These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

T2BPO why they should be removed and how.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Haulie Berry
#341 - 2012-05-07 14:38:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
Salo Aldeland wrote:
Do either of those proposals actually result in more or less money for inventors than the status quo? I'm not convinced either way, but I'm leaning towards less. The situation is far from straight forward and anybody who claims to have an answer will need to provide more than anecdotes and hunches to make their point.



The let-us-research-the-copies! idea is always extremely stupid. You go from Copytime + invent time + production time to copytime + invent time + research time + production time. The only positive benefit this could have on margins is if it caused a number of people to give up invention because it's just too ******* annoying to bother with anymore, when the system already needs to be made less obnoxious. Even in that unlikely scenario, any increase in margin would be more than consumed by the additional time required, resulting in less profit per slot-hour.

Scrapyard Bob's Sqrt(BPOME)-5 = BPCME idea is... okay. It would effectively remove hobbyist inventors from the equation because the "pros" will be using BPCs with ME that they won't be able to compete with and, unlike BPOs, they will actually be able to fill demand via invention, which isn't a bad thing, unless you're a casual. It basically would require you to do a LOT of ME research to get just a few points of ME in return. 100 ME on your T1 BPO would translate into 5ME on your BPC. I sort of like it out of sheer spite, as the same people who cry about BPOs would almost certainly be locked out of the invention system by such a change.
qDoctor Strangelove
Doomheim
#342 - 2012-05-07 14:43:04 UTC
Improve the damn interface for invention.
When making small mods, the ME/PE of the BPC is of no importance since it will use the same amount of minerals.
The issue are that my producer can have 9 invention jobs going, and they take 1 hour each.

The only people I can see doing massive invention would be bots.
First I have to RIGHT CLICK the BPC.
SELECT INVENTION
SELECT LAB
SELECT THE T1 MOD
PRESS OK
PRESS ACCEPT

then repeat.... 9 times, every 1h 15 min...

:CCP:

The BPO owners can just right click, manufacture 1000 units, 3-4 more clicks, wait 30 days.

THAT is the problem, the interface... not the existence of the BPO.
Salo Aldeland
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#343 - 2012-05-07 14:44:56 UTC
Here's an idea. If we really want to increase our income as inventors we should lobby for changes to the way insurance is calculated, so that T2 hulls pay out for their full replacement price. All of a sudden a lot more people are willing to undock in one of our fancy products and risk blowing it up. Demand for T2 hulls goes through the roof. Filthy lucre for everybody! The only losers are NPC underwriters, and who gives a **** about them anyway?
qDoctor Strangelove
Doomheim
#344 - 2012-05-07 17:02:27 UTC
Salo Aldeland wrote:
Here's an idea. If we really want to increase our income as inventors we should lobby for changes to the way insurance is calculated, so that T2 hulls pay out for their full replacement price. All of a sudden a lot more people are willing to undock in one of our fancy products and risk blowing it up. Demand for T2 hulls goes through the roof. Filthy lucre for everybody! The only losers are NPC underwriters, and who gives a **** about them anyway?


There are a lot more to T2 than hulls.
Besides, had it not been for OTEC, T2 frigs would be 5 mill isk again.
Salo Aldeland
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#345 - 2012-05-07 17:38:02 UTC
qDoctor Strangelove wrote:
There are a lot more to T2 than hulls.
Besides, had it not been for OTEC, T2 frigs would be 5 mill isk again.


Right, but people seem to have no problem writing off T2 modules as a cost of doing PvP and it shows in what modules are money makers and what aren't. A few T2 frigates are cheap enough that eating their replacement cost doesn't seem to hurt their popularity, but my hunch is that if insurance covered more of a T2 hull's actual cost they'd be more attractive as ships that you know ahead of time are going to end in a ball of fire with your pod in the middle of it.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#346 - 2012-05-07 18:25:14 UTC

T2 BPO's are fine.... You might have had a case for removing them many, many years ago, but at this point, most people that have them worked for them (by thieving, killing, or buying them). Removing them now is just wrong on many levels, primarily because you're destroying years of efforts of many players just because you think you can't compete.... which is typically wrong...

Instead, look at how you can improve the invention process, such that you don't destroy the utility of t2 BPOs, but you allow invention to compete...

I didn't read all 18 pages of this thread, so this might have been proposed earlier, but a simple change to decryptors would solve much of your whining, bitching, and moaning...

Make it so decryptors impart a fraction of the T1 BPC's ME & PE levels into invented T2 BPC. i.e., instead of having them impart +1 or +2 ME levels to the -4/-4 Invented BPC, have them impart 5% or 10% instead...

The downside to this, is it makes it very hard on the new builder... Currently, a new builder coming into the t2 production market primarily doesn't have to compete with highly researched T2 BPC/BPOs (except in a few cases). Their invented BPC's are just as researched as everyone elses.... I can't decide if this is a good thing, or a bad thing, as I believe in rewarding investement (i.e. time spent researching ME/PE Levels).

The other option I've always heard, allow the BPC's to be researched...
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#347 - 2012-05-07 21:16:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Lara Dantreb
The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).

The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.

As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei

The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---
Morgan Dinn
Imperial Mechanics
#348 - 2012-05-08 06:09:39 UTC
Lara Dantreb wrote:
The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).

The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.

As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei

The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi


You and your nazi card again :D
go away.
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#349 - 2012-05-08 09:45:40 UTC
Morgan Dinn wrote:
You and your **** card again :D
go away.


An inconvenient truth ?

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#350 - 2012-05-08 10:21:43 UTC
Lara Dantreb wrote:
The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).

The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.

As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei

The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi


Relating the deaths of millions to our little irrelevant computer game hobby, you represent T2BPO well . Please continue hopefully in the next few posts you will earn yourself a ban.
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#351 - 2012-05-08 10:34:24 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Lara Dantreb wrote:
The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).

The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.

As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei

The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi


Relating the deaths of millions to our little irrelevant computer game hobby, you represent T2BPO well . Please continue hopefully in the next few posts you will earn yourself a ban.



The comparison ends at your speech and your smear method of course, I do not emphasis things like you are used to do.

"Why they should be removed and how", "easy solution to T2bpo issue", I am somewhat surprised that this type of semantics is still used to describe a community, even in a video computer game

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---
shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#352 - 2012-05-08 10:56:25 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:


Relating the deaths of millions to our little irrelevant computer game hobby, you represent T2BPO well . Please continue hopefully in the next few posts you will earn yourself a ban.



considering that you got 2 pages of this thread deleted because you started posts like "STFU you stup** cun**" over losing an argument, you should not play the moral card. just saying.


shar'ra phone home
Jajas Helper
#353 - 2012-05-08 11:50:45 UTC
I'll drop this in:

Played this game for 3-4 years, gathered 30bil -> bought a T2 bpo and will recover that amount in 5-7 years + (Or more if ccp changes ship, modules or a general - that module is now useless and nobody buys it....)


I dont know why you think T2bpos are "unfair" if it takes that amount of investment other then you been jelly about hard work paying off for someone else.

That said: Yes i like it that i now have to do 30less inventions a day and have reduced some clickfest.... but i am broke on liquid isk ( considering my wallet before)....

Never forget T2BPO owners risk losing the value of their bpo on every ccp nerf / change in module performance.

But most of all, if you find them so unfair.. why the hell are you not taking advantage of them? Because if they are so OP, why dont you isk in on them? There are enough T2bpos sold on the forum and contracts to get yourself some nice advantage...

anyway, jelly haters gonne hate...

add: shameless copy paste of my post in the other hater thread... hate me for it

Inferno do _stuff _with _stuff _to imitate the _stuff _you could do faster with the old stuff

-stuff-
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#354 - 2012-05-09 14:05:53 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Make it so decryptors impart a fraction of the T1 BPC's ME & PE levels into invented T2 BPC. i.e., instead of having them impart +1 or +2 ME levels to the -4/-4 Invented BPC, have them impart 5% or 10% instead...

The downside to this, is it makes it very hard on the new builder... Currently, a new builder coming into the t2 production market primarily doesn't have to compete with highly researched T2 BPC/BPOs (except in a few cases). Their invented BPC's are just as researched as everyone elses.... I can't decide if this is a good thing, or a bad thing, as I believe in rewarding investement (i.e. time spent researching ME/PE Levels).


I'm not sure it would make it hard on the new builder at all. Or at least not much worse then having to research T1 BPOs in order to get into T1 production. You're still going to need a POS tower for copy slots, so having to research your BPOs first wouldn't be that big of a hurdle. Also, most new industrialists are going to be starting with modules/ammo/drone BPOs, which don't take very long to research (ME 100 on a module is only about 8.3 days).

T2 ME = Sqrt(T1 ME) - 5
Sqrt(ME 100) = 10, subtract 5 and you'd end up with a T2 BPC of ME 5.

For a lot of modules, that would actually be overkill on the ME as most of the elements are 'extra' and aren't affected by the ME level. As long as you can get rid of the "negative" ME/PE levels, you'd be good enough.

If the above formula worked, I'd probably go with 49/25 (ME/PE) or 64/25 on module/drone/ammo BPOs. Which would give me T2 BPCs of +2/+0 or +3/+0 instead of -4/-4.
Stella SGP
#355 - 2012-05-10 21:50:54 UTC
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
I'm not sure it would make it hard on the new builder at all. Or at least not much worse then having to research T1 BPOs in order to get into T1 production. You're still going to need a POS tower for copy slots, so having to research your BPOs first wouldn't be that big of a hurdle. Also, most new industrialists are going to be starting with modules/ammo/drone BPOs, which don't take very long to research (ME 100 on a module is only about 8.3 days).

T2 ME = Sqrt(T1 ME) - 5
Sqrt(ME 100) = 10, subtract 5 and you'd end up with a T2 BPC of ME 5.

For a lot of modules, that would actually be overkill on the ME as most of the elements are 'extra' and aren't affected by the ME level. As long as you can get rid of the "negative" ME/PE levels, you'd be good enough.

If the above formula worked, I'd probably go with 49/25 (ME/PE) or 64/25 on module/drone/ammo BPOs. Which would give me T2 BPCs of +2/+0 or +3/+0 instead of -4/-4.

Ive seen you bounce around this idea alot. While it is actually rather interesting and workable, but what are you aiming to accomplish with it other then making T2 stuff even cheaper then it already is.

It certainly won't stop people from crying about T2 Bpos because so long as it takes even 1 trit less to build from them or that invention requires datacores and many more mouse clicks, people will still continue to cry about T2 Bpos. Ultimately, the problem with T2 Bpos is one of perception and nothing else really.

It's just much easier to whine about stuff then to do something about it.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#356 - 2012-05-11 12:23:08 UTC
Stella SGP wrote:

Ive seen you bounce around this idea alot. While it is actually rather interesting and workable, but what are you aiming to accomplish with it other then making T2 stuff even cheaper then it already is.


It lowers the gap between the profit margin that a T2 BPO owner gets and what a T2 inventor gets on the same item. This levels the playing field and narrows the advantage that T2 BPO owners have.

Since T2 BPOs will never be removed, I'm in favor of things that:

- Make datacores cheaper (through increased supply such as selling datacores in the NPC R&D corp LP stores). That directly impacts how much the invention step costs.

- Increases the supply of decryptors (or changes them to work like RAM with % damage).

- Lower the monthly fuel cost of a POS tower (cheaper copies). This also directly impacts the cost of invention.

- Streamline the invention process to be less of a click-fest.

- Makes the decryptors that penalize ME, more interesting and desired. They would then have more demand and be useful in more situations. Or possibly rebalance the decryptors.

- Lowers the "waste" amount which BPO owners can get rid of, but invention owners have to put up with. For many things the -4 ME isn't a big deal, for other things, the -4 ME is bad enough that it erases the profit margin.
Salo Aldeland
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#357 - 2012-05-11 12:45:43 UTC
From my point of view the square root method adds a mountain of ME and PE lab time to my queue just to keep my income from dropping through the floor.
Javajunky
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#358 - 2012-05-12 05:24:20 UTC
Instead of campaigning endlessly for the removal of T2 BPO's from the game, why not go in the opposite direction and campaign for some mechanism that would allow the creation of T2 BPO's back into the game.

A Research Discovery Processs, requires some mad research skills, 500 or so datacores with a chance based increased with decryptors blah blah blah to score a T2 BPO.

just sayin..
shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#359 - 2012-05-12 08:42:48 UTC
Javajunky wrote:
Instead of campaigning endlessly for the removal of T2 BPO's from the game, why not go in the opposite direction and campaign for some mechanism that would allow the creation of T2 BPO's back into the game.

A Research Discovery Processs, requires some mad research skills, 500 or so datacores with a chance based increased with decryptors blah blah blah to score a T2 BPO.

just sayin..


that would kill invention entirely over some time and would make it impossible for newer players to get into T2 manufaction, there for I`d call this a quite bad idea.

people just have to start focusing on improving their own business, rather on damaging business of others.

shar'ra phone home
Daxine Myth
Doomheim
#360 - 2012-05-12 14:58:26 UTC
Well at least T2BPO's are being removed from high sec which is a small nerf.