EVE Search - Any plan to make T2-BPC Researchable?

All Channels

Science and Industry

Any plan to make T2-BPC Researchable?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
St Devil Caldari Defcon One Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.11.28 10:58:00 - [1] Wouldn't it be fair now to make the T2-BPC's researchable? At least, I would use these R.DB [...] Modules I looted somewhere. Ok, this is a argument. But when searching what they are made for (for those who don't know they are used in T2 BPO research), I realize that the T2-BPO owners still have this exaggerated advantage upon the hard working inventors. Advantage that can now be moderated by making the BPC researchable. It could be that this is already in the published plans, I'm just not aware of it. StD
Rosalina Sarinna Aliastra	Posted - 2008.11.28 12:35:00 - [2] Edited by: Rosalina Sarinna on 28/11/2008 12:35:01 To be honest I think the real issue is to get T2 BPOs seeded. Maybe this will happen once T3 takes over as the new standard for everything.
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.11.28 13:25:00 - [3] Originally by: Rosalina Sarinna Edited by: Rosalina Sarinna on 28/11/2008 12:35:01 To be honest I think the real issue is to get T2 BPOs seeded. Maybe this will happen once T3 takes over as the new standard for everything. Why? I do invention and it works just fine for me, I don't need T2 BPO's and so if I don't need them then you don't need them.
Rosalina Sarinna Aliastra	Posted - 2008.11.28 13:36:00 - [4] Originally by: Bloody Rabbit Originally by: Rosalina Sarinna Edited by: Rosalina Sarinna on 28/11/2008 12:35:01 To be honest I think the real issue is to get T2 BPOs seeded. Maybe this will happen once T3 takes over as the new standard for everything. Why? I do invention and it works just fine for me, I don't need T2 BPO's and so if I don't need them then you don't need them. It seems natural to me once T3 is all over the place. Invention makes T2 cost more than they should most of the time (due to negative ME) - but this matters much mroe on the T2 caps than elsewhere of course. A multirun invented Ark BPC with -5 ME for example costs near 3.7bil to build from the ground up which leaves very little for profit. I just don't like low ME. I only suggested this in light of the OP's proposal, I don't really NEED T2 BPOs seeded, but I figure this ma come in the future when everyones concentrating on T3 to make T2 more aligned with the original cost intentions (bear in mind insurance for T2 ships is woefully inaccurate due to player material collecting, markups, trading and pricing, not to mention the aforementioned invention which bumps costs a little more due to failed attempts and use of decrypters for more perfect BPC's).
Dyne Celsius	Posted - 2008.11.29 06:15:00 - [5] This is just an idea, but how about having another level of industry/research to take a T2 bpc to a T2 bpo. CCP could adjust the "reverse engineering" costs/requirements so that T2 bpo's still maintain most of thier value, and this could maybe even be a lead into T3? I donno just a thought?
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.11.29 07:29:00 - [6] Originally by: St Devil Wouldn't it be fair now to make the T2-BPC's researchable? At least, I would use these R.DB [...] Modules I looted somewhere. Ok, this is a argument. But when searching what they are made for (for those who don't know they are used in T2 BPO research), I realize that the T2-BPO owners still have this exaggerated advantage upon the hard working inventors. Advantage that can now be moderated by making the BPC researchable. It could be that this is already in the published plans, I'm just not aware of it. StD Look what is required to research a T2 BPO in time and skills. The T2 BPO researched to "perfect" level are a dream of people that don't build from T2 BPO. Researching a T2 BPC, even to remove the -5 ME, would use so much of your researcher time to make it unprofitable against inventig another block of items. For modules the only difference do between a T2 BPO and an invented BPC is some unit of the base minerals, as the T2 components and base module are a fixed value not modified by material research. So researching them to use 1 less morphite and some unit of tritanium (if you even get a difference, as, for example, the only minerals used by a Ballistic Control System are 3 unit of morphite, both for the T2 BPO and invented BPC and no level of research will lower that). For ships it will make a difference, but seeing how 1 level of ME for a cerberus is more than 5 days of research (133 hours, 20 minutes) it is much more efficient to invent another 2 cerberus BPC in the same time than researching 1 level of ME in the BPC you have. Always using +10 run decryptors can somewhat change that, but I have my dubt that the return from the time invested would be enough to make it worthwhile.
Nathan Derringer	Posted - 2008.11.29 09:51:00 - [7] A possible solution would be if they made the ME and PE level's of the BPC used in the invention count towards the end result. One solution could be if a perfect level of researh made it a 0 instead of -4. Another solution could be if for every 10-20% of research towards a perfect level it would take 1 off the corresponding area of research on the invented BPC. Nate
Rosalina Sarinna Aliastra	Posted - 2008.11.29 11:19:00 - [8] Edited by: Rosalina Sarinna on 29/11/2008 11:23:32 Originally by: Venkul Mul Edited by: Venkul Mul on 29/11/2008 07:37:30 Originally by: Rosalina Sarinna Invention makes T2 cost more than they should most of the time (due to negative ME) - but this matters much more on the T2 caps than elsewhere of course. A multirun invented Ark BPC with -5 ME for example costs near 3.7bil to build from the ground up which leaves very little for profit. This show very little knowledge of how EVE market work and T" BPO availability. The Ark is a jump freighter, there are no BPO of jump freighters (and heavy interdictors, Marauders, ecc., all the T2 that was introduced from Revelations onward). There is a low profit margin because all the builders are competing against other builders for a limited market. Every one of them push is price as low as possible to be the one to sell. So introducing T2 BPO for those items will only cut the inventors from the build process, not increase the profit. I didn't say there was a T2 BPO for the Ark, or Paladins or whatever, I was talking about the BPC for the Ark (from invention)... I shouldn't have mentioned profit in the above quote, what I meant was more along the lines of "leaves little reason to become a supplier of these ships without having the need within your own corp/alliance". Obviously if T2 BPO's do arrive profits will get pushed down, but thats a consequence of supply outstripping demand, not the reason why T2 BPOs would be released via seed (if it ever happens). The point is not the profits, the point is getting the T2 ships down to more like what their true value is (mineral cost). Think of it like the current T1 system is, theres very little profit in doing a lot of T1 items, but they are generally in very good supply, and they are near or sometimes even below mineral cost. In the end if the system stays as it is, so be it. I would hope however that another level of expensive invention (to get T3) isn't added to the T2 BPC invension which is already costly in of itself. T2 BPOs would relieve the pressure on T3 costs quite significantly, but in turn of course would negate the need for invention from T1 to T2 (unless there was a potential benefit in increasing margin compared to T2 BPO prices).
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.11.29 11:42:00 - [9] Originally by: Nathan Derringer A possible solution would be if they made the ME and PE level's of the BPC used in the invention count towards the end result. One solution could be if a perfect level of researh made it a 0 instead of -4. Another solution could be if for every 10-20% of research towards a perfect level it would take 1 off the corresponding area of research on the invented BPC. Nate Was the original idea for invention, apparently there are problems implementing it. The ratio of conversion from the T1 BPC to the T2 should be very bad (something like 1:20) to reflect the added cost and difficulties of researching a T2 BPO, but it would be good if implemented.
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.11.29 11:54:00 - [10] I think that researching a T2 BPC for ME should take less time than researching a T2 BPO, since you have a limited number of runs on a BPC. I also think that researching T2 ship BPC's could increase profits/time (small build cost, players will buy more of those ships since they will be more affordable). If the research formula is well tweaked, ofc.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.11.29 11:55:00 - [11] Originally by: Rosalina Sarinna I didn't say there was a T2 BPO for the Ark, or Paladins or whatever, I was talking about the BPC for the Ark (from invention)... I shouldn't have mentioned profit in the above quote, what I meant was more along the lines of "leaves little reason to become a supplier of these ships without having the need within your own corp/alliance". Really? Seem pretty different from your previous post. Originally by: Rosalina Sarinna Obviously if T2 BPO's do arrive profits will get pushed down, but thats a consequence of supply outstripping demand, not the reason why T2 BPOs would be released via seed (if it ever happens). The point is not the profits, the point is getting the T2 ships down to more like what their true value is (mineral cost). Think of it like the current T1 system is, theres very little profit in doing a lot of T1 items, but they are generally in very good supply, and they are near or sometimes even below mineral cost. As the Dev have introduced those ships and modules knowing perfectly that the would not have a T2 BPO I think that the material resources required for building them are based on the ME -4 and that the intended price of those ship is based on the build materials with ME -4. BTW: no T2 ship or module is even near his mineral cost. Originally by: Rosalina Sarinna In the end if the system stays as it is, so be it. I would hope however that another level of expensive invention (to get T3) isn't added to the T2 BPC invension which is already costly in of itself. T2 BPOs would relieve the pressure on T3 costs quite significantly, but in turn of course would negate the need for invention from T1 to T2 (unless there was a potential benefit in increasing margin compared to T2 BPO prices). From what CCP has said about T3 it will have nothing to do with T2 BPO/BPc. Then I suggest you look the copy time of T2 BPO. I will get better results as research time used (and time is important in this as much as the datacore consumption) inventing the modules than coping a T2 BPO for them. Learning what the T2 BPO require and do before speaking about them will help you giving a better argument for your idea.
Lord Fitz Project Amargosa	Posted - 2008.11.29 12:05:00 - [12] No because there needs to be some advantage to using all the different decryptors, there's no point if you can get one that outputs the worst ME and research it. Also, no more T2 BPOs or any T3 BPOs, because it would kill the T2 invention market. This is hardly complex economics. _____________________________ ░▒▓ ORCAs Available Early and Cheap ▓▒░
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.11.29 12:11:00 - [13] That's tru, this was my first thought also (decryptors). Agree with T2, T3 BPO's also. But you can limit the research of a T2 BPC to, let's say 4 units. Anyway, i don't think that's going to happend since CCP need those ships to be an ISK sink. But hope dies last.
F4LC0N	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:58:00 - [14] Edited by: F4LC0N on 29/11/2008 23:58:09 it isnt realy the build cost that keeps the ships price high lower invention cost and you'll get cheaper ships so go out and do more exploration no need for ccp to do anything :)
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.11.30 11:15:00 - [15] I was thinking about waste. But if we lower the waste we'll hurt the T2 and materials market. And people involved there there will fight against such thing. Anyone for himself. Also decryptors from exploration are not free, datacores and blueprints are not free also. And you can have really bad runs. Maybe if we'll have an increase in decryptor drop chance, we will have cheaper invention. Or maybe someone will stock them and the price wil be the same. Who knows?
Lord Fitz Project Amargosa	Posted - 2008.11.30 11:28:00 - [16] Originally by: Dianalexia I was thinking about waste. But if we lower the waste we'll hurt the T2 and materials market. And people involved there there will fight against such thing. Anyone for himself. Also decryptors from exploration are not free, datacores and blueprints are not free also. And you can have really bad runs. Maybe if we'll have an increase in decryptor drop chance, we will have cheaper invention. Or maybe someone will stock them and the price wil be the same. Who knows? Keep in mind that players control the datacore price (higher prices = more players harvesting them) and the lower the datacore price, eventually the lower the decryptor price has to be (less ships etc worth using decryptors on instead of just more datacores). They have already boosted decryptors quite abit once, and possibly it is something they can look at again, I'm not really sure it's needed, but it would be a far preferable arrangement to researching BPCs or adding more BPOs. Also keep in mind that ME 100 is still less than 10% better than ME0. And less than 20% better than ME-1 (Best invention). And that's further reduced by the fact that even 50% waste, doesn't mean 50% more build cost, due to both rounding and items that aren't affected by waste. Prices for T2 equipment is already really very very cheap, so I'm not really sure what the great need is here. A better version of Alchemy is all that is needed IMO. _____________________________ ░▒▓ ORCAs Available Early and Cheap ▓▒░
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.11.30 14:40:00 - [17] Edited by: Dianalexia on 30/11/2008 14:44:29 Originally by: Lord Fitz consective posts, read above. You're right, datacore prices could lower decryptor cost, but we have a limited number of lab slots. Also ship invention takes a long time and, in the name of the efficiency, players would still use decryptors keeping the prices high. One counter argument to what i said (lab slots limit) would be the use of multiple avatars doing invention, but i really don't know if this is mainstream (how many people are doing this). My support if for a way to decrease waste on the T2 BPC's, and you're right, the best way to do this is by boosting the decryptors (ME). We would avoid the stress on the labs for more and more ME research. PS (the edit): i also still think that one should get more decryptors from RADAR sites. Income for explorers would still be the same (low price/big volume).
I SoStoned	Posted - 2008.11.30 19:38:00 - [18] The only difference between Invention and certain T2 BPOs is about 50% extra material and on some items that might be 1 extra unit of Morphite, for example. For me the extra cost is not in the waste, it's in the datacores. Adding 1 to 4 million per (cheap) invention job definately makes for a distinct elevation in build costs that BPO owners don't suffer. IMO there should be a small (very small) chance of any invention job kicking out a BPO... and by very small I mean like... 1 BPO per item per year, or something like that. I had thought they had done this when one of my jobs kicked out a Energized Adaptive T2 BPO. I thought I had seen the up-side of all my work and labors... until after the next downtime and the BPO was gone. They said it was 'a bug'... Damn me if it wasn't a bug they fixed stupidly fast.
Lopin Acheteur Project Amargosa	Posted - 2008.12.01 07:49:00 - [19] Edited by: Lopin Acheteur on 01/12/2008 07:51:53 Originally by: I SoStoned For me the extra cost is not in the waste, it's in the datacores. Adding 1 to 4 million per (cheap) invention job definately makes for a distinct elevation in build costs that BPO owners don't suffer. IMO there should be a small (very small) chance of any invention job kicking out a BPO... and by very small I mean like... 1 BPO per item per year, or something like that. I had thought they had done this when one of my jobs kicked out a Energized Adaptive T2 BPO. I thought I had seen the up-side of all my work and labors... until after the next downtime and the BPO was gone. They said it was 'a bug'... Damn me if it wasn't a bug they fixed stupidly fast. Of course the BPO owner has an extra cost of several billion (up to a hundred billion) which the inventor doesn't have. Any BPO owner is already a suffering sucker, because the price of most of them is over 5 years worth of profit. 5 years of collecting material and playing the market whereas you can be in the black from day 1 with invention. Firstly, the more BPOs there are, the less room there is for inventors. Secondly, do you have any idea how small the chance would have to be to make only 1 BPO per item per year ? You would probably have to have a 1 in 10 billion chance for ships, and far slimmer chances for modules. Also you then end up with exactly the same problem you had before, where it becomes harder to verify that they were given out legitimately. If you want to experience the lottery like most people, get up all the standings on all your chars, then get all the skills. Then wait 3 years and get nothing for it, not datacores, nothing. And if you change agents / fields, you'd lose all your RP. The fairly lucky people then got some ridiculous T2 BPO that sells for less margin above build cost than most T1 items. I'm sure you think there should be a small chance given that you actually think that means you would have got one. But in reality you wouldn't ever get one, everyone else would get them, and you'd be back here complaining that the chance should be greater. Quote: You're right, datacore prices could lower decryptor cost, but we have a limited number of lab slots. Also ship invention takes a long time and, in the name of the efficiency, players would still use decryptors keeping the prices high. One counter argument to what i said (lab slots limit) would be the use of multiple avatars doing invention, but i really don't know if this is mainstream (how many people are doing this). Players might use decryptors if the cost is not much more because of the invention time, but the build time is also long so.... Also, there comes a point where the decryptors would be not worth using regardless, because the people who didn't use them would force the price below where it was profitable to use the decryptor at all, thus it would HAVE to drop in price.
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.12.08 11:13:00 - [20] I hate command ships . If you want to build from invention BPC yo have only 1 choice... if you want some profit. Also another 2 for enough ISK to tell yourself that you didn't do it for free :P. For the rest, be prepared to lose ISK. Big time.
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.12.08 11:25:00 - [21] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Nathan Derringer A possible solution would be if they made the ME and PE level's of the BPC used in the invention count towards the end result. One solution could be if a perfect level of researh made it a 0 instead of -4. Another solution could be if for every 10-20% of research towards a perfect level it would take 1 off the corresponding area of research on the invented BPC. Nate Was the original idea for invention, apparently there are problems implementing it. The ratio of conversion from the T1 BPC to the T2 should be very bad (something like 1:20) to reflect the added cost and difficulties of researching a T2 BPO, but it would be good if implemented. 5% base propability would be even propably too high for T2 BPO from T2 BPC, altho it ofc depends also on assosiated other costs. I think either one of those would be step in good direction (making either initial BPC ME/PE levels modify end resuslts of invention or some hard/expencive enogh option ot get T2 BPO's without having to rely current owners will to sell his). To be honest I was quite surprised when at first relase starting BPC ME/PE elvel did not affect end results as when stuff was in planning stages I was getting impression that something on those lines was planned. At that time I just assumed that they relased it heaviliy prenerfed - but so far there has been no serious indicators that CCP is planning to do anything at all in regards of T2 invention / BPO stuff.
Rashmika Clavain Gallente Revelation Space	Posted - 2008.12.08 12:12:00 - [22] Has CCP stated there will be T3 BPO's, I was under the impression they were moving away from higher tech level BPO's. /shrug Removed. Please keep your EVE signature related to your EVE persona and not that of a real life politician. Navigator
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.12.09 01:37:00 - [23] Originally by: Lord Fitz No because there needs to be some advantage to using all the different decryptors, there's no point if you can get one that outputs the worst ME and research it. Also, no more T2 BPOs or any T3 BPOs, because it would kill the T2 invention market. This is hardly complex economics. tbh I would love to see the t2 invention market crushed. and just have t2 bpos seeded on the market like t1
Tasko Pal Heron Corporation	Posted - 2008.12.09 03:41:00 - [24] Originally by: Venkul Mul From what CCP has said about T3 it will have nothing to do with T2 BPO/BPc. Where are you getting this information? It was my weak understanding that invention skills would be necessary.
Gamer4liff Caldari Metalworks THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY	Posted - 2008.12.09 14:13:00 - [25] T2 BPOs being sold on the open market, or any "direct" purchase method = death of T2 market margins, invention.
brinelan Caldari Victory Not Vengeance Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.12.09 15:38:00 - [26] Edited by: brinelan on 09/12/2008 15:38:40 Invention seems to be fine as it is. If there are items selling below material cost then it is most likely the "datacore i get are free" crowd that dont take a good chunk of cost into their math. I do not own a t2 bpo, nor would I ever want to. I can make more profit per week as an inventor on items that I invent then any bpo holder will for teh same item. It is great to be able to keep 11 lines running making items, while that t2 bpo holder can only make them 1 at a time. The going rate for a t2 bpo is 2+ years of profit. Sucks for anyone in the last 2 years who bought any bpos for items affected by the nano nerf. At least with invention, I was making money right from the beginning and I could change the items I was making on a dime to keep profits going. There are items that make a ton of money through invention. Nobody is going to just tell you what they are, but you can use a spreadsheet or calculator to figure it out yoruself. It would be nice to be able to affect the me/pe of an invented print, but with people making money hand over fist with invention why is it necessary? -------------------------- Some days you're the bug, some days you're the windshield
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.12.09 19:55:00 - [27] Originally by: brinelan Edited by: brinelan on 09/12/2008 15:38:40 I can make more profit per week as an inventor on items that I invent then any bpo holder will for teh same item. It is great to be able to keep 11 lines running making items, while that t2 bpo holder can only make them 1 at a time. You seem to assume that having a T2 BPO prevents the owner from inventing. Altho this particular area has debated to death over the past threads on this subject.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.12.10 05:53:00 - [28] Originally by: Gamer4liff T2 BPOs being sold on the open market, or any "direct" purchase method = death of T2 market margins, invention. and I want cheap stuffs
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.12.10 08:53:00 - [29] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Gamer4liff T2 BPOs being sold on the open market, or any "direct" purchase method = death of T2 market margins, invention. and I want cheap stuffs Failing more complex solutions I could see myself even supporting that idea. Cost of blueprint is high enough barrier to the market entry. Those who can't afford or don't want to buy T2 BPO could always remain in the invention. I would prefer however somekind of invention related possibility of affecting end result ME in positive direction (preferably by having initial bpc to modify end result me/pe) or failing that possibility of getting your claws on BPO thru invention process (altho it should be specific effort towards BPO - most simple one would be propably using t1 bpo for invention and a bit higher datacore investment, say current base cores x10 and/or special decryptor).
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.12.10 10:55:00 - [30] Originally by: Carniflex most simple one would be propably using t1 bpo for invention and a bit higher datacore investment, say current base cores x10 and/or special decryptor). And it would still be too expensive to build an Eos (just an example) or other ships, modules, etc, where the only way to gain some profit is the use of a T2 BPO. Also one can always sold that T2 BPO to cover his initial expenses. But i'm not talking about the T2 BPO removal. T2 BPO's are great because they allow the players to gain ISK for PVP without too much of a hussle. They fill a niche. All i want is a fair chance to compete and enjoy the game in his inventor/industrial aspect.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.