These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Invention & T2 BPOs - Will this ever change?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#61 - 2011-10-10 13:40:30 UTC
T2 BPO's are not the problem.
A BPO owner would gladly sell there items at a higher price.
Before Invention Hulks used to sell for 500 mil isk a pop and the other T2 ships were not far behind on profit margins.
Invention dropped the prices of T2 items.

And there is still a ton of people who are under the impression that if they mine their own minerals they are free.
This also can apply to moon goo as well.

So what you have is a market that is flooded with T2 items and prices that are artificially low.

At one time I considered making my own jump freighter.
There are no T2 BPO's for jump freighters.
In the end I ended up buying one as it was cheaper then making one myself.
And is with me making the freighters and producing the copy all from my own BPO's

T2 BPO's are not the problem.





EVERYBODY KNOWS
Karim alRashid
Starboard.
#62 - 2011-10-10 13:45:53 UTC
Simetraz,

If T2 BPOs is not an issue for a particular item, does not mean it's not an issue for ALL items.

There's simply no public information that allows you or me or anyone to make such conclusions.

While I agree that invention effectively puts an upper limit to the sale price of ALL items, this does not mean that some items aren't exclusively produced by T2 BPO owners, in other words, the inventors are denied entry on this market.

Pain is weakness leaving the body http://www.youtube.com/user/AlRashidKarim/videos
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#63 - 2011-10-10 13:49:17 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Hi
Is the Invention & T2 BPO situation ever likely to change?
The problem being that where originally BPOs were given out, which can be researched and all that jazz, but now only invention works giving you some crappy ME copy.
This means that if you don't own a T2 BPO, you will NEVER be able to produce at a price that is competetive to an alliance with a T2 BPO.

It doesnt even matter if it's ridiculously hard to produce a BPO, make it a 1 in 1,000,000 chance on invention or something, but either BPOs need to start working their way back into the game, or the existing T2 BPOs need to go, because without that you are basically saying there's no point in working towards industry since you'll never be able to beat the already exising industial corps.


no because CCP employees cant be trusted with T2 BPOs. See: T20 incident

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes
Linda Shadowborn
Dark Steel Industries
#64 - 2011-10-10 13:50:04 UTC
Yeah and ALL those items that sell at a loss couldnt be from the horde of people just inventing and then going "well i mined these minerals so they are free" or the ones that just invent at the drop of a hat and make whatever and sell without thinking.

Yes they lose money and yes they exist! I know several that i on an almost daily basis try to pound sense into "but i do this for fun i dont care about the money" and then go and run incursions to make the money needed to waste away selling crap under production cost.

Dont blame all on t2 bpo holders. Also as said a t2 bpo can run ONE line, where as i can run.. well quite a lot :) Inventing the blueprints doesnt take much time. Hell i got a backlog of blueprints a mile long (i know.. i need more manufacturing alts).


By your logic, t1 blueprints should always be profitable. We are all able to get them right? And can research them.. Sure.. look up quite a few t1 items, even with max researched blueprints, you wont make profit. So.. eh.. wait.. but.. that shouldnt be? well gee sherlock, people are idiots and will sell below cost without thinking. Also someone might have got a really good deal on a few million units of trit, use the cost they paid instead of the real market value (see the stuff i mine is free)....
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#65 - 2011-10-10 13:52:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Karim alRashid wrote:
While I agree that invention effectively puts an upper limit to the sale price of ALL items, this does not mean that some items aren't exclusively produced by T2 BPO owners, in other words, the inventors are denied entry on this market.
But the thing is that, where (if) that's the case, it's not the BPO owners that deny them entry — it's the consumers, who lack the interest in the product. Opening those markets up by removing the BPOs would not make them profitable, just make the same minuscule volumes a market for people who don't understand opportunity cost…
Karim alRashid
Starboard.
#66 - 2011-10-10 13:53:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Karim alRashid
Tippia wrote:
Karim alRashid wrote:
While I agree that invention effectively puts an upper limit to the sale price of ALL items, this does not mean that some items aren't exclusively produced by T2 BPO owners, in other words, the inventors are denied entry on this market.
But the thing is that, where (if) that's the case, it's not the BPO owners that deny them entry — it's the consumers, who lack the interest in the product.


Oh, if there's no demand, BPO owners will not produce either. Yes, these are likely items with relatively low demand, but still not zero.

And to clarify the mechanism of denying market entry my point:
A T2 BPO owner produces an ship from a ME0 BPO and puts it on market for 10% markup.

An inventor invents a ME-1 BPC. This is already 10% worse than the ME0, so if it puts it on the market at the same price, he will be at zero profit even not accounting for invention costs and against only a ME0 BPO.

If you account for invention costs and that the T2 BPO is researched, the gap becomes even bigger.

The end result is that any inventor with any sense does not produce this item at all.

Pain is weakness leaving the body http://www.youtube.com/user/AlRashidKarim/videos
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#67 - 2011-10-10 13:56:12 UTC
Linda Shadowborn wrote:

Yes they lose money and yes they exist! I know several that i on an almost daily basis try to pound sense into "but i do this for fun i dont care about the money" and then go and run incursions to make the money needed to waste away selling crap under production cost.


yes, damn people for having fun here. I wont have it!

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#68 - 2011-10-10 14:01:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Karim alRashid wrote:
Simetraz,

If T2 BPOs is not an issue for a particular item, does not mean it's not an issue for ALL items.

There's simply no public information that allows you or me or anyone to make such conclusions.

While I agree that invention effectively puts an upper limit to the sale price of ALL items, this does not mean that some items aren't exclusively produced by T2 BPO owners, in other words, the inventors are denied entry on this market.



The only way T2 BPO's can corner the market is if the item is a low Volume and the you can keep up with demand.
There MIGHT be one or 2 items on the market where this is happening and if they could keep up with demand then they could set there own price.

IF they can't set there own price that means invention is having a effect on there profit margins.

But as you say the players have 0 information about how many of each type of BPO is out there and if people are actually producing at capacity with them.

So why bother with a thread stating T2 BPO's are taking over the market if there are no facts to back it up.

EVERYBODY KNOWS
Linda Shadowborn
Dark Steel Industries
#69 - 2011-10-10 14:10:40 UTC
Kengutsi Akira wrote:
Linda Shadowborn wrote:

Yes they lose money and yes they exist! I know several that i on an almost daily basis try to pound sense into "but i do this for fun i dont care about the money" and then go and run incursions to make the money needed to waste away selling crap under production cost.


yes, damn people for having fun here. I wont have it!


LOL :) I have nothing against people having fun that isnt what i meant. More like trying to explain yet another way why things can be sold under production cost :) But i do try to tell them that they are losing money and could have fun AND make money

and FFS CCP!!! fix the darn forums, it is such a paint o type and sit and wait for several seconds for the text to catch up
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#70 - 2011-10-10 14:32:52 UTC
Karim alRashid wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I cover the cost of my POS outside of manufacture


This makes no sense whatsoever.

You MUST cover your POS costs with manufacture. If not, then there's no reason to do manufacture at all, just do what you used to do in order to "cover" you POS costs and you'll have bigger income.

Here's an example, if something is still not clear.
Taking into account only recurring costs. Say, you have a medium POS, which takes 160M/month fuel cost. You cover you fuel cost, say, with missions. In the same time, You profit from the POS less than 160M/month, say, 159M, Remember, the proposition is you don't cover you POS costs from manufacturing.

Bottom line:
+160M from missions
+159M from manufacturing
-160M for fuel
159M profit

If you don't have a POS at all:
+160M from missions
160M profit

By this, I mean that the POS already (without manufacture) produces enough cash to run itself, and would run regardless of whether I was using it for manufacture, so the POS costs arent required in my manufacture costs, as they would be there regardless. by introducing manufacture, i had no static costs that increased.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Karim alRashid
Starboard.
#71 - 2011-10-10 15:08:52 UTC
OK, sorry, I made wrong assumptions.

Pain is weakness leaving the body http://www.youtube.com/user/AlRashidKarim/videos
Hellenna Cain
Omega Commercial Products
#72 - 2011-10-10 15:26:10 UTC
Regardless if T2 BPO's are an advantage or not. The should be removed.


  • if It is an advantage, it should be removed to balance the game.


  • If it is not an advantage and invention is better, then tech 2 BPO's are not needed and will not be missed.


I would favor change them to a max run bpc with the same ME and PE to ensure enough training time for the untrained to catch up.
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2011-10-10 15:27:21 UTC
Back then when I did some invention stuff with various T2 cruisers, I made more money than one player owning one unit of the most profitable T2 cruiser BPO. The reasons have been explained by others already. So there's no need to remove T2 BPOs.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#74 - 2011-10-10 15:28:28 UTC
Hellenna Cain wrote:
Regardless if T2 BPO's are an advantage or not. The should be removed.

  • if It is an advantage, it should be removed to balance the game.
…apart from the detail that it is balanced even though they give a very tiny advantage under certain circumstances.
KaarBaak
Squirrel Team
#75 - 2011-10-10 15:38:47 UTC
Hellenna Cain wrote:
Regardless if T2 BPO's are an advantage or not. The should be removed.


  • if It is an advantage, it should be removed to balance the game.
I think it's been pretty clearly explained that there is no real advantage of BPO vs invention already in this thread.
Quote:


  • If it is not an advantage and invention is better, then tech 2 BPO's are not needed and will not be missed.
What about genuine variety in game mechanics? You could pose the question...why have different types of turrets if they are all effectively the same? They all have a short, med, long range variant.

Why have more than one mission?
etc...

It's been pretty firmly established that T2 BPOs don't offer any sort of advantage over invention, in this thread as well as the myriad other threads that this has come up in. They just allow for a bit of variety in manufacturing mechanics...and variety is good.

Dum Spiro Spero
Karim alRashid
Starboard.
#76 - 2011-10-10 15:40:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Karim alRashid
Reading this thread, I'm very happy that there are so many dumb inventors. Twisted

Pain is weakness leaving the body http://www.youtube.com/user/AlRashidKarim/videos
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#77 - 2011-10-10 15:45:24 UTC
KaarBaak wrote:
Hellenna Cain wrote:
Regardless if T2 BPO's are an advantage or not. The should be removed.


  • if It is an advantage, it should be removed to balance the game.
I think it's been pretty clearly explained that there is no real advantage of BPO vs invention already in this thread.
Quote:


  • If it is not an advantage and invention is better, then tech 2 BPO's are not needed and will not be missed.
What about genuine variety in game mechanics? You could pose the question...why have different types of turrets if they are all effectively the same? They all have a short, med, long range variant.

Why have more than one mission?
etc...

It's been pretty firmly established that T2 BPOs don't offer any sort of advantage over invention, in this thread as well as the myriad other threads that this has come up in. They just allow for a bit of variety in manufacturing mechanics...and variety is good.


It's all well and good saying variety, but the variety isn't there anymore. you can no longer get T2 BPOs, so they don't have variety, they just have deprecated features they haven't removed completely.
And regardless of what people say, single BPO vs single invention, there is a clear advantage. and with the higher BPs, the massive risk of invention puts a considerable uncertainty factor on invention. With BPOs, you know you are going to have it going forward, and any time you aren't producing using it, it can be copied so copies can be sold to further get profit from it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#78 - 2011-10-10 15:47:59 UTC
Not this crap again...

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

Skyly
Baba Yagas
The Initiative.
#79 - 2011-10-10 15:51:23 UTC
Considerable uncertainty factor in Invention?

I can point you to t2 BPO owners that have invested billions in a T2 BPO, only to have it nerfed the next patch. The price of the BPO drops entirely and they can't produce the stuff for a profit. Also, if people aren't willing to buy the item you produce, why the hell would they buy a BPC for it?

With invention if something gets nerfed you can just start inventing something else.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#80 - 2011-10-10 15:55:01 UTC
Skyly wrote:
Considerable uncertainty factor in Invention?

I can point you to t2 BPO owners that have invested billions in a T2 BPO, only to have it nerfed the next patch. The price of the BPO drops entirely and they can't produce the stuff for a profit. Also, if people aren't willing to buy the item you produce, why the hell would they buy a BPC for it?

With invention if something gets nerfed you can just start inventing something else.

But you are talking about people that bought the BPOs in an unwise investment. That's their issue. The current owner can STILL produce the item at a cost lower than inventors. Whether the item is saleable is something they should have looked at before purchase. Either way, doesnt change the fact that they removed the feature, but not the items, which is crazy. It's like removing freighters and saying "oh but you guys already with freighters can keep them"

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.