These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Market Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

How much did you lose on your T2 bpo?

First post
Author
Zahara Cody
Imperial Corrections Service.
#61 - 2014-09-24 20:16:41 UTC
Even owning t2 bpos, it's still too much effort for me to even use them... most of mine sit unused until i find a buyer... people like me are taking t2 bpos out of play for months at a time... I'll still rake in more than most inventors... manufacturing, inventing, mining, PI, exploration, etc all way too much effort and not enough reward. Trading is where it's at.

Hating is free, that's why poor people do it the best.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#62 - 2014-09-24 20:42:34 UTC
Trin Javidan wrote:
I like the discussion that is going on. However i would like to add a few things to it. I do sence a small amoutn of hate towards the existance of T2 bpo's from you mr. Kell, and i wonder if this is coloring your point of view. As you have said; you are on the train for a long time.
Well you'd be wrong there. I have no hate towards T2 BPOs specifically. I don't see the point in keeping remnants of ANY deprecated mechanic behind purely because a handful of people feel they are entitled to keep said remnants because they've chosen to pay a high price for them. T2 BPOs are not inherently expensive, they are that way because people are willing to pay more and more for them. Those choices are not a reason to keep them around.

Trin Javidan wrote:
Let my try to explain it on a simple, to be understandable (and for me to type) way. If there is a farmers market where 200 people want apples, where 170 apples are supplied by farmers (invention) and 30 by their workers (T2 bpo) who bought them cheaper and are reselling; Who is making up the price and who are shooting themselves in the foot? (this is a brain thinker)
You are complaining about the 0.1 isking game and all the tards that are falling for it. That is something substantialy differant!
(and you are also forgetting the t2 pvp loot sellers> buy order dumps > undercutting producers)
(Your claimes are adressed vs T2 bpo producers but i doubt you hvnt even thought about this one)
This makes no sense, like at all. I'm not entirely sure you understand the benefit a T2 BPO producer gets. An inventor needs to pay for each run of their BPC a set cost, on top of the build cost, to produce a BPC at a lower profit rate than a researched BPO. That's a sunk cost, one they won't get back. A BPO owner doesn't need t pay that. They pay for a BPO once, can infinitely produce from it, then can resell the BPO whenever they want to recover that cost.

Trin Javidan wrote:
And what about the risk of investing? I do remember EVE being all about "Risk vs reward" > T2 bpo's value where going up and down following shipsbuff's, module changes, market manipulations and major fleet doctrine changes.
People didnt realised this, and it made reselling them very lucrative.

We are still taking about bought T2 bpo's not given ones (!!)

The cherry on the pie are these invention changes, to make it super clear:
Invention: Invest XXX amount > profit everymonth > after xxx years you build up a capital
Bought T2 bpo: Invest HUGH amount > Profit everymonth > Now -HUGH amount
Except the investment still has value. The only risk you have is that your BPO goes down in value, which if you are paying attention can be preempted. The people who will lose out when the BPOs get canned will not be the main owners. The owners will cash them out for what looks like a sweet deal right before they crash, guaranteed.

Trin Javidan wrote:
At invention there is no risk at all... because on the long therm you have a 53% (succes rate), at T2 bpo you have risk of value deduction, which is now the case and the crated risk has ruind previous and future profit to come.
There's as much risk in invention as any other mainstream production. People can compete with your product and crush your profit margins, because people can all achieve the same level. That promotes competition, which is very healthy.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Zahara Cody
Imperial Corrections Service.
#63 - 2014-09-24 20:56:00 UTC
Removing T2 bpos will only make invention marginally more profitable, if at all... this is not about the viability of invention. Just come out and say it..

Hating is free, that's why poor people do it the best.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#64 - 2014-09-24 21:12:44 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Zahara Cody wrote:
Removing T2 bpos will only make invention marginally more profitable, if at all... this is not about the viability of invention. Just come out and say it..
You're right, It's not, which is what I've stated multiple times. It's about removing the remnants of a deprecated mechanic so the invention mechanics can be played with without having to constantly ask the question "how will T2 BPOs affect or be affected by this change".

I get it though, you make a lot of isk though trading T2 BPOs, and if they get nerfed into just collectors items or removed entirely, you'll lose that line of isk making. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#65 - 2014-09-25 04:42:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Bad Bobby
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's about removing the remnants of a deprecated mechanic so the invention mechanics can be played with without having to constantly ask the question "how will T2 BPOs affect or be affected by this change".

And when the argument is reduced down to that, we're left deciding whether that reduction in support and development complexity is worth the loss of depth in the game.

But we players do not have the means to gauge how much that reduction in support and development complexity is worth or how much we stand to gain from it.

We can gauge the value of the loss of depth in the game, but that will be a matter of personal taste, which cannot really be debated.

But at least we've completed another turn around the ballroom and come to the same place. A difference of opinion based on taste and weakly founded speculation.
Big Lynx
#66 - 2014-09-25 05:26:17 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Eve works well for about 8y with t2bpos. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#67 - 2014-09-25 07:37:37 UTC
Big Lynx wrote:
Eve works well for about 8y with t2bpos.
I don't think we want to point towards the last 8 years of EVE industry as some kind of paragon.

Sure, what we've had for the last 8 years has worked (more or less) and has been interesting, but it could and really should have been a lot better. The recent and upcomming industry iterations are long overdue and well short of the mark, in my opinion.

But I do agree, T2 BPOs of the last 8 years have not been anywhere near as bad as some people claim. In fact, I probably wouldn't still be playing right now if things like T2 BPOs didn't exist.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#68 - 2014-09-25 07:48:11 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's about removing the remnants of a deprecated mechanic so the invention mechanics can be played with without having to constantly ask the question "how will T2 BPOs affect or be affected by this change".

And when the argument is reduced down to that, we're left deciding whether that reduction in support and development complexity is worth the loss of depth in the game.

But we players do not have the means to gauge how much that reduction in support and development complexity is worth or how much we stand to gain from it.

We can gauge the value of the loss of depth in the game, but that will be a matter of personal taste, which cannot really be debated.

But at least we've completed another turn around the ballroom and come to the same place. A difference of opinion based on taste and weakly founded speculation.
T2 BPO do not add depth. They give a select number of players the ability to bypass invention in favour of using T1 mechanics, so if anything, they remove depth.

And it's too late. T2 BPOs are already doomed.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#69 - 2014-09-25 08:06:40 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
T2 BPO do not add depth. They give a select number of players the ability to bypass invention in favour of using T1 mechanics, so if anything, they remove depth.

They give every player the ability to own, collect and trade limited edition industrial assets. They give every player more things to aspire to or work towards, if they so desire. They add positive and interesting aspects to the game that otherwise would not exist.

But you don't like them, so apparently none of that matters.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#70 - 2014-09-25 09:42:09 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
T2 BPO do not add depth. They give a select number of players the ability to bypass invention in favour of using T1 mechanics, so if anything, they remove depth.
They give every player the ability to own, collect and trade limited edition industrial assets. They give every player more things to aspire to or work towards, if they so desire. They add positive and interesting aspects to the game that otherwise would not exist.

But you don't like them, so apparently none of that matters.
No, I just don't think the positives outweigh the negatives. Removing their ability to produce most certainly has no impact on the depth of the game and they can still be collected. If they are collectors items, surely nobody would have an issue with their inevitable removal from the industry system, right?

And other collectors items have been removed before and I didn't see you whining about depth then. Stop holding on to deprecated mechanics and accept that the game must move forward to progress. It's gonna happen whether you want it to or not.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#71 - 2014-09-25 10:08:22 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Lucas Kell wrote:
I just don't think the positives outweigh the negatives.

A matter of taste, which is pointless to argue over.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#72 - 2014-09-25 10:55:16 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Bad Bobby wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I just don't think the positives outweigh the negatives.
A matter of taste, which is pointless to argue over.
Not really. The positives are that a handful of people can use an item to undercut prices of the main producers (bearing in mind that they would still be collectables even if they didn't get used for industry). The negatives are that the invention system has to be tiptoed around when making changes so that this deprecated system won't break or be broken by the changes.

The thing is, if you issue really was that they are part of the history of EVE and are valuable collectors items, then their use as an industry item would be irrelevant.

*Snip* Removed reply to an edited out part of the quoted post. ISD Ezwal.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#73 - 2014-09-25 18:39:24 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


BPOs are not "Bind on Pickup". You could buy them and get "the same potential end-game" etc. etc.
Many who started playing well past T2 BPOs lottery had been "phased out" still got their BPOs fill.


Well.... then they failed to run the numbers. I considered it too but even before the indy fix the ROI was on a time scale that didn't make sense. Now that the copy bottle neck is gone I consider the playing field more or less leveled. At this point, the discussion is moot.

What I'll never understand, however, is that for years, when it WAS relevent, CCP didn't just collectively grow a pair and put the genie back in the bottle. They fixed it by introducing invention and then subsequently (and with great delay) fixed invention. However, they seemed to lack the balls to just say, "starting at date X all T2 BPOs will be converted to max researched T1 BPO's". The day they introduced invention all T2 BPO's should have been converted.,...but they flinched and missed their window to do the right thing.

I always found this odd. It was as though the Devs, having created the problem in the first place, were being held hostage by personal agendas and were either unable or unwilling to fix it. From a game play perspective, it was weak, it was illogical and it was unjust. Three things to which I have an incredibly strong allergy.

CCP created the best game ever, IMO, but on this point they made a mistake that was handled abysmally -- from a gaming perspective -- on every level.

T-
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#74 - 2014-09-26 18:27:22 UTC
I have removed some posts that contained a reply to an edited out part of the post(s) they replied to.

I also removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#75 - 2014-09-26 20:03:57 UTC
Tinu Moorhsum wrote:
I always found this odd. It was as though the Devs, having created the problem in the first place, were being held hostage by personal agendas and were either unable or unwilling to fix it. From a game play perspective, it was weak, it was illogical and it was unjust. Three things to which I have an incredibly strong allergy.

CCP created the best game ever, IMO, but on this point they made a mistake that was handled abysmally -- from a gaming perspective -- on every level.

T-


As a sometimes massively critic against CCP, I have to say they have a lot of factors that make them stand out in a positive way.

One of them is, they usually don't play "gods" with their game. If they fumble, they take the blow and try countering it, like they were "in the sandbox" with us.

When they botched the T2 BPOs they could have played high gods of authority and brute force removed them. Many other MMO companies would have done that...

... and this is why CCP is still here and they aren't.

CCP don't fear dirtying their hands (some times in a bad way) and taking the consequences. Holding to the T2 BPO legacy costed CCP many headaches but in the end the "BPO containment" worked well enough.

Unfairness, dirty playing, ways to circumvent both, all contributes making EvE "not perfect, not irreal" and thus felt a more believable space life simulation.
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#76 - 2014-09-26 21:59:57 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


As a sometimes massively critic against CCP, I have to say they have a lot of factors that make them stand out in a positive way.

One of them is, they usually don't play "gods" with their game. If they fumble, they take the blow and try countering it, like they were "in the sandbox" with us.

When they botched the T2 BPOs they could have played high gods of authority and brute force removed them. Many other MMO companies would have done that...

... and this is why CCP is still here and they aren't.

CCP don't fear dirtying their hands (some times in a bad way) and taking the consequences. Holding to the T2 BPO legacy costed CCP many headaches but in the end the "BPO containment" worked well enough.

Unfairness, dirty playing, ways to circumvent both, all contributes making EvE "not perfect, not irreal" and thus felt a more believable space life simulation.


Thank you for this perspective. I agree that the invention strategy worked and I sincerely appreciate your point of view that CCP are in the sand box with us. It does feel like that to me too. This perspective is something I wouldn't have come up with myself but now that you say it, I'm all nodding and feeling like part of the collective. :)

T-
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#77 - 2014-09-26 22:54:55 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tinu Moorhsum wrote:
I always found this odd. It was as though the Devs, having created the problem in the first place, were being held hostage by personal agendas and were either unable or unwilling to fix it. From a game play perspective, it was weak, it was illogical and it was unjust. Three things to which I have an incredibly strong allergy.

CCP created the best game ever, IMO, but on this point they made a mistake that was handled abysmally -- from a gaming perspective -- on every level.

T-


As a sometimes massively critic against CCP, I have to say they have a lot of factors that make them stand out in a positive way.

One of them is, they usually don't play "gods" with their game. If they fumble, they take the blow and try countering it, like they were "in the sandbox" with us.

When they botched the T2 BPOs they could have played high gods of authority and brute force removed them. Many other MMO companies would have done that...

... and this is why CCP is still here and they aren't.

CCP don't fear dirtying their hands (some times in a bad way) and taking the consequences. Holding to the T2 BPO legacy costed CCP many headaches but in the end the "BPO containment" worked well enough.

Unfairness, dirty playing, ways to circumvent both, all contributes making EvE "not perfect, not irreal" and thus felt a more believable space life simulation.
Lol? They usually throw bans around, declare things exploits, and undo stuff. Like the fac five stuff or the bounty exploit in Crius. CCP are not at all against just nuking things out of the game when they mess up. The only reason T2 BPOs survived is because at the time it was the GMs handing them out to all their mates and CCP hadn't really got into the mindset of nuking things out. If the original T2 BPO situation was happening right now instead you'd all be finding yourselves sitting starting at your T1 BPO equivalents quicker than you can blink.

And to be perfectly honest, a game company that refuses to take decisive action because a few people will cry about it is hardly going about it the right way. They are instead going to keep taking whacks at them until T2 BPOs are pretty much useless and everyone involved is all whined out or gone, then they'll drop them from industry use. In the long run it's going to be more painful than the "one quick jolt and done", even if people actively investing in them are too blinded by bias to see it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#78 - 2014-09-27 08:47:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Lucas Kell wrote:

Lol? They usually throw bans around, declare things exploits, and undo stuff.


Now stop the flamethrower and sit down to think.

Is banning a mass solution? No. CCP hit the exploits inventors, initiator and - when the exploit could be contained - all of the offenders.

So, when the "FW Forex" was born, they punished the few who were the "inventors", but did not hit the number of others who copied them (there were, there were).

When the POS T2 exploit became widely spread, they acted like they did with T2 BPOs: they could not ban thousands of players (in a game whose sub numbers are limited) so they just fixed it. In the case of bugs, they could be fixed like you fix a leak, when stuff is handed to large numbers, and many got the stuff in a legitimate way, you can't just tell them they shall be punished like the guility ones. This usually causes very bad press, lots of people quitting and so on.
EvE by then had fewer subs than even today, it could have not recovered from the blow.


Lucas Kell wrote:

The only reason T2 BPOs survived is because at the time it was the GMs handing them out to all their mates and CCP hadn't really got into the mindset of nuking things out.


Keep repeating the mantra to yourself, it makes it true!

Never mind it was a lottery with more than 10 or 100 participants, never mind CCP might have taken action to the specific cases they could find, while leaving the legit T2 BPOs to everybody else who won them in a legit way.


Lucas Kell wrote:

And to be perfectly honest, a game company that refuses to take decisive action because a few people will cry about it is hardly going about it the right way. They are instead going to keep taking whacks at them until T2 BPOs are pretty much useless and everyone involved is all whined out or gone, then they'll drop them from industry use. In the long run it's going to be more painful than the "one quick jolt and done", even if people actively investing in them are too blinded by bias to see it.


To be perfectly honest, by now you should have learned the EvE "vibe". If you don't like a dirty game on all its dimensions then you should not even be here.

I have chosen to play EvE in the most honest way I could, but MANY wanted a MMO where they could act like they could never do in any other MMO. They got it. You either accept EvE's reality or keep complaining, it won't change a comma.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#79 - 2014-09-27 14:40:14 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
When the POS T2 exploit became widely spread, they acted like they did with T2 BPOs: they could not ban thousands of players (in a game whose sub numbers are limited) so they just fixed it. In the case of bugs, they could be fixed like you fix a leak, when stuff is handed to large numbers, and many got the stuff in a legitimate way, you can't just tell them they shall be punished like the guility ones. This usually causes very bad press, lots of people quitting and so on.
EvE by then had fewer subs than even today, it could have not recovered from the blow.
Except the entire mechanic was deprecated, so we're not talking about a few exploiters, we're talking about an entire system being replaced and them keeping the remnants of the old process in. Why did they remove researched compression blueprints refunding only the base cost with Crius for example?

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
To be perfectly honest, by now you should have learned the EvE "vibe". If you don't like a dirty game on all its dimensions then you should not even be here.

I have chosen to play EvE in the most honest way I could, but MANY wanted a MMO where they could act like they could never do in any other MMO. They got it. You either accept EvE's reality or keep complaining, it won't change a comma.
And what? So we should just not voice our opinions when they mess up? Most of the people that campaign for T2 BPOs to be left in do so because they make a lot of isk flipping and using them, with very little risk. Outside of exceptional times like now where prices are all over the place, T2 BPOs are profitable and maintain their value. Hardly the level of risk I'd expect from a "hardcore" game like EVE.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#80 - 2014-09-27 19:26:04 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Except the entire mechanic was deprecated, so we're not talking about a few exploiters, we're talking about an entire system being replaced and them keeping the remnants of the old process in. Why did they remove researched compression blueprints refunding only the base cost with Crius for example?


It was not replaced, it was made obsolete (with wildly degrees of success) by flanking it with a new one. Again, not a 100% success, nor I'd expect CCP to be able and completely fix such an huge mess. The "patch" they put was good enough though, in fact invention manufacturers (both BPC manufacturers and finished items manufacturers) had plenty to earn. Yes they had to pick what to make, avoiding the niches where T2 BPOs were overhelmingly profitable and the market too tiny to exhaust BPO holders production capabilities. But even T1 manufacturers have to pick the profitable markets, avoiding some very good meta items competition and many other factors.


Lucas Kell wrote:

Most of the people that campaign for T2 BPOs to be left in do so because they make a lot of isk flipping and using them, with very little risk. Outside of exceptional times like now where prices are all over the place, T2 BPOs are profitable and maintain their value. Hardly the level of risk I'd expect from a "hardcore" game like EVE.


Let me remind you that EvE is a Sun Tsu game:

"What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease"