These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#1061 - 2012-09-05 15:47:30 UTC
Obsidiana wrote:
Leave them in. Just buff Invention and make T2 BPOs obsolete.


Interesting....
Obsidiana
Atrament Inc.
#1062 - 2012-09-05 15:57:36 UTC
Kara Books wrote:
Obsidiana wrote:
Leave them in. Just buff Invention and make T2 BPOs obsolete.


Interesting....

Thank you. Call me opportunistic, but I want better Invention. The outdated system only makes sense in conjunction with preserves T2 BPOs, but that was years ago.

I do not want Invention to be the stagnant, backwards system that is it.

I want better Invention that is so good that no one cares about T2 BPOs.

It should be revisited and improved periodically. I want moar Invention.

That will kill the argument.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#1063 - 2012-09-05 18:20:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
You do realize that buffing invention to increase yield is self-defeating, as it would lower margins even more.

The problem is not invention or T2 BPOs. It's people that value their effort very little, typically with the argument that EVE is a game so they don't care how much they earn, or even if they take a loss, as long as they are having fun.

Building ships is an example of this, because everyone and their grandmother thinks building ships is "cool", regardless of if they are profitable or not (because hundreds of others had the same idea, and are 0.01 ISK-ing each other into oblivion).

Every new industrialist also wants to get into the market, often without doing any market research.

I earn billions of ISK by finding out what the market wants, then supplying it. However, this takes both time and effort, which many are not willing to invest in.

There is LOTS of opportunity for earnings on the current markets. Don't expect ISK to just magically appear in your wallet without putting in some effort.
Javajunky
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1064 - 2012-09-05 18:29:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Javajunky
I am not sure why this thread lives on - I do laugh though.

Take it in another direction, T2 Invention gives you a 0.5% chance to create a T2 BPO - there, I fixed it for you.

Creative opportunities for others to acquire one without having to spend 2 years to get any ROI, devalue the ones that were handed out by corrupt means.
shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#1065 - 2012-09-05 19:10:55 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
You do realize that buffing invention to increase yield is self-defeating, as it would lower margins even more.

The problem is not invention or T2 BPOs. It's people that value their effort very little, typically with the argument that EVE is a game so they don't care how much they earn, or even if they take a loss, as long as they are having fun.

Building ships is an example of this, because everyone and their grandmother thinks building ships is "cool", regardless of if they are profitable or not (because hundreds of others had the same idea, and are 0.01 ISK-ing each other into oblivion).

Every new industrialist also wants to get into the market, often without doing any market research.

I earn billions of ISK by finding out what the market wants, then supplying it. However, this takes both time and effort, which many are not willing to invest in.

There is LOTS of opportunity for earnings on the current markets. Don't expect ISK to just magically appear in your wallet without putting in some effort.


unironicly the best post in this thread


shar'ra phone home

Zifrian
The Frog Pond
Ribbit.
#1066 - 2012-09-05 19:31:54 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
You do realize that buffing invention to increase yield is self-defeating, as it would lower margins even more.

The problem is not invention or T2 BPOs. It's people that value their effort very little, typically with the argument that EVE is a game so they don't care how much they earn, or even if they take a loss, as long as they are having fun.

Building ships is an example of this, because everyone and their grandmother thinks building ships is "cool", regardless of if they are profitable or not (because hundreds of others had the same idea, and are 0.01 ISK-ing each other into oblivion).

Every new industrialist also wants to get into the market, often without doing any market research.

I earn billions of ISK by finding out what the market wants, then supplying it. However, this takes both time and effort, which many are not willing to invest in.

There is LOTS of opportunity for earnings on the current markets. Don't expect ISK to just magically appear in your wallet without putting in some effort.

And...thread.

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder

Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#1067 - 2012-09-05 22:17:28 UTC
Javajunky wrote:
I am not sure why this thread lives on - I do laugh though.

Take it in another direction, T2 Invention gives you a 0.5% chance to create a T2 BPO - there, I fixed it for you.

Creative opportunities for others to acquire one without having to spend 2 years to get any ROI, devalue the ones that were handed out by corrupt means.

.
Perhaps a modification:
Keeping all the copy rules from BPO's the same.


"T2 Invention gives you a 0.5% chance to create a T2 BPO"
except make the chance, .01% and lower depending on original BPO cost and not allowing any market influence upon said outcome, No decryptors, nothing, that can be limited or complatly bought out by any one to be added to that mix.
But instead replace that with Raw RP.

The basic mechanics for invention would also have to be changed, possibly even create a different type or whole set of Datacores just to keep the market from doing a massive bounce.

as for the original owners, I dont think they would be hurt much, as their obviously profitless 600B T2 BPO's would be unprofitable either way.

In short allowing any newbie who joins eve, to basically join a huge lottery where he/she can walk away with 20-600B isk with some massive luck in just a few months of gameplay, or, just enough to get permanently hooked to eve.

This could open quite a few doors and options.
Pipa Porto
#1068 - 2012-09-05 22:39:37 UTC
Kara Books wrote:
as for the original owners, I dont think they would be hurt much, as their obviously profitless 600B T2 BPO's would be unprofitable either way.


You keep saying that like anyone's claimed that T2 BPOs don't provide a profit to their owners.


As to your idea, I think you vastly underestimate the size of EVE's industrial sector.

Seeding BPOs is a nerf to invention, removing BPOs is (you claim) a buff to invention. Why do you want to nerf invention at the same time you want to buff it?

Seeding BPOs would simply raise the minimum demand for invention controlled prices. Seeding BPOs the way you propose would raise the minimum demand more in the most in-demand items, resulting in a likely oversupply of BPOs, permanently crippling invention one item at a time. This would mean that, far from helping newbies, eventually invention would become the province of the rich industrialist trying to get a BPO in an underserved market (and likely not making any money on the BPCs he's inventing).

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#1069 - 2012-09-05 23:05:35 UTC  |  Edited by: shar'ra matcevsovski
Javajunky wrote:
I am not sure why this thread lives on - I do laugh though.

Take it in another direction, T2 Invention gives you a 0.5% chance to create a T2 BPO - there, I fixed it for you.

Creative opportunities for others to acquire one without having to spend 2 years to get any ROI, devalue the ones that were handed out by corrupt means.


by far the worst Idea that got presented.

These are just some of the reasons:

-MORE T2 BPO is bad, as they naturaly dont leave the game and only would be added, over time it would be the only way to make isk, vanilla invention would become pointless. 20 T2 BPO´s per type wont hurt anyone, 2000 certainly will. So after all this solution would only work for a limited amount of time and end up in a totally broken T2 production system.

-NOOBS would have serious toruble to get into the business as they couldnt compete to the mass of T2 BPO`s. Would be a lot harder to get in.

-it would just simplify the entire T2 production wich clearly isnt needed or wanted. The main Issue is still the huge amount of over-production, wich would lead into even more competition and as the result lower margins.

-Current T2 BPO`s would lose their collector item status, and a lot of value, but I guess for all the mildly irrational T2 BPO haters thats just a bonus

Dont you guys find it hilarious that most of you "solutions" include seeding more T2 BPO`s wich are are apparently game-killers itself?
honestly, even as a T2 BPO owner i find the idea of just removing t2 BPO`s without any reimbursment a lot better than this one...

shar'ra phone home

Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#1070 - 2012-09-06 22:24:51 UTC
Giving inventions a 100 100 stat instead of a -10 -10 would be a great solution to the problem. It may destroy margins in some markets but it would open the playing field to all industrialists of EVE and not those players CCP chose to produce T2 or those players who purchased the right via BPO.
Pipa Porto
#1071 - 2012-09-06 22:30:36 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Giving inventions a 100 100 stat instead of a -10 -10 would be a great solution to the problem. It may destroy margins in some markets but it would open the playing field to all industrialists of EVE and not those players CCP chose to produce T2 or those players who purchased the right via BPO.


That would not change the profitability of invention. It would also make most decryptors effectively worthless.

And once again, you've failed miserably at showing any shred of evidence to suggest that the current situation of BPOs has any effect on the profitability or accessibility of invention as a profession.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#1072 - 2012-09-06 22:40:24 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Giving inventions a 100 100 stat instead of a -10 -10 would be a great solution to the problem. It may destroy margins in some markets but it would open the playing field to all industrialists of EVE and not those players CCP chose to produce T2 or those players who purchased the right via BPO.


That would not change the profitability of invention. It would also make most decryptors effectively worthless.

And once again, you've failed miserably at showing any shred of evidence to suggest that the current situation of BPOs has any effect on the profitability or accessibility of invention as a profession.


not that he really beleives that, he just has to post something pseudo-on-topic to keep the thread bumped.

shar'ra phone home

Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#1073 - 2012-09-07 00:28:26 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Giving inventions a 100 100 stat instead of a -10 -10 would be a great solution to the problem. It may destroy margins in some markets but it would open the playing field to all industrialists of EVE and not those players CCP chose to produce T2 or those players who purchased the right via BPO.


Indeed, this would place T2 on par with T1, but of course more steps, POS, skills and many different steps need to be taken before the player can truly utilize anything more then just a few items for himself/herself.

Citizens of New Eden:
These non believers need to be taught a lesson in Manufacture and give up their T2 BPO's in the process, let us rid New eden of this defilement and place this into the Chapters of history.
shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#1074 - 2012-09-07 01:06:40 UTC
Kara Books wrote:

Citizens of New Eden:
These non believers need to be taught a lesson in Manufacture and give up their T2 BPO's in the process, let us rid New eden of this defilement and place this into the Chapters of history.


totally not a brewlar alt Cool

shar'ra phone home

Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#1075 - 2012-09-07 06:43:02 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Giving inventions a 100 100 stat instead of a -10 -10 would be a great solution to the problem. It may destroy margins in some markets but it would open the playing field to all industrialists of EVE and not those players CCP chose to produce T2 or those players who purchased the right via BPO.


1) changing invention would not bring anything, except ruining the prices for decryptors/datacores/T2 Bpc and... final products
2) the guys who are in charge of industry in CCP are aware that T2 BPO and invention are fine and quite balanced.
3) you aren't CCP your point of view is narrow, you lack a lot of knowledge about how industry works, how markets works and you don't have the data and statistics as ccp have.
4) You just implicitly admited to be disturbed by "those players who purchased the right via bpo".
5) This discussion thread is sterile, you have nothing new to bring, except hammering the same things for months

6) to contradict what you claim about alleged loss of subscribers :

EVE Online Subscribers, from MMOdata.net

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---

Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#1076 - 2012-09-07 12:24:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
Kara Books wrote:

Citizens of New Eden:
These non believers need to be taught a lesson in Manufacture and give up their T2 BPO's in the process, let us rid New eden of this defilement and place this into the Chapters of history.


totally not a brewlar alt Cool



All those who speak out against the silliness that is T2BPO along the years are my alts. If present counts stand I have over 1000 accounts so CCP hey up remove T2BPO before you lose 1/30th of your player base.
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#1077 - 2012-09-07 12:25:56 UTC
Buff invention and make T2BPO's irrelevant. That way T2BPO owners could not complain as there BPO's have not been touched.
Sevastian Liao
DreamWeaver Inc.
#1078 - 2012-09-07 12:38:01 UTC
1) Make silly proclamation based on faulty assertions
2) Have faulty assertions shot down by figures/ actual experience/ logic
3) Try repeating silly proclamation based on faulty assertion, hoping that noise drowns out reason
4) Get shot down again
5) Keep quiet for a week or two and hope that people forget figures/logic/experience
6) Go back to Step 1

...Ad infinitum
Pipa Porto
#1079 - 2012-09-07 13:34:33 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Buff invention and make T2BPO's irrelevant. That way T2BPO owners could not complain as there BPO's have not been touched.


You also don't seem to understand the concept of a zero sum game.

The More You Don't Know™

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#1080 - 2012-09-07 13:46:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
If the lottery was fair (it wasn't)

Says who (except you) ? Do you have any shred of a proof ? Why are you not presenting it to CCP Internal Affairs ?

Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Horrible ROI for new players. Astronomical ROI for players who were gifted them. Can you please stop making out that T2BPO's somehow cost their owners massive amounts of effort or isk as it's simply not the case.

A significant portion of useful T2 BPOs have changed hands for ISK, as opposed to still being in the original hands.
So, actually, yes, a good number of T2 BPOs did cost their current owners a lot of ISK.

BY PROMOTING THE REMOVAL OF T2 BPOs YOU ARE IGNORING ALL THE COLLATERAL DAMAGE, WHILE NOT REALLY IMPROVING THE OVERALL SITUATION MUCH.
And it's unlikely CCP will EVER listen to you anyway,

Instead, you should be promoting a significant usability and ME/PE levels buff to invention.
This would reduce the practical benefits of having a T2 BPO to nearly nothing, and the only significant leftover value of T2 BPOs will be the collector value, not the economic one.

Regardless of what you do, even if you remove T2 BPOs, inventors still won't make more profit.
Improving invention will slightly lower inventor profit (lower barriers to entry, leading to more inventors competing, leading to lower profits), however, it will heavily decrease price of T2 goods (razor-thin margins) and increase volume of T2 goods being manufactured (same materials can make more goods with better invention ME levels).
All in all, it's the solution with the least amount of unpleasant collateral damage.