of Majority whiners.
Pe0w |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 02:02:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Yara Stone I would like to see something get done about this in the game. Right now a few old players have items that you cannot obtain ingame, This in my mind would be something akin to developer content for testing. I see a few options to handel it such as change all the bpo's to full run BPC's to remove them from the game or add the ability to create BPO's for these items in game.
Not addressing these in the game because somebody feels that it's unfair to loose all that isk is not smart, it's lowers the gaming experience for the rest of us and should be dealt with. I personally have 2 t2 bpo's and I still want this changed so it's a fair and level gaming for everybody.
So are you in favour of removing the Apotheosis shuttle from the game? After all, you can no longer acquire it. How about the rare skills MFO, MRO, SDO, and AE? Those are similarly unobtainable. And let's not even get into the unique ships. None of them are obtainable in-game today, two of them are useful for something other than bragging rights, and one class of them is far and away better than any other battleships in existence. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 02:10:00 -
[45]
All the loudmouths who are screaming for the removal of the T2 BPOs from the game... how about going here to this thread T2 BPOS THE FUTURE: Dev Blog Needed and posting your support for a simple DEVBLOG that will nip this in the bud once and for all? Hu?
I own T2 BPO and I want to hear what the developers actually have to say on the issue? Or are you all only good for screaming and yelling on the forums and are afraid to actually ASK for answers, I am not... so show some guts, and ask for them.... |
Dirtee Girl
Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 04:11:00 -
[46]
sorry but no
the argument against t2 bpo's is as valid as a bpo holder saying take invention out of the game because it devalues my assets .
the simple truth is that invention in most cases is often done wrong and quite poorly by those who engage in it . while some inventors churn out 3bill a month easy some make very little because they invent low demand/high competion items constantly having to fight price wars and drop their sell orders to get their return faster .
many threads have bee posted on this topic never has one conclusive argument against the existence of t2 bpo's been made . remember invention came along to reduce and normalize prices on t2 items for the sake of the consumer it is not meant to be a insta wealth generator . if t2 bposs were removed and invention became a higher proft margin enterprise it would become flooded by the mee too crowd and in the end your profits would be bled off by competition and would in the end mirror the profitability of t-1 manufacturing . an inventor has the advantage of volume by being able with a properly funded and laid out production model to out produce the t-2 bpo holder and therefore place on more markets simultaneaously . where as the bpo holder is limited to a single output . if anything the advantage lies with the inventor as long as he isn't working piecemeal and is focused on long term sucess .
i would suggest you invest your time and energy on reseaching product placement and and production optimisation . but that would involve effort and dedication on your part and tbh that not why this thread was posted . because it's obvious that work is exactly what your trying to avoid .
*
* |
Ma Eies
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 08:03:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Ma Eies on 11/06/2008 08:05:03 i know this is just going to be ignored by anyone who disagrees, but T2 BPOs aren't competing with invention, other inventors are. T2 BPOs do not produce enough, that's why T2 prices were so high before invention, inventors flooded on to the scene, dropping prices competing with each other, T2 BPO owners probably make more profit per ship but a good inventor has much more volume possible and flexibility to shift products if their current project loses profitability
if all T2 BPOs where removed right now the market wouldn't be changed at all |
Grarr Dexx
Naval Protection Corp Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 08:27:00 -
[48]
T2 BPO's are fine, over 95% of them have switched hands countless times already.
Not signed.
|
Yorda
Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:17:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Yorda on 11/06/2008 14:17:55 This is just one of the many things stopping newer players from integrating into the current eve universe.
Make them into 100run BPCs or something instead. |
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:22:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Yorda
This is just one of the many things stopping newer players from integrating into the current eve universe.
Actually if the newer players make multi billions of isk they can buy a T2 BPO just like most of the currant holders had to do. |
|
Yorda
Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:28:00 -
[51]
Originally by: lecrotta Actually if the newer players make multi billions of isk they can buy a T2 BPO just like most of the currant holders had to do.
Only if the current holders want to sell them. |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:28:00 -
[52]
Originally by: lecrotta
Originally by: Yorda
This is just one of the many things stopping newer players from integrating into the current eve universe.
Actually if the newer players make multi billions of isk they can buy a T2 BPO just like most of the currant holders had to do.
Current.
Also, life isn't fair, but the game always needs to balanced. CCP has never refrained from changing ships because of peoples investments into them. There is no reason to not extend that to other assets(nor have they ever not extended that into other assets). There needs to be a sound reason for keeping these assets in the game which give a significant advantage to the old guard which is unnecessary and against the spirit of eve, regardless of who currently owns them.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:41:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Goumindong
There needs to be a sound reason for keeping these assets in the game which give a significant advantage to the old guard which is unnecessary and against the spirit of eve, regardless of who currently owns them.
That is the attitude of a nerfit hound.
There needs to be a very good reason to nerf summat not the other way around.
1. The price drop on T2 items ppl are complaining about has come from invention not from BPO's.
2. The T2 market will not rise in price just because BPO's have been removed so this entire idea is about jealousy and how others can make slightly higher profits and anybody who thinks differently is a fool or a liar.
3. BPO holders sell them on occasion giving those who had the wisdom and foresight to build investment capital the chance to gain one. |
CyrixJester
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:44:00 -
[54]
Edited by: CyrixJester on 11/06/2008 14:44:53 Warning, wall of text ahead
The problem with T2 BPOs is not related at all to how profitable it may or may not be to own them. As I see it, the concept has two inherent problems which act to restrict the ability of a new player to integrate into the EVE community.
The first and largest problem in my opinion is that the very existence of T2 BPOs acts as an unfair barrier to entry into the T2 marketplace. As it stands now, a new player attempting to enter the market has to either purchase a BPC with a limited number of runs or invent the relevant BPC themselves. Due to the nature of invention, there is a significant amount of isk and time that must be expended in order to enter the market.
On the other hand, those few who were playing the game back when the T2 lottery was in play simply ran a few missions, and were rewarded with free entry into the marketplace. If the lottery was still in place, this would be less of an issue as it would still be possible to gain the advantage that the older players possess. But instead, we have a limited number of unlimited run blueprints held by those who were around back in 2004 competing with newer players who have to constantly invest new capital in order to remain in the marketplace. This is inherently unfair, and it is irrelevant that the BPOs are traded: they should not exist in the first place.
The second problem comes from a lack of continuity in policy behind the EVE marketplace. The developers have been working to remove their influence on the market for some time now, as best seen with the gradual removal of most NPC-seeded items. Their policy appears to be that, if it can be produced by the players, let the players produce it. This cannot be done with T2 BPOs. I cannot go and make more of them, even though they unduly influence an item that IS produced by the player base. This is an issue that has to be dealt with.
Now, how to compensate those holding the BPOs is fairly simple. Because the BPOs do get traded from time to time, give BPO holders a multi-run BPC of whatever item they have, plus an amount of isk to compensate for the loss of the BPO. CCP would be, in essence, buying out the BPO holders.
TL;DR - T2 BPOs act as a barrier to entry into the market and do not follow CCPs current actions regarding the market, both points serve to discourage new players from integrating into the EVE community. |
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:52:00 -
[55]
Originally by: CyrixJester
The problem with T2 BPOs is not related at all to how profitable it may or may not be to own them. As I see it, the concept has two inherent problems which act to restrict the ability of a new player to integrate into the EVE community.
The first and largest problem in my opinion is that the very existence of T2 BPOs acts as an unfair barrier to entry into the T2 marketplace. As it stands now, a new player attempting to enter the market has to either purchase a BPC with a limited number of runs or invent the relevant BPC themselves. Due to the nature of invention, there is a significant amount of isk and time that must be expended in order to enter the market.
An older player without any BPO's has to buy into the market as well buddy just like he needs or needed to train skills or earn isk for ships this is not a eve age issue at all.
Originally by: CyrixJester
On the other hand, those few who were playing the game back when the T2 lottery was in play simply ran a few missions, and were rewarded with free entry into the marketplace.
Wrong
Just because ppl have been playing longer does not mean they have access to t2 bpo's or the market. Ive been playing since 2003 and i do not have a t2 bpo or a t1 for that matter unless it drops from somebody wreck. |
Yorda
Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:54:00 -
[56]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean An older player without any BPO's has to buy into the market as well buddy just like he needs or needed to train skills or earn isk for ships this is not a eve age issue at all.
Wrong
Just because ppl have been playing longer does not mean they have access to t2 bpo's or the market. Ive been playing since 2003 and i do not have a t2 bpo or a t1 for that matter unless it drops from somebody wreck.
I really don't miss marakov or whatever your alt was called. Your posting is worse than mine. |
CyrixJester
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:58:00 -
[57]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
An older player without any BPO's has to buy into the market as well buddy just like he needs or needed to train skills or earn isk for ships this is not a eve age issue at all.
How is it not an age issue? The older players had a chance to get T2 BPOs via the lottery, newer players do not. The supply of T2 BPOs is limited by this, and such a restriction only benefits older players who hold the BPOs or can afford to purchase the BPOs. Newer players can either sell GTCs in the hope of getting enough isk to buy one of a limited number of GTCs, or go without. |
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 14:59:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Yorda
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean An older player without any BPO's has to buy into the market as well buddy just like he needs or needed to train skills or earn isk for ships this is not a eve age issue at all.
Wrong
Just because ppl have been playing longer does not mean they have access to t2 bpo's or the market. Ive been playing since 2003 and i do not have a t2 bpo or a t1 for that matter unless it drops from somebody wreck.
I really don't miss marakov or whatever your alt was called. Your posting is worse than mine.
Your idea of content and rational argument has not changed much has it.
Go away.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 15:04:00 -
[59]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 11/06/2008 15:04:41
Originally by: CyrixJester
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
An older player without any BPO's has to buy into the market as well buddy just like he needs or needed to train skills or earn isk for ships this is not a eve age issue at all.
How is it not an age issue? The older players had a chance to get T2 BPOs via the lottery, newer players do not. The supply of T2 BPOs is limited by this, and such a restriction only benefits older players who hold the BPOs or can afford to purchase the BPOs. Newer players can either sell GTCs in the hope of getting enough isk to buy one of a limited number of GTCs, or go without.
What about older players who were not carebear mission runners?, they (I) are in the same boat as the newer players.
As i said this is not about age its about jealousy and bitterness, as nothing will change if BPO's get removed other than NOBODY EVER young or old will get a chance to own one.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Nynaeve Ares
Animus Incarnate
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 15:10:00 -
[60]
Something needs to be done to level the playing field. |
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 15:15:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Nynaeve Ares Something needs to be done to level the playing field.
The first thing that invention did was crash the t2 market prices, this was not the bpo holders or the buyers it was the sellers undercutting each other. Now a BPO holder may be able to make a bit more profit that a inventor but thats it and its not effecting the inventors one bit unless you count envy and thats no reason to remove summat. |
CyrixJester
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 15:18:00 -
[62]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean What about older players who were not carebear mission runners?, they (I) are in the same boat as the newer players.
As i said this is not about age its about jealousy and bitterness, as nothing will change if BPO's get removed other than NOBODY EVER young or old will get a chance to own one.
Their presence in the game only stands to benefit the few who currently possess them. All other players, young or old, are affected by this. However, the opportunity to own them was only available to the older players. The capital needed to purchase them is only available (without selling GTCs) to the older players. Why shouldn't the BPOs be removed from the game is the better question.
I'm not saying that CCP should simply delete all the T2 BPOs from the owners' hangars, they should be properly compensated. However, the BPOs give a distinct competitive advantage to those players who were around when they were being offered and decided to enter the lottery. The lottery itself was unfair, and the invention system is a better way of handling T2 items. Why not complete the transition? |
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 15:27:00 -
[63]
Originally by: CyrixJester
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean What about older players who were not carebear mission runners?, they (I) are in the same boat as the newer players.
As i said this is not about age its about jealousy and bitterness, as nothing will change if BPO's get removed other than NOBODY EVER young or old will get a chance to own one.
Their presence in the game only stands to benefit the few who currently possess them. All other players, young or old, are affected by this. However, the opportunity to own them was only available to the older players. The capital needed to purchase them is only available (without selling GTCs) to the older players. Why shouldn't the BPOs be removed from the game is the better question.
I'm not saying that CCP should simply delete all the T2 BPOs from the owners' hangars, they should be properly compensated. However, the BPOs give a distinct competitive advantage to those players who were around when they were being offered and decided to enter the lottery. The lottery itself was unfair, and the invention system is a better way of handling T2 items. Why not complete the transition?
Why remove them and stop younger or older players from ever owning a t2 bpo as these players may not stay poor forever and young players do get older and richer over time.
T2 BPO's do nothing to reduce the profit of inventors as the inventors themselves have already crashed the market prices of t2 items in their haste to make quick profits.
The only thing removing them would serve is to satisfy the jealousy and envy of bitter ppl who have nothing to gain or lose form the removal other than venomous satisfaction.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
CyrixJester
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 15:47:00 -
[64]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Why remove them and stop younger or older players from ever owning a t2 bpo as these players may not stay poor forever and young players do get older and richer over time.
T2 BPO's do nothing to reduce the profit of inventors as the inventors themselves have already crashed the market prices of t2 items in their haste to make quick profits.
The only thing removing them would serve is to satisfy the jealousy and envy of bitter ppl who have nothing to gain or lose form the removal other than venomous satisfaction.
The T2 market, before invention, was priced the way it was because there were so few actors in the market. The prices dropped drastically because invention allowed drastically more people to enter the market. More supply + constant demand = lower prices. Fairly basic economics.
This does not excuse the fact that T2 BPO holders still have a major competitive advantage over those who gain BPCs via invention. Their advantage is that they did not have to expend the capital and time in the invention process to gain their BPO. Due to the nature of the BPO, they will never have to jump through these hurdles to remain in the market.
Everyone else must continually invent new BPCs in order to remain in the market. This is, in and of itself, unfair. While, in the long run, the advantage of holding a BPO as opposed to a BPC may be only a few percentage points more of profit, this adds up quickly in the highly competitive market in Empire. Profit margins are razor-thin as it is, the BPOs only serve to make the rich richer.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 16:41:00 -
[65]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 11/06/2008 16:45:38
Originally by: CyrixJester
The T2 market, before invention, was priced the way it was because there were so few actors in the market. The prices dropped drastically because invention allowed drastically more people to enter the market. More supply + constant demand = lower prices. Fairly basic economics.
Exactly, T2 BPO's have had no effect on the profits of inventors these profits have declined due to a now abundance of supply and that is 100% due to invention.
Originally by: CyrixJester
This does not excuse the fact that T2 BPO holders still have a major competitive advantage over those who gain BPCs via invention. Their advantage is that they did not have to expend the capital and time in the invention process to gain their BPO. Due to the nature of the BPO, they will never have to jump through these hurdles to remain in the market.
Total rubbish.
Before invention ppl were buying t2 products from a few areas and transporting them across empire or into low sec or 0.0 to make profit from the markup they added, now they just invent the stuff themselves to make a profit and save themselves the traveling.
Originally by: CyrixJester
Everyone else must continually invent new BPCs in order to remain in the market. This is, in and of itself, unfair. While, in the long run, the advantage of holding a BPO as opposed to a BPC may be only a few percentage points more of profit, this adds up quickly in the highly competitive market in Empire. Profit margins are razor-thin as it is, the BPOs only serve to make the rich richer.
Another load of rubbish.
The market is thin because so many ppl invent and if so many are doing it then it must be profitable. Now a BPO holder may be able to make a little more isk per sale but the fact is that he has zero effect at all on the inventors profit margins in the game as they are already saturating the market and would not be doing that if it was not worth it.
I do not claim that BPO holders do not have a slight advantage but the fact is that the advantage does not negativity effect inventors in any way so complaining about it is just sour grapes and thats pathetic, petty and non issue as far as a removal is concerned.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Dramaticus
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 17:12:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Dramaticus on 11/06/2008 17:12:26 If invention is good enough for me, its good enough for T2 BPO holders. Please don't use RL pictuers of players in Sig without permission. - WeatherMan |
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 17:31:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Dramaticus
If invention is good enough for me, its good enough for T2 BPO holders.
Thats hardy a good reason to remove summat from the game. And lets face it goons were good enough for you...... |
Arithron
Gallente Trade Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 18:03:00 -
[68]
Actually, inventors hold a competitive advantage over BPO holders. Inventors can invent and build from multiple BPC at once, so run full factory slots, churning out more product per given time period than a BPO holder.
The BPO holder, unless s/he has multiple copies of a BPO, is stuck with a limited production per given time period.
Over time, the inventor has the edge, since they sell more and hence end up with more iskies, even given slightly lower profit per item. Its a volume effect.
I know players who have only ever invented and made 10's of bils in a year, more than owning a copy of the BPO would have yeilded in the same time.
take care, Arithron |
Dramaticus
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 18:04:00 -
[69]
Originally by: lecrotta
Originally by: Dramaticus
If invention is good enough for me, its good enough for T2 BPO holders.
Thats hardy a good reason to remove summat from the game. And lets face it goons were good enough for you......
OH MAN A JOKE ABOUT MY ALLIANCE GOSH I HAVE BEEN TOTALLY WRECKED HERE.
It's a perfectly good reason. Hell, CCP has changed far more important things for much worse reasons, so it doesn't take much. |
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 18:08:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Arithron Actually, inventors hold a competitive advantage over BPO holders. Inventors can invent and build from multiple BPC at once, so run full factory slots, churning out more product per given time period than a BPO holder.
The BPO holder, unless s/he has multiple copies of a BPO, is stuck with a limited production per given time period.
Over time, the inventor has the edge, since they sell more and hence end up with more iskies, even given slightly lower profit per item. Its a volume effect.
I know players who have only ever invented and made 10's of bils in a year, more than owning a copy of the BPO would have yeilded in the same time.
take care, Arithron
Well said bud unfortunately the cry babies never see this or add it into their equations, they only see that the single BPO can mathematical make a cheaper item on occasion. The larger picture eludes them in their haste to run to the forum crying about it. |
|
Smatchimo
GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 21:11:00 -
[71]
I'm against T2 BPOs because, much like Jade, they are extremely imbalanced and their very existence causes unnecessary conflict.
|
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 21:28:00 -
[72]
T2 bpos should have been removed when invention was released. The fact that they still exist probably proves some CCP devs have a large stash of them that they don't want to give up.
T2 bpos are not available to the new player anymore. New players are completely at the mercy of older players if they even wish to purchase one at a ridiculously inflated price.
It's dumb and the only people supporting keeping them have private t2 bpos that they have been making money on since the beginning of time. It's time to kill off a bad idea once and for all.
|
CyrixJester
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 21:31:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Arithron Actually, inventors hold a competitive advantage over BPO holders. Inventors can invent and build from multiple BPC at once, so run full factory slots, churning out more product per given time period than a BPO holder.
The BPO holder, unless s/he has multiple copies of a BPO, is stuck with a limited production per given time period.
Over time, the inventor has the edge, since they sell more and hence end up with more iskies, even given slightly lower profit per item. Its a volume effect.
I know players who have only ever invented and made 10's of bils in a year, more than owning a copy of the BPO would have yeilded in the same time.
take care, Arithron
BPO holders are only limited in their production if and only if they choose to opt out of invention. Holding a BPO doesn't prevent them from inventing T2 BPCs. The issue with the BPO comes from the fact that once you get the BPO, you never lose production from it. It tilts the market in favor of the BPO holder because he can play by the same rules as everyone else and come out ahead every single time.
A bit of an example to try to clarify my point. We have two producers, both of whom have equal skill in their production and invention skills. Both are producing Vagabonds. However, one of them has a BPO for this item, while the other does not. This BPO lets him produce 2 in one run. The other player must rely on invention and BPCs, which nets him 2 per BPC.
As the second producer can have many BPCs in production, you may think that he has the comparative advantage. He can produce many more Vagabonds than his competitor with the BPO can. Using only his BPO, he can only produce 2 vagabonds in the same time the inventor can produce 2*X vagabonds. X is the number of BPCs he successfully invents.
But wait, why can't the BPO holder also use invention to get Vagabond BPCs as well? He can put in just as much effort as the inventor, yet he will always be able to produce more than the person without the BPO. He changes the formula from 2 versus 2*X to 2+(2*X), BPO + BPCs, versus simply 2*X. The BPO holder always wins in this scenario, unless he gets lazy.
THAT is why it is an unfair competitive advantage, and THAT is why the BPOs need to be removed from the game.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 22:03:00 -
[74]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 11/06/2008 22:06:56
Originally by: CyrixJester
BPO holders are only limited in their production if and only if they choose to opt out of invention. Holding a BPO doesn't prevent them from inventing T2 BPCs. The issue with the BPO comes from the fact that once you get the BPO, you never lose production from it. It tilts the market in favor of the BPO holder because he can play by the same rules as everyone else and come out ahead every single time.
A bit of an example to try to clarify my point. We have two producers, both of whom have equal skill in their production and invention skills. Both are producing Vagabonds. However, one of them has a BPO for this item, while the other does not. This BPO lets him produce 2 in one run. The other player must rely on invention and BPCs, which nets him 2 per BPC.
As the second producer can have many BPCs in production, you may think that he has the comparative advantage. He can produce many more Vagabonds than his competitor with the BPO can. Using only his BPO, he can only produce 2 vagabonds in the same time the inventor can produce 2*X vagabonds. X is the number of BPCs he successfully invents.
But wait, why can't the BPO holder also use invention to get Vagabond BPCs as well? He can put in just as much effort as the inventor, yet he will always be able to produce more than the person without the BPO. He changes the formula from 2 versus 2*X to 2+(2*X), BPO + BPCs, versus simply 2*X. The BPO holder always wins in this scenario, unless he gets lazy.
THAT is why it is an unfair competitive advantage, and THAT is why the BPOs need to be removed from the game.
There is no competitive advantage to owning a BPO as they do not reduce the profit of inventors at all.
The difference between the two builders profit in your example is utterly insignificant when you consider the scale on which you are trying to apply it.
YES the BPO holder can make slightly more profit but in no way do BPO's reduce the profits that a inventor can make so to remove them out of spite cos a few ppl who invested billions to buy them can do so is a petty and pathetic act of jealousy. |
Dagas Hunter
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 22:37:00 -
[75]
Old players have an unfair advantage? Well that's nothing new. They have more SP, more ISK, more blueprints, more of everything, but that's how eve works.
I never won any BPO on the lottery so I'm not saying this to save my own skin, it's simply a fact about EVE, it's not fair.
That said I wouldn't mind if there was a few more BPO added to even things out. Maybe a really small chance of getting one when inventing a BPC, I just don't think it's going to happen.
|
CyrixJester
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 23:02:00 -
[76]
Edited by: CyrixJester on 11/06/2008 23:02:42 Edited by: CyrixJester on 11/06/2008 23:02:13 A producer who holds a BPO has, by definition, a competitive advantage over the non-BPO holding producer.
Originally by: Wikipedia A firm possesses a sustainable competitive advantage when it has value-creating processes and positions that cannot be duplicated or imitated by other firms that lead to the production of above-normal rents.
The value-creating position here is that pesky T2 BPO. The holder of said BPO will always have an advantage, no matter how slight, over anyone who doesnÆt. The manner in which they were given out was somewhat arbitrary as I understand it, and this process went out the door when Invention was introduced into the game. What we have now is a source of guaranteed income for those who happen to possess a T2 BPO. Yes, one can spend an inordinate amount of money to purchase a T2 BPO. Well, not inordinate, but actually the total lifetime value of possessing the BPO, but thatÆs just going back into intermediate microeconomics for me, and I really donÆt want to go there right now.
Anyways, the scale of the advantage created by holding the T2 BPO is completely irrelevant. They serve only to destabilize the market in favor of those who were either lucky enough to earn one via the lottery or had the resources available to purchase one. The invention system was designed to make the BPOs irrelevant, and I will agree that it largely has. Why NOT eliminate the final vestige of the T2 lottery? It only serves to benefit a few. I am not suggesting that those people with the BPOs should simply lose them. They should be compensated for the value of the BPO. They should not, however, continue to hold onto said BPO. CCP is currently attempting to render as much control of the market as possible over to the player base, and the T2 BPO is one final aspect of developer interference on the market that should be done away with. This is not a æpetty and pathetic act of jealousy.Æ This is basic economic theory . . . I have not broken new ground in advocating against outside interference in the marketplace. Yes, holders of the BPOs have gained from this interference. No, they arenÆt responsible for the interference in the first place. No, they should not be punished for their gains. Yes, they should be compensated in full for the loss of the BPO.
If the holders of the BPOs really benefit as little as is claimed from their possessions, then why do they sell for so much isk? Why wouldnÆt they be willing to give them up. As has been claimed in this thread, there is no real benefit from hanging on to them. So why not get rid of them?
|
Killljoy
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 00:43:00 -
[77]
Once again the easiest way to fix this issue is to make a very hard way of getting new ones into the game. I admit there would still be poeple crying that its to hard. But it should be an option.
|
Bra'nn Draythe
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 02:50:00 -
[78]
Originally by: lecrotta
Originally by: Nynaeve Ares Something needs to be done to level the playing field.
The first thing that invention did was crash the t2 market prices, this was not the bpo holders or the buyers it was the sellers undercutting each other. Now a BPO holder may be able to make a bit more profit that a inventor but thats it and its not effecting the inventors one bit unless you count envy and thats no reason to remove summat.
And do you know why the T2 market crashed? Because it went from an oligopoly to something a lot closer to an open market. However, there is still one significant barrier separating the T2 BPC inventors from the T2 BPO holders, and that is the cost/risk aspect of invention.
A BPO is pretty much guaranteed to have a better ME than any invention BPC, in fact I don't think it's possible to have a worse one. And since most BPCs from invention have negative ME's, that means that at the very least, the BPC inventor already has a 10% higher base cost to their production. Add in the 'every attempt is a success' unrealistic cost of invention with datacores, T1 BPCs, and time, and you have an even higher cost overhead for the inventor. Tack on the possibility of that T2 BPO being researched to ME 10 and it gets even worse.
The production cost differences are staggering. Sure there are T2 items where there is no T1 equivalent, but they're not nearly as popular.
It's why most T2 frigate invention is pretty much a guaranteed lost because of the non-scaling cost of decryptors and the base construction costs.
Crunching the numbers on production costs was impressive and eye-opening to say the least.
Turning the existing BPO's into max-run BPC's would be too harsh, but give them a limit. Maybe 100 runs or something, but they're still relics of a darker time for EVE's economy. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 02:58:00 -
[79]
Bra'nn does raise one good point here, and that's the non-scaling cost of decryptors. I would endorse a plan to make invention take as many decryptors as datacores in order to get decryption bonuses, assuming that drop rates and current stack sizes were increased accordingly(say, x16 or so?). |
Joe
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 04:53:00 -
[80]
Seems everyone's prepared to whine about the situation that Dev's created and constantly critisize their game design. Nobody gives any thought for the Players that continue to save their iskies and buy BPOs. (the option thats allways been there, but sure, whine becuase thats somehow 'unfair')
Is the last official comment from FanFest '07 of 'No change for t2 bpos' still Valid, or will people that continue to invest 10's of Bil in T2 BPOS be screwed over by stealth nurf?
|
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 06:35:00 -
[81]
Originally by: CyrixJester
Originally by: Arithron Actually, inventors hold a competitive advantage over BPO holders. Inventors can invent and build from multiple BPC at once, so run full factory slots, churning out more product per given time period than a BPO holder.
The BPO holder, unless s/he has multiple copies of a BPO, is stuck with a limited production per given time period.
Over time, the inventor has the edge, since they sell more and hence end up with more iskies, even given slightly lower profit per item. Its a volume effect.
I know players who have only ever invented and made 10's of bils in a year, more than owning a copy of the BPO would have yeilded in the same time.
take care, Arithron
BPO holders are only limited in their production if and only if they choose to opt out of invention. Holding a BPO doesn't prevent them from inventing T2 BPCs. The issue with the BPO comes from the fact that once you get the BPO, you never lose production from it. It tilts the market in favor of the BPO holder because he can play by the same rules as everyone else and come out ahead every single time.
A bit of an example to try to clarify my point. We have two producers, both of whom have equal skill in their production and invention skills. Both are producing Vagabonds. However, one of them has a BPO for this item, while the other does not. This BPO lets him produce 2 in one run. The other player must rely on invention and BPCs, which nets him 2 per BPC.
As the second producer can have many BPCs in production, you may think that he has the comparative advantage. He can produce many more Vagabonds than his competitor with the BPO can. Using only his BPO, he can only produce 2 vagabonds in the same time the inventor can produce 2*X vagabonds. X is the number of BPCs he successfully invents.
But wait, why can't the BPO holder also use invention to get Vagabond BPCs as well? He can put in just as much effort as the inventor, yet he will always be able to produce more than the person without the BPO. He changes the formula from 2 versus 2*X to 2+(2*X), BPO + BPCs, versus simply 2*X. The BPO holder always wins in this scenario, unless he gets lazy.
THAT is why it is an unfair competitive advantage, and THAT is why the BPOs need to be removed from the game.
Using your example, serious producer building only vagabonds:
BPO holder can produce 18 Vagabonds from invented BPC in x time, plus 3 from BPO (lower production time, let's give him a greter bonus than real). So 21 Vagabonds.
They sell at 100 each, Gain from BPC 10, from BPO 20. total gain 240.
Equivalent producer, using only invnetion. 20 Vagabonds, netting 10 each. His return 200.
The inestment of the first players is something like 40 billions, the investmen of the second player is about 1 billion.
So who is getting the better return from the investment?
Part II. Selling 20 Vagabond each they have crashed the market, now the vagabond sell at 85. They switch invention to another item that cost 90 to invent and sell at 100.
Inventor still get 200 from his inventions. The BPO holder can choose to use the BPo and get 180 from invention and 15 from the BPO for 195 total (less than a pure inventor) or can stop producing from the BPO and do only invention for 200, but then he has unused a 40 billion asset.
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 06:38:00 -
[82]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 12/06/2008 06:42:46
Originally by: CyrixJester
A producer who holds a BPO has, by definition, a competitive advantage over the non-BPO holding producer.
Originally by: Wikipedia A firm possesses a sustainable competitive advantage when it has value-creating processes and positions that cannot be duplicated or imitated by other firms that lead to the production of above-normal rents.
The value-creating position here is that pesky T2 BPO.
Notice the bolded part of your citation? Invention is exactly the duplicating an imitating procedure they cite.
Originally by: CyrixJester
If the holders of the BPOs really benefit as little as is claimed from their possessions, then why do they sell for so much isk? Why wouldnÆt they be willing to give them up. As has been claimed in this thread, there is no real benefit from hanging on to them. So why not get rid of them?
Because people like you and your friends see "TII" and stop thinking, not doing the math of the returns and because there is people with a lot of isk and little avenue of investment.
When and if you have 50-100 billions in the wallet and not the time to run after good investments in all EVE a 1% return from something that require relatively little work can seem worthwhile.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 06:54:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Using your example, serious producer building only vagabonds:
BPO holder can produce 18 Vagabonds from invented BPC in x time, plus 3 from BPO (lower production time, let's give him a greter bonus than real). So 21 Vagabonds.
They sell at 100 each, Gain from BPC 10, from BPO 20. total gain 240.
Equivalent producer, using only invnetion. 20 Vagabonds, netting 10 each. His return 200.
The inestment of the first players is something like 40 billions, the investmen of the second player is about 1 billion.
So who is getting the better return from the investment?
Part II. Selling 20 Vagabond each they have crashed the market, now the vagabond sell at 85. They switch invention to another item that cost 90 to invent and sell at 100.
Inventor still get 200 from his inventions. The BPO holder can choose to use the BPo and get 180 from invention and 15 from the BPO for 195 total (less than a pure inventor) or can stop producing from the BPO and do only invention for 200, but then he has unused a 40 billion asset.
THIS.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Lutien
z-inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 10:52:00 -
[84]
Edited by: Lutien on 12/06/2008 10:53:34 Edited by: Lutien on 12/06/2008 10:52:45 The t2 market is know a dual market. invention and t2 bpo's. In the time there were only t2 ship/mods prices exploded. if you remove the t2 bpo's there won't be a steady suply of all kind of t2 goods and the market's will get cleaned out(market manipulation) witch will result in verry high prices (the pvp guy's wine, a lot louder than than the people on this post). We now have a stable t2 market, witch is good for pvp and that is what ccp wants. loosing a t2 ship in pvp combat is not so expensive. if t2 come's from 1 sourge i will be and t2 ships will only be used in mission play.
The t2 bpo holders have a adv over invention since they can make it cheaper, however they have only one bpo(one factorie) and can not switch if the product they produce is no longer hot on the market, inventors can.
Adding new t2 bpo's will make invention useless, and degrade's t2 building to t1 building.
|
Bakatu Kat
Kat Family
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 12:24:00 -
[85]
Why the hell are you all talking about market and profit? For me its simple. I have a corp and t2 bpo owner has one. both have same number of chars in corp. who needs to spend more time to produce t2 ships for number of corpmates? and thats all. time for copying + time of invention + more minerals means that invention looses solution (apply one or both): 1. change t2 bpos to max run bpcs 2. let me/pe level of t1 bpc influence the outcome of invention (me/pe of t2 bpc)
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 12:40:00 -
[86]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 12/06/2008 12:41:45
Originally by: Bakatu Kat
Why the hell are you all talking about market and profit? For me its simple. I have a corp and t2 bpo owner has one. both have same number of chars in corp. who needs to spend more time to produce t2 ships for number of corpmates? and thats all. time for copying + time of invention + more minerals means that invention looses. solution (apply one or both): 1. change t2 bpos to max run bpcs 2. let me/pe level of t1 bpc influence the outcome of invention (me/pe of t2 bpc)
edit for support
Did you factor in the MULTI billion cost for the BPO and at a margin of a mil or so per ship extra profit for using it you need to build 2-4 thousand ships before you see any return above that of a inventor.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Joe
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 12:48:00 -
[87]
UBPC weren't nurfed into max run bpc, but bpc with massive amount of runs. Why would T2 bp be nurfed to max runs?
The real issue that needs to be raised with the devs by the CSM is the Continuing investment of 10's of bil for bpos, after the '07 Fanfest Q&A response of 'no T2 change planned'
Pe0w |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 16:52:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Joe The real issue that needs to be raised with the devs by the CSM is the Continuing investment of 10's of bil for bpos, after the '07 Fanfest Q&A response of 'no T2 change planned'
You are 100% correct Joe - and that is why I have created this thread: T2 BPO Future - Request for a comprehensive Dev Blog
Linking it here for a second time, because I want all the whiners to actually show some backbone and ASK a question, rather than spout garbage. Of course, all those in favor of BPOs staying the way they are should also be legitimately interested in the answers as well.
|
Jurgen Cartis
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:12:00 -
[89]
I love people who assume that BPOs have 0 cost to acquire for the current owners. Especially when they then go on about the costs of datacores and decryptors. Even more so when they whine about how they can't acquire them in the same post!
I do have to wonder how many BPOs are with their original owners. The Sell Orders forum would have me believe its not a large number.
However, topics like this make me want something stronger than simply not supporting it, I want a thumbs down. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:30:00 -
[90]
Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 20:30:32 It's hilarious people trying to justify t2 bpos to stay in the game with some sort of I paid x number of isk for something as if it means anything at all. Please, really you make me laugh.
When items can no longer be acquired by anyone in game they should no longer exist in game. This is pretty standard game design stuff which CCP and some people here can't get their head around.
|
|
Dianeces
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:38:00 -
[91]
Originally by: teji
When items can no longer be acquired by anyone in game they should no longer exist in game.
You're absolutely right, you can't buy T2 BPOs at all. Ever. They're never sold. Especially since (insert large alliance here) has them all.
|
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:51:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Dianeces You're absolutely right, you can't buy T2 BPOs at all. Ever. They're never sold. Especially since (insert large alliance here) has them all.
The mechanism for releasing t2 bpos into the game is gone. Unless they reinstated the lottery when I wasn't looking.
|
Dianeces
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:56:00 -
[93]
Originally by: teji
Originally by: Dianeces You're absolutely right, you can't buy T2 BPOs at all. Ever. They're never sold. Especially since (insert large alliance here) has them all.
The mechanism for releasing t2 bpos into the game is gone. Unless they reinstated the lottery when I wasn't looking.
Oh, I see now. Because the lottery is gone, you can't get them without working for it anymore. :shobon:
|
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 21:17:00 -
[94]
Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 21:18:06 Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 21:17:44
Originally by: Dianeces Oh, I see now. Because the lottery is gone, you can't get them without working for it anymore. :shobon:
Because the lottery is gone there is no way to get one that doesn't involve bending over.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 21:23:00 -
[95]
Originally by: teji
Originally by: Dianeces Oh, I see now. Because the lottery is gone, you can't get them without working for it anymore. :shobon:
Because the lottery is gone there is no way to get one that doesn't involve bending over.
Do you mean paying for them?.
Would you buy a BPO for 40ish bil when all it would save you is 1-4 mil per ship it builds?. Considering you can put out a almost unlimited number with invention it is not worth it tbh.
The only reason i can see that ppl want BPO's removed is sour grapes cos realistically they are losing nothing by not owning one and buying one is not financially worth it. So we are left with the bitter morons crying about not owning or being able to afford one when they are sold.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 21:39:00 -
[96]
Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 21:39:29
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean Would you buy a BPO for 40ish bil when all it would save you is 1-4 mil per ship it builds?. Considering you can put out a almost unlimited number with invention it is not worth it tbh.
You just illustrated perfectly why t2 bpos aren't realistically acquirable for profit making and leaving them in the game only benefits the old time gamers.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 21:49:00 -
[97]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 12/06/2008 21:51:04
Originally by: teji
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean Do you mean paying for them?.
Would you buy a BPO for 40ish bil when all it would save you is 1-4 mil per ship it builds?. Considering you can put out a almost unlimited number with invention it is not worth it tbh.
The only reason i can see that ppl want BPO's removed is sour grapes cos realistically they are losing nothing by not owning one and buying one is not financially worth it. So we are left with the bitter morons crying about not owning or being able to afford one when they are sold.
You just illustrated perfectly why t2 bpos aren't realistically acquirable for profit making and leaving them in the game only benefits the old time gamers.
I also pointed out that they are of no real benefit to anybody but i see you chose to snip that bit and the reason why ppl like you still want them removed. (RE-ADDED) |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 22:27:00 -
[98]
Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 22:28:39 Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 22:27:47
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean I also pointed out that they are of no real benefit to anybody but i see you chose to snip that bit and the reason why ppl like you still want them removed. (RE-ADDED)
They benefit those who got them originally since they didn't have the up-front cost. Also since the ME/PE is still better than any invention they still print isk. I would accept a change for T2 bpos to make them have worse ME/PE than invention instead of removing them from the game. That seems pretty reasonable. You get the benefit of infinite runs without having the randomness of invention. |
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 22:33:00 -
[99]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 12/06/2008 22:35:44
Originally by: teji
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean I also pointed out that they are of no real benefit to anybody but i see you chose to snip that bit and the reason why ppl like you still want them removed. (RE-ADDED)
They benefit those who got them originally since they didn't have the up-front cost. Also since the ME/PE is still better than any invention they still print isk. I would accept a change for T2 bpos to make them have worse ME/PE than invention instead of removing them from the game. That seems pretty reasonable. You get the benefit of infinite runs without having the randomness of invention.
Negative ppl like you make me sick, you are so full of venom and jealousy that all you can think of is taking from others.
Why not petition for increasing the ME/PE in invention bpc's instead of thinking like a whiney child and thinking nerf nerf nerf.
Did you read post 80 btw, you realy should. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 23:03:00 -
[100]
Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 23:05:13
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean Negative ppl like you make me sick, you are so full of venom and jealousy that all you can think of is taking from others.
Let me restate the same thing in a different way. Change the balance of PE/ME to make invention more profitable than a T2 bpo for a given item. I don't care how it's done. Nerf or buff it really makes no difference to me. Apparently people have severe allergic reactions to the word nerf even though buffing a different item has the same effect.
Quote: Did you read post 80 btw, you realy should.
Yes you can switch easier what you are producing with invention. I thought that much was obvious. However, nothing is keeping the bpo holder using invention as well to suppliment the bpo income. |
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 23:37:00 -
[101]
Originally by: teji
Yes you can switch easier what you are producing with invention. I thought that much was obvious. However, nothing is keeping the bpo holder using invention as well to supplement the bpo income.
Supplement?.
How does the fact that you can build 100 ships from invention with enough building slots but only 1 from the BPO make invention the "supplemental" item ffs.
The BPO makes a few mil isk per item more than each individual invention bpc but you can have 100's of invention bpc running at the same time as your single BPO.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
The Speaker
The Clue Factory
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 00:15:00 -
[102]
Originally by: lecrotta
Originally by: Nynaeve Ares Something needs to be done to level the playing field.
The first thing that invention did was crash the t2 market prices, this was not the bpo holders or the buyers it was the sellers undercutting each other. Now a BPO holder may be able to make a bit more profit that a inventor but thats it and its not effecting the inventors one bit unless you count envy and thats no reason to remove summat.
Inventors have more overall profit-making potential than T2 BPO holders, but it comes at an exponential increase in time, effort and risk. Exponential.
I've got a healthy T2 BPO portfolio, and I dedicate about one hour every week maintaining all of the inputs/outputs for each print. One hour. Sometimes less. It's pretty awesome. It's really cheesy though.
Sure, invention murdered my profit margins, but they're still astronomical by real world standards. 500%? 600%? 700%? 800%? 900%? All the while pricing product lines at rates intended to make inventors cry. I may not be making 5+, 10+, 15+ billion a month off of each BPO like pre-invention times, but it's still a decent living and it comes with the added bonus of knowing you're urinating in some inventor's hopes and dreams for profits.
So yeah, removing T2 BPO wouldn't be a bad idea. It'd suck for those of us with them, but oh well. Mountains of Isk get sort of boring after awhile anyways.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 00:24:00 -
[103]
Originally by: The Speaker
Originally by: lecrotta
Originally by: Nynaeve Ares Something needs to be done to level the playing field.
The first thing that invention did was crash the t2 market prices, this was not the bpo holders or the buyers it was the sellers undercutting each other. Now a BPO holder may be able to make a bit more profit that a inventor but thats it and its not effecting the inventors one bit unless you count envy and thats no reason to remove summat.
Inventors have more overall profit-making potential than T2 BPO holders, but it comes at an exponential increase in time, effort and risk. Exponential.
I've got a healthy T2 BPO portfolio, and I dedicate about one hour every week maintaining all of the inputs/outputs for each print. One hour. Sometimes less. It's pretty awesome. It's really cheesy though.
Sure, invention murdered my profit margins, but they're still astronomical by real world standards. 500%? 600%? 700%? 800%? 900%? All the while pricing product lines at rates intended to make inventors cry. I may not be making 5+, 10+, 15+ billion a month off of each BPO like pre-invention times, but it's still a decent living and it comes with the added bonus of knowing you're urinating in some inventor's hopes and dreams for profits.
So yeah, removing T2 BPO wouldn't be a bad idea. It'd suck for those of us with them, but oh well. Mountains of Isk get sort of boring after awhile anyways.
So let me understand this?.
You are a multi T2 bpo holder, you say your profit margin at the moment is between 500 and 900% (how can you not know exactly if your building stuff and selling it?). And al5though you are still making 500%-900% profit you seem to want them removed because you are bored with making mountains of isk?.
Now i do ot want to really call anybody a liar, but your a LIAR.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
The Speaker
The Clue Factory
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 00:34:00 -
[104]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean So let me understand this?.
You are a multi T2 bpo holder, you say your profit margin at the moment is between 500 and 900% (how can you not know exactly if your building stuff and selling it?). And al5though you are still making 500%-900% profit you seem to want them removed because you are bored with making mountains of isk?.
Now i do ot want to really call anybody a liar, but your a LIAR.
Margins vary based on which print and which market the product is unloaded at.
Ask around and poll people who have mountains of isk. Sure, isk is great and all, but after a certain point it starts to lose meaning. Just because someone has reaped great benefits from an unbalanced model doesn't mean that they can't acknowledge the flaws in the system. No, I'm not naive enough to trash my own prints since most likely noone else will. So until the day comes when T2 BPO across the board are gone, I'll sit back and enjoy griefing markets.
Thanks for the comments though. |
Bra'nn Draythe
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 07:32:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Bra''nn Draythe on 13/06/2008 07:33:14 The amount of misinformation being given in this thread about the profit differences between invention and BPO's is pretty amazing. I'm not sure if it's because of ignorance of the actual values or because of an attempt to hide the truth and point at the fabricated numbers as proof that it's not that bad.
First, let's look at time investment:
A non-researched Vagabond BPO (Which you can get the stats for on the market) is as follows:
PE 0 give you a production time of around 1d 12h or so with Industry V, which is required to build it.
Invention has to deal not only with the PE, but the time involved to get the BPC in the first place. If you had a POS with a laboratory cranking out the max-run BPCs for invention and doing the invention itself with, the time investment would be around 4-5 days per attempt. And since both invention and copying are lab activities, you're limited by either your laboratory operations skill, which can allow for quite a bit, or extra characters to do the inventing. If you did this with empire slots... Well, you could wait for weeks for a copying slot.
Then there's the actual production cost.
ME 0 gives you a cost of around 52m ISK to build the ship with Jita parts, assuming you have a Production Efficiency skill of V. Less means it costs more, but thanks to the magic of multiplication, the overall percentages remain the same. A Vagabond sells for around 81m right now, which is a profit of almost 60%.
Each negative level of ME past 0 adds another 10% overhead to the cost with a few minor exceptions (R.A.M. and the hull, specifically). It's been a little while since I last invented anything, but I think the best ME you can get for an invented ship is -1, which also only gives you a single run, increasing the overhead cost of that ship. I personally went for the -2 ME, 2 run BPC option as that gave me what I felt was the best risk/return option.
Each one of those attempts, accounting for failure rate, decryptors, BPCs, run time, etc, gave something like a 7.5m overhead to each run, something a BPO holder doesn't have to deal with at all.
None of these issues are even seen by BPO holders. So this is what we're looking at:
At LEAST a 10% higher cost of production, a copying overhead cost (Yes, there's still a cost if you provide all of the items needed. It's called an opportunity cost), and the time investment. This could easily push the cost of each ship to being 30% or more higher than the BPO-produced one.
Oh, and the production amount from that BPO? Again with the Vagabond option you're looking at approximately 2 Vagabonds every 3 days, so that's around 20 of them a month. Invention can give you more, sure, but you've got the time investment to get that BPC, then the often negative PE effect as well (Which can push the production time per hull close to 3 days in some cases).
It's not a tiny difference. It's a pretty huge one.
As for the 'cost' of those BPO's. As stated by others before, their initial cost was laughably small. To claim that the cost paid to purchase the BPO from another player should be protected is laughable and flies directly in the face of any concept of risk that supposed to be part of the basis for this game. |
Kitoba
Legion of Dynamic Discord
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 08:18:00 -
[106]
I'd call for a motion to inject tII bpos at an increasing rate into the game as tIII approaches, think exploration or random chance of invention resulting in bpo's, but then noone's gonna listen to my sanity.
Or you're all so stunned by my ideas that you rather keep silent as not to embarrass yourselves. It's hard to tell, you know.
|
Jurgen Cartis
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 09:29:00 -
[107]
Originally by: teji
They benefit those who got them originally since they didn't have the up-front cost. Also since the ME/PE is still better than any invention they still print isk. I would accept a change for T2 bpos to make them have worse ME/PE than invention instead of removing them from the game. That seems pretty reasonable. You get the benefit of infinite runs without having the randomness of invention.
Wait. You're serious, aren't you?
So, in your ideal world, inventors have. . . better ME for less material usage (important on large stuff and especially with Dysprosium so expensive) better PE for faster building all the advantages of parallel building capacity and the ability to go off and make something else when the market for Widget IIs tanks?
All this, and all you get for your trouble is not having to burn a few dozen datacores that get cheaper by the week as more people line up to farm them.
I take it someone had a particularly long failure streak on their Marauder jobs? |
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 09:30:00 -
[108]
Originally by: teji Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 20:30:32 It's hilarious people trying to justify t2 bpos to stay in the game with some sort of I paid x number of isk for something as if it means anything at all. Please, really you make me laugh.
When items can no longer be acquired by anyone in game they should no longer exist in game. This is pretty standard game design stuff which CCP and some people here can't get their head around.
"Disintegrate immediately the Imperial Apoc, Federate Megathron, Guardian Vexor, Raven State issue, ecc. They can't the acquired in game."
Other dumb thoughts to share with us? |
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 09:41:00 -
[109]
Originally by: teji
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean I also pointed out that they are of no real benefit to anybody but i see you chose to snip that bit and the reason why ppl like you still want them removed. (RE-ADDED)
They benefit those who got them originally since they didn't have the up-front cost. Also since the ME/PE is still better than any invention they still print isk. I would accept a change for T2 bpos to make them have worse ME/PE than invention instead of removing them from the game. That seems pretty reasonable. You get the benefit of infinite runs without having the randomness of invention.
No cost like: - Training the needed skill to get the R&D agents when they gave nothing if you weren't lucky; - running the missions for the standing; - running the missions for the R&D agents when they were asking decent items and not tritanium (like 35 science graduates, find them if you can); - waiting a year before the lottery restart as you have started playing at the end of the previsous round of the lottery; - spending all the accumulated RP for a BPO (25K RP for a quake L BPO? it is worth 250 millions? that was the price when I got it).
Sure 0 cost, no work.
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 09:45:00 -
[110]
Originally by: The Speaker
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean So let me understand this?.
You are a multi T2 bpo holder, you say your profit margin at the moment is between 500 and 900% (how can you not know exactly if your building stuff and selling it?). And al5though you are still making 500%-900% profit you seem to want them removed because you are bored with making mountains of isk?.
Now i do ot want to really call anybody a liar, but your a LIAR.
Margins vary based on which print and which market the product is unloaded at.
Ask around and poll people who have mountains of isk. Sure, isk is great and all, but after a certain point it starts to lose meaning. Just because someone has reaped great benefits from an unbalanced model doesn't mean that they can't acknowledge the flaws in the system. No, I'm not naive enough to trash my own prints since most likely noone else will. So until the day comes when T2 BPO across the board are gone, I'll sit back and enjoy griefing markets.
Thanks for the comments though.
Boy you are a bad liar. You don't know a bit about the BPO return. Or you are a very bad builder and think that the minerals and T2 building materials are free because you build them yourself. |
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 09:51:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Bra'nn Draythe
Invention has to deal not only with the PE, but the time involved to get the BPC in the first place. If you had a POS with a laboratory cranking out the max-run BPCs for invention and doing the invention itself with, the time investment would be around 4-5 days per attempt. And since both invention and copying are lab activities, you're limited by either your laboratory operations skill, which can allow for quite a bit, or extra characters to do the inventing. If you did this with empire slots... Well, you could wait for weeks for a copying slot.
While the use of the copy slots has a cost (POS fuel) if you are using a character trained to invent to produce the copies you are doing it wrong.
You should start a new alt in one of the science schools, train him a bit and you have a character that can run several copy jobs at little cost and without using invention slots. You can use the same character to do R&D for agents to get some extra datacore too.
|
Grismar
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 11:03:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Grismar on 13/06/2008 11:03:57 I might have supported the idea if the tone would have been a little more constructive. The whole T2 BPO discussion is a matter of people owning them ridiculing people that don't for their building skills and people that don't own them crying about how unfair the game is. Neither is helping the issue forward.
I would say that a little research into the matter to come up with a better solution than "let's just not touch it for now" is called for. I can see options that might be fair, if properly looked at by people with all the information (i.e. CCP + player builders).
For example: how about turning all the existing BPO's into BPC's with a number of runs that far exceeds what you would normally be able to get - or better still, a pile of normal maxed out BPCs that don't break the rules and have the added advantage of being distributable. The trick is getting the number of runs right, but that's what the research is needed for. This way, there would be no need to refer to changes 3 years into the future, even though the end effect might be just as far away for even the most productive builders. As a another side effect, these BPCs would start out with a monetary value equal to (or perhaps even above) the current BPOs, but would nicely go down when used to balance the 'unfairness' over time.
Just an example, I'm sure there's people out there with better ideas, but at least a little more thought than "let's get rid of them" should go into it...
Fly well and have fun, Grismar. |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 11:07:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Arithron Actually, inventors hold a competitive advantage over BPO holders. Inventors can invent and build from multiple BPC at once, so run full factory slots, churning out more product per given time period than a BPO holder. Actually, inventors hold a competitive advantage over BPO holders. Inventors can invent and build from multiple BPC at once, so run full factory slots, churning out more product per given time period than a BPO holder.
Only if the t2 BPO holder is somehow prevented from inventing. |
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 11:50:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Grismar
I would say that a little research into the matter to come up with a better solution than "let's just not touch it for now" is called for. I can see options that might be fair, if properly looked at by people with all the information (i.e. CCP + player builders).
For example: how about turning all the existing BPO's into BPC's with a number of runs that far exceeds what you would normally be able to get - or better still, a pile of normal maxed out BPCs that don't break the rules and have the added advantage of being distributable. The trick is getting the number of runs right, but that's what the research is needed for. This way, there would be no need to refer to changes 3 years into the future, even though the end effect might be just as far away for even the most productive builders. As a another side effect, these BPCs would start out with a monetary value equal to (or perhaps even above) the current BPOs, but would nicely go down when used to balance the 'unfairness' over time.
Just an example, I'm sure there's people out there with better ideas, but at least a little more thought than "let's get rid of them" should go into it...
Fly well and have fun, Grismar.
The problem is that the spread of T2 BPO quality is very large, so what can be "fair" for 1 of those BPO is "unfair" for another.
The best thing is to let's the ME and PE of the original T1 BP influence the values on the final T2 BPC when inventing.
That will remove the only true advantage left to T2 BPo, the research done on them. And that it is not a so large advantage as you can think, researching them is a long process. I have researched a T2 Barrage M BPO. To get some PE it required more that 20 days of lab, and the advantage was going from 8 hours as production time to 7 hours, 20 minutes. To recover the isk I hadn't gained while doing the research it required 240 days with the new, improved speed.
So 2/3 of a years were used to be exactly at the point were I would have been if I had done no research (and I am not considering the cost of fueling the POS).
After that point I have started gaining a 9,1% extra.
Invention an be more of a hassle (not really, I do it, and the really annoying part is researching the market, not building or inventing), but a T2 BPo is a lot of capital imobilized for a very small return. |
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 12:03:00 -
[115]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 13/06/2008 12:05:45 What the inventors and whiners fail to realize is that increasing the ME or PE of invention or screwing around with it to make it more efficient will not help them what so ever simply because the builders will still try to under cut each other and reduce profits even further. BPO holders and BPO's are not the problem and do not effect the market or the profits of inverters at all, inventors are doing that by competing with each other so a reduction in costs will either not effect profits or reduce them further and BPO's have nothing to do with it.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 14:26:00 -
[116]
Originally by: teji Edited by: teji on 12/06/2008 21:39:29
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean Would you buy a BPO for 40ish bil when all it would save you is 1-4 mil per ship it builds?. Considering you can put out a almost unlimited number with invention it is not worth it tbh.
You just illustrated perfectly why t2 bpos aren't realistically acquirable for profit making and leaving them in the game only benefits the old time gamers.
Given that people actually pay tens of billions for them, I'd have to say that they can't be that bad an investment. Nobody gets 40 billion without having some idea of how to judge profitability. |
Bra'nn Draythe
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 15:01:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Bra'nn Draythe
Invention has to deal not only with the PE, but the time involved to get the BPC in the first place. If you had a POS with a laboratory cranking out the max-run BPCs for invention and doing the invention itself with, the time investment would be around 4-5 days per attempt. And since both invention and copying are lab activities, you're limited by either your laboratory operations skill, which can allow for quite a bit, or extra characters to do the inventing. If you did this with empire slots... Well, you could wait for weeks for a copying slot.
While the use of the copy slots has a cost (POS fuel) if you are using a character trained to invent to produce the copies you are doing it wrong.
You should start a new alt in one of the science schools, train him a bit and you have a character that can run several copy jobs at little cost and without using invention slots. You can use the same character to do R&D for agents to get some extra datacore too.
I specifically mentioned using an alt, which is what I did.
Using a POS to help with invention also carries the additional costs of running that POS which, once again, increases the overhead by even more for the inventor. -- e-honor only applies to losses |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 15:45:00 -
[118]
Edited by: teji on 13/06/2008 15:55:12 Edited by: teji on 13/06/2008 15:54:27 Edited by: teji on 13/06/2008 15:51:11 Edited by: teji on 13/06/2008 15:47:52
Originally by: Venkul Mul "Disintegrate immediately the Imperial Apoc, Federate Megathron, Guardian Vexor, Raven State issue, ecc. They can't the acquired in game."
Wow, give this man a cookie. You came up with another good idea. Although the imbalance created by a few people playing hangar queen with these ships is no where near the effect that t2 bpos have.
I see the old playes are still with their fingers in their ears refusing to listen to explanations on total cost and effort between invention and bpo.
Quote: What the inventors and whiners fail to realize is that increasing the ME or PE of invention or screwing around with it to make it more efficient will not help them what so ever simply because the builders will still try to under cut each other and reduce profits even further.
Yes it will. They would now compete at a better than bpo cost base. The effort will still be higher but the end product will be cheaper. It will allow them to eliminate the profit margins of bpo holders in the major markets.
Quote: Given that people actually pay tens of billions for them, I'd have to say that they can't be that bad an investment. Nobody gets 40 billion without having some idea of how to judge profitability.
I never said players in this game were very smart in their purchases. Isk != IQ |
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 15:56:00 -
[119]
Originally by: teji
Quote: What the inventors and whiners fail to realize is that increasing the ME or PE of invention or screwing around with it to make it more efficient will not help them what so ever simply because the builders will still try to under cut each other and reduce profits even further.
Yes it will. They can now compete at a better than bpo cost base. The effort will still be higher but the end product will be cheaper. It will allow them to eliminate the profit margins of bpo holders in the major markets.
BPO holders ain't dropping the prices down its the inventors that are crashing the market cos of competition the BPO holders will set prices around the cost of the market but inventors are constantly under cutting each other. So making invention easier or cheaper will just make T2 items cheaper and thus less profit for all but BPO holders have nothing to do with the decrease. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 16:07:00 -
[120]
Quote: BPO holders ain't dropping the prices down its the inventors that are crashing the market cos of competition the BPO holders will set prices around the cost of the market but inventors are constantly under cutting each other. So making invention easier or cheaper will just make T2 items cheaper and thus less profit for all but BPO holders have nothing to do with the decrease.
Waaaaaaaaaaaah? Is that what you were trying to say? That CCP dared to implement some system where bpo holders would have some competition? CCP preserved a profit margin for you by making invention have -ME. Inventors will never be able to compete with you purely on a cost basis. If there are some people that are selling items below invention cost somewhere buy the **** and relist it. Don't come crying on the forums that invention killed your exorbitant margins and now you are stuck with margins that are still better than anyone else has.
|
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 16:13:00 -
[121]
Originally by: teji
Quote: BPO holders ain't dropping the prices down its the inventors that are crashing the market cos of competition the BPO holders will set prices around the cost of the market but inventors are constantly under cutting each other. So making invention easier or cheaper will just make T2 items cheaper and thus less profit for all but BPO holders have nothing to do with the decrease.
Waaaaaaaaaaaah? Is that what you were trying to say? That CCP dared to implement some system where bpo holders would have some competition? CCP preserved a profit margin for you by making invention have -ME. Inventors will never be able to compete with you purely on a cost basis. If there are some people that are selling items below invention cost somewhere buy the **** and relist it. Don't come crying on the forums that invention killed your exorbitant margins and now you are stuck with margins that are still better than anyone else has.
Never had a T2 bpo or any other sort for that matter and i could not care about T2 holders profit or inventors for that matter. What i do not like is "WAAABULANCE" nerfits who think that they deserve to be given a free hand out or up while others spent years getting into the same position.
T2 BPO holder deserve to make a little more profit that ppl without them and considering that they do not effect the profits that inventors make one bit the only reason to remove them is because of jealous cry baby prats who are never satisfied no matter what is done. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 16:17:00 -
[122]
Edited by: teji on 13/06/2008 16:19:36
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean T2 BPO holder deserve to make a little more profit that ppl without them and considering that they do not effect the profits that inventors make one bit the only reason to remove them is because of jealous cry baby prats who are never satisfied no matter what is done.
T2 BPO holders deserve nothing. When things need to change the last thing that needs to be thought about is entitlement. When titans get nerfed will the alliances that build them get a refund? Nope. It doesn't matter that you spend 60 billion isk on the titan bpo and many billions more to build one. When **** is broken you fix it.
Like I said before some CCP dev probably has a ton of T2 bpos which is why we will never end up seeing this fixed. I wish I could prove this though.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 16:20:00 -
[123]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 13/06/2008 16:22:04
Originally by: teji
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean T2 BPO holder deserve to make a little more profit that ppl without them and considering that they do not effect the profits that inventors make one bit the only reason to remove them is because of jealous cry baby prats who are never satisfied no matter what is done.
T2 BPO holders deserve nothing. When things need to change the last thing that needs to be thought about is entitlement. When titans get nerfed will the alliances that build them get a refund? Nope. It doesn't matter that you spend 60 billion isk on the titan bpo and many billions more to build one. When **** is broken you fix it.
BPO's work fine as far as Ive been told and they have zero impact on players in eve other than those who own them or buy them in the future, so not broken in fact working perfectly.
If your going to make accusations of corruption within ccp i suggest you have facts to back it up or start a thread for the csm to investigate it.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
The Speaker
The Clue Factory
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 17:14:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Venkul Mul Boy you are a bad liar. You don't know a bit about the BPO return. Or you are a very bad builder and think that the minerals and T2 building materials are free because you build them yourself.
Yes, proper accounting and math is oh so difficult Nice try at refuting points by trying the marginalize-your-opponent route.
Who knows. Maybe your prints are no longer very profitable. Maybe you are a horrifically inept builder. Honestly, that's most likely not the case - but it's a strong strategic move for you to try to paint the picture that T2 BPO holders are oh-woe-is-me nerfed and deserve more. I understand why you would take that tack, but it's somewhat transparent.
As far as the other guy's assertion that T2 BPO holders aren't the ones driving margins down, in some cases this is true but in others it most definitely isn't. Some T2 BPO holders derive a warped sense of glee by griefing inventors and other BPO holders. I know that I do. Unfortunately I've only been able to kill the margins on four, maybe five, product lines (which really is just a drop in the bucket).
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 17:17:00 -
[125]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 13/06/2008 17:20:24
Originally by: The Speaker Originally by: Venkul Mul Boy you are a bad liar. You don't know a bit about the BPO return. Or you are a very bad builder and think that the minerals and T2 building materials are free because you build them yourself.
Yes, proper accounting and math is oh so difficult Nice try at refuting points by trying the marginalize-your-opponent route.
Who knows. Maybe your prints are no longer very profitable. Maybe you are a horrifically inept builder. Honestly, that's most likely not the case - but it's a strong strategic move for you to try to paint the picture that T2 BPO holders are oh-woe-is-me nerfed and deserve more. I understand why you would take that tack, but it's somewhat transparent.
As far as the other guy's assertion that T2 BPO holders aren't the ones driving margins down, in some cases this is true but in others it most definitely isn't. Some T2 BPO holders derive a warped sense of glee by griefing inventors and other BPO holders. I know that I do. Unfortunately I've only been able to kill the margins on four, maybe five, product lines (which really is just a drop in the bucket) .
Still more lies from the guy who claimed to be making 500-900% profit from his BPO's, AFTER invention came out.
Originally by: The Speaker
Sure, invention murdered my profit margins, but they're still astronomical by real world standards, 500%? 600%? 700%? 800%? 900%? All the while pricing product lines at rates intended to make inventors cry.
You should have researched prices and profit margins before posting this total delusion.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
procurement specialist
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 17:23:00 -
[126]
um. how bout we replace the bpos with like 1000 or 10,000 (some large number) of bpcs at the current me/pe of the bpo. then you have a few years worth of jobs to build steady or you can sell off good bpcs, or you can keep the steady rate you have now and coast still for a few years as everyone else vapors their bpcs and the price comes back up.
not really saying bpos need to be killed but seemed a better compromise than a single max run bpc for a friggin bpo.
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 17:49:00 -
[127]
While I am still seeing all kinds of acrimonious shouting in this thread, with people saying other people deserve nothing, and etc...
May I suggest shouters, again, go to this thread: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=793692 AND ASK for answers.
I am afraid shouting is not allowed in that thread.. just polite nudging to the devs for answers. The loudest mouths in this thread, by the way, are the ones who are not seen in the other... and it has been linked here 3 times so far.
I still firmly believe that the provocateurs on both sides are really afraid to ask the developers of the game real questions, because they are really afraid of the answers.
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 18:16:00 -
[128]
Market forces will eventually devalue them to reasonable levels of sane cost.
That is.. once people finally catch a clue and grasp that a 2 year ROI for anything in this game is a little insane. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 19:33:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Jinx Barker I still firmly believe that the provocateurs on both sides are really afraid to ask the developers of the game real questions, because they are really afraid of the answers.
I know the answers already. It will be the same type of crap that the FW alliance explantion was. Nothing compelling but alot of fluff about how they feel.
I stand by my statement of: If it's not available for anyone to get then it shouldn't be in the game. It's the same reason that the lottery was a failure as a game concept and why many other games that try the same type of thing remove it shortly after. Except in this case there is some unkown reason to keep the remenants of a failed system around. To make it even more funny they made invention less profitable than the bpos.
As far as my hypothesis of CCP employees having t2 bpos. It's the only logical reason that I can come up with that they are still around. Eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable must be the truth (yes I stole a quote). Since there is no logical reason to leave t2 bpos in the game what remains is that personal interest has interfered with good game design sense.
|
Anane
Abaim Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 19:35:00 -
[130]
lemme just say one thing... if you don't like the way CCP runs the game then WHY are you playing it? it is just a game after all, no one is forcing you to play it.
|
|
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 19:40:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Anane lemme just say one thing... if you don't like the way CCP runs the game then WHY are you playing it? it is just a game after all, no one is forcing you to play it.
Why are you reading this forum? All this forum contains are people asking for changes that they would like to see in game. That is the purpose of this forum. To discuss what you would like to see changed. Hence we are discussing it.
This thread is for talking about t2 bpos. This is not for complaining about other forum members. Please stay on topic. Thanks |
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 19:55:00 -
[132]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 13/06/2008 19:55:50
Originally by: teji
As far as my hypothesis of CCP employees having t2 bpos. It's the only logical reason that I can come up with that they are still around. Eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable must be the truth (yes I stole a quote). Since there is no logical reason to leave t2 bpos in the game what remains is that personal interest has interfered with good game design sense.
Your ignoring the obvious reasons they do not remove them like:
1. As with the fed navy and other ships the T2 BPO's are a pinnacle of their particular type in the game.
2. They effect game design and game play not at all unless your a jealous and bitter nerf hound, and so there is NO reason to remove or nerf them unlike every other removal or nerf the game has seen.
3. They are available or at least can be available for ppl to buy if they have enough isk to do so.
Now considering these facts id say your Sherlock Holmes logic needs a lot of work. |
Elenath
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 20:21:00 -
[133]
I disgree almost completely with the OP. I don't even own a single BPO of any sort, and I'll be the first to say that those who have them have the right to keep them.
/not signed
|
Sally Hemmings
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 20:53:00 -
[134]
|
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 20:56:00 -
[135]
Edited by: teji on 13/06/2008 20:57:01
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
1. As with the fed navy and other ships the T2 BPO's are a pinnacle of their particular type in the game.
2. They effect game design and game play not at all unless your a jealous and bitter nerf hound, and so there is NO reason to remove or nerf them unlike every other removal or nerf the game has seen.
3. They are available or at least can be available for ppl to buy if they have enough isk to do so.
1) T2 bpos have nothing to do with things that anyone can purchase by running some missions. Maybe if they removed the missions and left the ships in the game you might have a point. If you are talking about unique ships that have been given out in the past that isn't a good idea either.
2) Either they A) don't matter or B) are extremely valuable (see: contracts). So either they are imbalanced which is shown by the ridiculous sale prices or they don't matter so no one should miss them if they were to be removed.
3) A bpo that I want never comes up to contract or it's put up at such a high price it is unfeasable to own it. Either way it doesn't matter. It's not available. |
Twisted Mechanic
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:02:00 -
[136]
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:27:00 -
[137]
Originally by: teji
1) If you are talking about unique ships that have been given out in the past that isn't a good idea either.
Nice argument well presented.
Originally by: teji
2) Either they A) don't matter or B) are extremely valuable (see: contracts). So either they are imbalanced which is shown by the ridiculous sale prices or they don't matter so no one should miss them if they were to be removed.
Even if they are ridiculously priced nobody is forced to buy them, and they do not matter to others as far as effecting profits are concerned. So the only reason to remove or nerf them is because ppl are bitter cos they do not own one and that is the worst reason to do anything as ppl like that (you) should not be catered to EVER.
Originally by: teji
3) A bpo that I want never comes up to contract or it's put up at such a high price it is unfeasable to own it. Either way it doesn't matter. It's not available.
Just because you think the price is unfeasible does not mean other would not like to add one to their trophy case, who do you think you are to remove a item from the game that has zero effect on your game at all just because you feel its over priced. |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:29:00 -
[138]
Originally by: teji 3) A bpo that I want never comes up to contract or it's put up at such a high price it is unfeasable to own it. Either way it doesn't matter. It's not available.
Finally we hear some truth here... the above exemplifies ALL of your arguments - you do not have the ISK or the ability to buy a good BPO, and you want to take it away from all others that have them, one way or another.
Basically we come down to a real reason why all the people who want T2 BPOs be taken out of game - their own inability to make enough ISK and their own jealousy at the others. |
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:52:00 -
[139]
Let me boil this down as simple as possible. It is in CCP's best interest to preserve some sort of equal opportunitiy between players. This is the basis of pretty much every multiplayer game design.
Good game designers don't arbitrarily say ok you get a free pass and you don't. You don't just give an arbitrary set of people a magic bullet that instantly kills everyone else and even dream of it being considered fair. That is why the lottery system was doomed from the moment it was conceived. Work should be rewarded. More work should reward more. This is why invention is so great. Randomness is part of the system but not so much that it prohibits anyone from entering a market.
I never want to purchase a blueprint and I have no interest in building anything. I could not care less about owning one of these or reaping the rewards of having such an item. If you think this has anything to do with me you are wrong. This is about getting CCP to realize they ****** up.
If you want to rant and rave about how bitter I am please go ahead. Maybe we can reference some conspiracy theories too. |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:58:00 -
[140]
Originally by: teji I never want to purchase a blueprint and I have no interest in building anything. I could not care less about owning one of these or reaping the rewards of having such an item. If you think this has anything to do with me you are wrong. This is about getting CCP to realize they ****** up.
If you want to rant and rave about how bitter I am please go ahead. Maybe we can reference some conspiracy theories too.
Ok.
Originally by: teji A bpo that I want never comes up to contract or it's put up at such a high price it is unfeasable to own it. Either way it doesn't matter. It's not available.
Good luck with your credibility and all that. I still say you are causing trouble and are jealous, and masking it with "fair game" and "balance" garbage. I have read what you were saying, and was just waiting for a slip up like above, again, your kind always comes out with it, you are just not careful enough, or clear-headed enough to try an avoid pitfalls of fallacy. |
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 22:01:00 -
[141]
Originally by: teji Let me boil this down as simple as possible. It is in CCP's best interest to preserve some sort of equal opportunitiy between players. This is the basis of pretty much every multiplayer game design.
Good game designers don't arbitrarily say ok you get a free pass and you don't. You don't just give an arbitrary set of people a magic bullet that instantly kills everyone else and even dream of it being considered fair. That is why the lottery system was doomed from the moment it was conceived. Work should be rewarded. More work should reward more. This is why invention is so great. Randomness is part of the system but not so much that it prohibits anyone from entering a market.
BPO's in the game do nothing to effect the profits of inventors so other than jealousy your whole point here is worthless.
Originally by: teji I never want to purchase a blueprint and I have no interest in building anything. I could not care less about owning one of these or reaping the rewards of having such an item.
The rewards are minuscule for a good builder and just because you cannot afford one or do not want one is not reason to remove them from the game. In fact because you want nothing to do with them they do not effect you or your game play at all.
|
teji
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 22:13:00 -
[142]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean BPO's in the game do nothing to effect the profits of inventors so other than jealousy your whole point here is worthless.
Oh yes my jealousy drives me . I'm just against free rides which the lottery and the t2 bpo situation was / is. I suppose that makes me jealous. Whatever, you won't listen to anything I say and I won't listen to what you say.
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 22:39:00 -
[143]
Originally by: teji Oh yes my jealousy drives me . I'm just against free rides which the lottery and the t2 bpo situation was / is. I suppose that makes me jealous. Whatever, you won't listen to anything I say and I won't listen to what you say.
Thank you for being honest, for once, and admitting the truth in whatever perverse form it may be.
|
Blackjack Turner
Inverted Awareness United Corporations Against Macros
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 00:20:00 -
[144]
Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 00:24:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Blackjack Turner Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
Im a main actually, if you understood manufacturing you would know that BPO's do not effect inventors at all or their profits. So the only reason anybody would want them removed is false greed, envy and jealousy as no other real reason exists.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Reachok
Tres Hombres
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 00:26:00 -
[146]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: Blackjack Turner Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
Im a main actually, if you understood manufacturing you would know that BPO's do not effect inventors at all or their profits. So the only reason anybody would want them removed is false greed, envy and jealousy as no other real reason exists.
You've just clearly illustrated my point. Thanks!
|
sophisticatedlimabean
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 00:39:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Reachok
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: Blackjack Turner Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
Im a main actually, if you understood manufacturing you would know that BPO's do not effect inventors at all or their profits. So the only reason anybody would want them removed is false greed, envy and jealousy as no other real reason exists.
You've just clearly illustrated my point. Thanks!
Your point claims that i am a alt (im not) and that their are other reasons why ppl want BPO's removed.
Did you not read your own post?.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Bra'nn Draythe
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 08:07:00 -
[148]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: Blackjack Turner Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
Im a main actually, if you understood manufacturing you would know that BPO's do not effect inventors at all or their profits. So the only reason anybody would want them removed is false greed, envy and jealousy as no other real reason exists.
It's amusing how you can say something and not know what you're talking about.
The profit of something is determined by it's selling price. The selling price is determined by market conditions. You can put a T2 ship or item on the market for higher than the current price, but it probably won't sell all that quickly. That's what keeps your price lower to draw more consumer demand (Because they don't want to pay more, and EVE won't let them for that matter)
You have a minimum amount you can sell it for before you actually realize a loss on your product. That's determined by the costs of manufacturing. If your costs are higher than mine and there's nothing you can do about it, the competitive advantage is in my court. This is what's known as the "Wal-Mart" effect. Lower costs = Lower prices with a profit = driving out of business those with higher costs.
The safety margin for an invented ship (I don't know about modules) tends to vary by class, being the best for Recon ships and the worst for most T2 frigates (The Electronic Attack Ships are an exception to this because no T2 BPO exists).
Of course, inventors can understate their costs by treating their R&D Agent datacores and explored decryptors as free, but that's not really sound economic sense. -- e-honor only applies to losses |
sophisticatedlimabean
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 09:39:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Bra'nn Draythe
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: Blackjack Turner Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
Im a main actually, if you understood manufacturing you would know that BPO's do not effect inventors at all or their profits. So the only reason anybody would want them removed is false greed, envy and jealousy as no other real reason exists.
It's amusing how you can say something and not know what you're talking about.
The profit of something is determined by it's selling price. The selling price is determined by market conditions. You can put a T2 ship or item on the market for higher than the current price, but it probably won't sell all that quickly. That's what keeps your price lower to draw more consumer demand (Because they don't want to pay more, and EVE won't let them for that matter)
You have a minimum amount you can sell it for before you actually realize a loss on your product. That's determined by the costs of manufacturing. If your costs are higher than mine and there's nothing you can do about it, the competitive advantage is in my court. This is what's known as the "Wal-Mart" effect. Lower costs = Lower prices with a profit = driving out of business those with higher costs.
Ok bud so you claim that even though the T2 market for years has been steady and the although plummet coincided exactly with the onset of invention that its the BPO owners that are driving it down. Although for years the BPO holders had the sense to keep the market high suddenly they have decided to crash it?.
The BPO guys and gals may be able to make a slightly higher profit than inventors but that profit does not effect in the slightest inventors or their profits as the market and demand is way to large (a fact you either ignored as it did not suit you and your point, or you were just ignorant of because of a lack of insight).
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Bra'nn Draythe
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 10:18:00 -
[150]
Edited by: Bra''nn Draythe on 14/06/2008 10:19:57 I said it before in the thread and I'll say it again. Maybe this time you'll actually read it and understand it.
Back before invention, an Oligopoly existed in the T2 market. An Oligopoly is when there's a relatively small number of individuals or companies involved in a market, resulting in a limited amount of competition. There wasn't that much underbidding because there was a rather low number of people putting stuff up for sale.
With the previous numbers I quoted, a Vagabond would have cost 50m or so to build (Possibly less, possibly more, I don't know what the component costs were) and were oftentimes selling for over 200m ISK each. Many T2 modules were priced upwards of 8-9x as high as they are now.
The invention came in. The Oligopoly came closer to a true Free Market, but not quite because not all of the 'players', so to speak, are following the same rules. Those that have the advantage of lower costs of production enjoy an automatic boost over those that do not.
The current situation is beneficial to the consumer, but it's not as equally beneficial to the sellers of the goods. These situations do happen in the real world, but it would be very difficult to think of anything approaching a magic money-making machine like a T2 BPO. The holders of the BPOs do not make 'slightly higher profits'. Hell, if I could find a company that could reliably make such 'slightly higher profits' in the real world, I wouldn't have to worry about working anymore and could just live off my investments in them.
Well, I guess I could invest in the oil companies right now, but they're a bit of an extreme and their long-term outlook isn't great, but that's irrelevant here.
Oh, and as for the rare event ships. There's one big difference between them and the T2 BPOs. In order to take advantage of their significant powers and abilities, one would have to risk them in combat, either PvE or PvP, which could end up with one less said rare event ship in the game. Ask the ex-leader of IAC about that. But a T2 BPO is different. They don't even have to be put into any risky situation to be used. It's less effective, but unlike ships, they still produce when they're being 'cargo bay queens', unlike hangarqueen ships that are never undocked. -- e-honor only applies to losses |
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 11:36:00 -
[151]
Your missing the fact that nobody is saying that the T2 bpo guys cannot make more isk per sale on the ships they build from their BPO as they of course can without a doubt.
But the fact is that the market is so large and varied that they do not effect the profits of a inventor in the slightest and to claim that they do is absurd.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Allandra Stardream
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 13:33:00 -
[152]
A still aspire to have enough ISK to actually buy a T2 BPO, they are very available, maybe not often and maybe not the exact one you'd want, but they do sell, so please do not take them out of the game.
|
sakana
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 14:20:00 -
[153]
Obviously t2 BPO owners will be able to make larger profits than those who rely on invention, but you can still make a huge amount of isk through invention. You could then use this isk to purchase a t2 BPO.
I'm not saying it's fair, but with no real feasible way of removing the t2 BPOs, and with the introduction of invention vastly leveling the playing field, I don't believe anything has to be done.
|
Elenath
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 14:27:00 -
[154]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: Blackjack Turner Lies, greed, envy. This is all the posters who would leave the T2 BPO's in game have to argue with. Made mostly by T2 BPO owner's alts I'm sure.
Im a main actually, if you understood manufacturing you would know that BPO's do not effect inventors at all or their profits. So the only reason anybody would want them removed is false greed, envy and jealousy as no other real reason exists.
True, to a degree. But BPOs do make the actual manufacture less of a hassle, and that convenience has a price. But I agree, I think most people voting to get rid of BPOs are people who want them and don't have them.
|
Bra'nn Draythe
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 19:34:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Elenath True, to a degree. But BPOs do make the actual manufacture less of a hassle, and that convenience has a price. But I agree, I think most people voting to get rid of BPOs are people who want them and don't have them.
Not just less of a hassle, but as I've said before, cheaper too.
I don't want them to exist period and I don't have them. To me, they're basically subsidized T2 production when it doesn't need any. The demand for T2 items is quite obvious, so it's not like there's any need to make it cheaper to produce without good reason.
The original T2 BPO program was heavily flawed, to put it kindly, and it's a relic of a poor design decision that's still having an effect today. -- e-honor only applies to losses |
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 23:27:00 -
[156]
Originally by: The Speaker
Originally by: Venkul Mul Boy you are a bad liar. You don't know a bit about the BPO return. Or you are a very bad builder and think that the minerals and T2 building materials are free because you build them yourself.
Yes, proper accounting and math is oh so difficult Nice try at refuting points by trying the marginalize-your-opponent route.
Who knows. Maybe your prints are no longer very profitable. Maybe you are a horrifically inept builder. Honestly, that's most likely not the case - but it's a strong strategic move for you to try to paint the picture that T2 BPO holders are oh-woe-is-me nerfed and deserve more. I understand why you would take that tack, but it's somewhat transparent.
As far as the other guy's assertion that T2 BPO holders aren't the ones driving margins down, in some cases this is true but in others it most definitely isn't. Some T2 BPO holders derive a warped sense of glee by griefing inventors and other BPO holders. I know that I do. Unfortunately I've only been able to kill the margins on four, maybe five, product lines (which really is just a drop in the bucket).
Quote: Sure, invention murdered my profit margins, but they're still astronomical by real world standards. 500%? 600%? 700%? 800%? 900%? All the while pricing product lines at rates intended to make inventors cry. I may not be making 5+, 10+, 15+ billion a month off of each BPO like pre-invention times, but it's still a decent living and it comes with the added bonus of knowing you're urinating in some inventor's hopes and dreams for profits.
Give me the name of those mystical BPO giving 500% profit and how you get it, then i could think you are speaking the truth and give you my excuses, till then for me you are a liar or you aren't counting all the expenses.
Note: r.a.m., even if you produce them should be priced at sell price (or you will be moving the profit of building r.a.m. to the final item, and the profit come from building r.a.m., not the T2) items, idem for T2 building components, idem for all the other items used.
If you are saying "the basic materials/minerals cost X, so building all the components/advanced materials I am getting 500% profit on the final item" you are simply adding the profits of several constructing jobs to the final job and calculating them there. In that situation it is not the T2 BPO what give you a 500% profit, it is the building of the components that give you a profit.
|
Joe
Umbra Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 01:29:00 -
[157]
Originally by: sakana Obviously t2 BPO owners will be able to make larger profits than those who rely on invention, but you can still make a huge amount of isk through invention.
Tech II bpo's = Profit (guaranteed return) Invention = Gamble (no guaranteed return)
You can save up and buy one of the 20,000 Tech II BPOs, Investing massive amounts of Isk for a small Guaranteed return each week, Or with minimal cost Gamble for the Chance of Getting rich quick.
Really all thats needed is DEV input. There are other 'Assembly Hall' Topics asking for this, Players argueing amongst themselves does't really solve anything, This thread is piontless and really only mirrors hundreds of previous 'General Discussion' and 'Market Discussion' Threads that have also had no Dev input
Pe0w |
Lord Jita
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 17:15:00 -
[158]
Edited by: Lord Jita on 15/06/2008 17:17:03 Edited by: Lord Jita on 15/06/2008 17:16:30 Edited by: Lord Jita on 15/06/2008 17:15:44 Edited by: Lord Jita on 15/06/2008 17:15:18 SUpported after I read this thread: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=796755
Specifically this part:
Quote: During this time I also gave my corporation about 50 Billion isk in named modules, Unrestricted free use of Zealot, Absolution, Astarte, CapII and PDUII BpoÆs, paid for another station at 22 Billion isk and gave them Aeon, Archon, Revelation and Minmitar outpost BpoÆs
This is one guy. ONE GUY. How many people are like this in the game? This is fair how exactly that he is this filthy stinking rich from 5 t2 bpos he posesses? He bought his own titan AND a station? What the crap? I think these people made enough ISK with them already.
|
Jaarlax
Ratty Corp PLC Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 18:13:00 -
[159]
pointless argument really, you may not recall, but ccp on a couple of occasions had to reseed bpos in the lottery. because they dont last, chars go inactive, they get blown up being moved, accidentaly recycled, every day there are less and less.
i own a couple of bpos and i invent, you make more isk with invention than bpos i have a prowler bpo, which makes 11 a week, every week, thats all it ever will do. if the market tanks on prowlers...i'll still be making 11 a week whilst crying.
with invention i can switch to another item and have bpc's ready in a day or 2. the bpo makes me 11 a week, with invention i can make 30 or more, yes they cost a little more to build, but the volume more than makes up for it.
the days when a bpo made you instantly rich are long gone, most are next to useless, any item that has a high profit will attract the inventers and prices will drop to a reasonable level, classic example is hulks, bpo only = 500mil a pop, with invention 90-100mil a pop.
bpo owners have no control on the market, they cannot react to market changes, they may make a higher % of profit per item, but isk profit will be way behind a half descent inventer due to his ability to change what he builds and the volume he can build.
be interesting if ccp could release the number of t2 bpos lost each month and how many are on chars that havent logged in in 6 month or more.
time and peoples stupidity will gradualy reduce the bpos to collectables soon enough, so it's not worth worrying about.
|
killerco
The Flying Dutchmen Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 21:05:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Honz the current system benefits those that have been playing forever!!!
so whats wrong with that, that also means i've been paying forever too play this game so i have every right in having 2 T2 ship bpo's
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |