EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
#801 - 2014-04-16 11:22:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Aeonidis
Tippia wrote:
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Add a new account with 3 manufacturers... There: production capacity increased by 33 slots.
…which won't be able to produce any faster than the BPO already could.

That Invuln II blueprint will go from taking 213 hours to produce a batch of 100 and, what, 500 hours(?) to make a 100-run copy to taking 213 hours to produce a batch of 100 and taking 200 hours to make a 100-run copy — not enough to dominate any markets, but enough to make it worth-while to use the copies in a production POS.

Sure, you could make 10 10-run copies instead and run those 10 copies in parallel. It'll still take 200 hours to do so and while the end product comes out quicker during the production step, you are then idling while the next batch of copies is being researched. The number of runs you can squeeze out of the BPO per time period won't really change.

Quote:
Currently, the cap is set hard to the amount of T2 BPOs that you own... well, with these changes
…the cap will be pretty much exactly the same.



I still see an easy button. The T2 BPO holder always gets a copy with little overhead in producing that copy and now can produce it much faster. plus they have researched T2 BPOs. who would buy a ME -4 PE -4 BPC when there are cheaper ME 3 PE 1's on the same global contract market?
In Tea We Trust
#802 - 2014-04-16 11:22:34 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Heh... the production capacity is not an issue. It haven't been in the past either. But I can see where your assumption comes from. The base of your logic is that a player has a T2 BPO and that the volume is not enough to fill or control the market. But, I'm talking about a single player here with 20+ accounts and dozens of T2 BPOs of the same type. Put several players like that in an entity (like a corporation or alliance) and you'll get market control (yes, those are actual persons and not some hypothetical situation... and no, I'm not naming them). I was there while it was happening and I can assure you that they HAD control over the market in the past and they will have it again if the opportunity like what is going to happen in the summer expansion arrives.

And yeah... good luck obtaining enough T2 BPOs by buying them to even think of competing on the market. And even if you had enough ISK to do that, do you really think that you'd be simply able to go to the Buy Orders section of the forum and just ask for it and be flooded with offers? Big smile Market control is not something an individual is willing to sell - for any amount of ISK. Especially if it's centered around a game mechanics that have been removed for years.

Additionally, your argument is still missing the fact that the majority of industrial players play by one rules for years and the handful of players are milking the game mechanics that was discontinued a long time ago).

These game mechanics where not removed or discontinued. The T2 BPOs are still here and fully functional. Like many areas of EVE we are all given many alternative ways to achieve the same end result and we can each choose which way suits us. Just because this isn't the way you choose to do it does not make the alternatives wrong, evil or unbalanced.

Yes there has been a long history of T2 BPOs dominating various markets at various times and for various reasons. That problem has become less and less with each passing rebalance, as the breadth of demand for T2 products increases. The best solution for whatever remains of that problem is to continue with the rebalancing.


So you can still, without investing tens or hundreds of billions of ISK (disregarding the fact that owners won't sell their profitable stock in the first place) and by using an active game mechanic actually play the game and get the T2 BPO the same way others have done it more than 5 years ago? Great, do you mind pointing out where can I do that?

Changed and removed are two different things.
Solar Assault Fleet
#803 - 2014-04-16 11:24:51 UTC
Allison A'vani wrote:


At the moment, almost no t2 ships make any profit from invention

That's strange, I make almost all my profits by inventing, building and selling T2 ships.

The only time that T2 BPO's have any noticeable impact is when the volumes are really low.

As in products that almost no-one wants to buy.

CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.

#804 - 2014-04-16 11:25:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Again, for any item where invention is currently worth-while, BPOs are insignificant and don't control anything. New players getting into T2 manufacturing will have it just as easy to make a profit as people who are currently doing it — viz. very easy. They will also be helped by the improved mechanics and (hopefully) an improved UI to make their lives even easier.

Actually Tippia that isn't true.

Even if we assume a copy time of 1:1 T2 BPO's will make higher profit than currently since they will gain a significant material bonus due to extra materials becoming base materials now. Meaning higher discount in materials relative to invention compared to currently.

However in the case of a 1:1 ratio this will mean that they still can't compete with volume... but...
CCP have said they intend to make the copy time LESS than the manufacture time.
Meaning that anything better than a 1:1 ratio will eventually mean that a T2 BPO holder can now run multiple lines full time instead of just 1 line. Exactly how many lines dependant on that ratio. It will take a bit of time for their copy process to get themselves there, but it will increase the amount of production a T2 BPO holder can make, while also increasing their profit per item. Meaning the market share a T2 BPO can hold will have increased significantly.

As such, it is entirely reasonable to want the T2 BPO situation addressed. There are no good reasons other than grandfathering to maintain T2 BPO's, and Grandfathering in a sandbox game is a terrible thing, because it breaks the sand box by giving an advantage that can't be created by a new player. Sure they can buy one if it's non profitable from someone else, but they can't make their own to compete with someone who is actually utilising it. Meaning when it comes to industry, T2 BPO's actually break the sandbox.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#805 - 2014-04-16 11:25:54 UTC
About the damage changes on R.A.M..

I always try to run jobs so the R.A.M. doesnt get destroyed in the T2 modules production.

I repair and reuse them.

I thought it was much cheaper that way per mod.

This advantage is now gone if I'm correct.????

Anyone care to elaborate on that???
In Tea We Trust
#806 - 2014-04-16 11:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Bad Bobby
Aeonidis wrote:
I still see an easy button. The T2 BPO holder always gets a copy with little overhead in producing that copy

Well that clearly isn't true. At least think about what you post.
In Tea We Trust
#807 - 2014-04-16 11:28:47 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
There are no good reasons other than grandfathering to maintain T2 BPO's

Having things to aspire to in industry and having an interesting economic landscape to mess with are both pretty good reasons.
Amarr Empire
#808 - 2014-04-16 11:31:52 UTC
Apologies if this has been asked (or even answered) earlier in the thread. Now that slots are going away, that essentially means that there will be unlimited research slots in selected high sec stations. These slots used to be so massively oversubscribed that it was all but impossible to use them. Indeed, this situation was one of the things that pushed me out of my high sec comfort zone and into more dangerous places.

Maybe the answer will come in the "costs" dev blog later on, and there simply aren't any details yet, but I'm struggling to picture anything -- anything at all -- that would push research out of the perfect safety of NPC high sec stations once the slots and waiting times go away. Researched BPOs are by far the most valuable asset in the game to any industrialist. A dead Titan is an expensive setback, but you can always build another one. A lost BPO, on the other hand, will not only have to be repurchased, but can take months of research before it's usable for production.

I only took any BPOs out of high sec because it was so difficult (or even impossible) to research and copy them there. It will take a massively huge enormous cost differential to justify risking them outside of their safe little cocoons in high sec. I'm very anxious to see how this develops.

But enough negativity! It's great to see the long-promised industrial expansion take shape. With this many changes, nobody is going to agree with every change. It may even be amazing if I end up agreeing with the majority of them. But we've needed changes for a very long time, and I'm very appreciative to see CCP make the effort.
#809 - 2014-04-16 11:36:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Aeonidis wrote:
I still see an easy button. The T2 BPO holder always gets a copy with little overhead in producing that copy and now can produce it much faster. plus they have researched T2 BPOs. who would buy a ME -4 PE -4 BPC when there are cheaper ME 3 PE 1's on the same global contract market?

What is the market for simple -4/-4 BPCs right now, when you could just as well produce them on your own?

Also, you're assuming that the BPO holders will suddenly start selling copies rather than produce from them. Is that really the best use of their industry time?

Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Even if we assume a copy time of 1:1 T2 BPO's will make higher profit than currently since they will gain a significant material bonus due to extra materials becoming base materials now. Meaning higher discount in materials relative to invention compared to currently.
That doesn't affect their ability to control the market, though, nor does it block inventors — new or old — from making profit.

Quote:
However in the case of a 1:1 ratio this will mean that they still can't compete with volume... but...
CCP have said they intend to make the copy time LESS than the manufacture time.
Meaning that anything better than a 1:1 ratio will eventually mean that a T2 BPO holder can now run multiple lines full time instead of just 1 line.
Sure, but again, the “less than” reduction is there to make it possible to produce from the BPCs rather than the BPOs. I'm feeling fairly certain that it will only be so much lower that it just compensates for the added production step.

In other words, say that a Invuln II copying gets reduced to 2h/run from the current 5 (I think) and let us compare this to the current 2h8m production time. We'd then see a change along the lines of…

Currently: BPO is used for a 100-unit production run — total time 213h for 100 units at the expected 2h8m/unit.
Post-patch: BPO is used for a 10×10 copy run, and the 10 BPCs are then run in parallel — total time 200 hours for the copying + 21h18m for the production = 221h18m for 100 units at 2h12m/unit.

e: addition is hard… Oops
Tikitina
#810 - 2014-04-16 11:41:03 UTC
In regard to the offline POS thing, instead of only allowing one POS per moon, maybe allow 5 POSes; to be anchored at the moon's 5 Lagrange Points.

That would be 5 POSes per moon. And if they are moon mining, maybe split the resulting material between the five, rounding up.

So having multiple POSes for moon mining will only decrease their efficiency but allow for other industrial activities to take place.

In Tea We Trust
#811 - 2014-04-16 11:41:26 UTC
Jagoff Haverford wrote:
Maybe the answer will come in the "costs" dev blog later on, and there simply aren't any details yet, but I'm struggling to picture anything -- anything at all -- that would push research out of the perfect safety of NPC high sec stations once the slots and waiting times go away.

We really need the rest of that information, as half of the people in this thread are pulling their hair out at the prospect of things that will probably never happen.

Jagoff Haverford wrote:
Researched BPOs are by far the most valuable asset in the game to any industrialist. A dead Titan is an expensive setback, but you can always build another one. A lost BPO, on the other hand, will not only have to be repurchased, but can take months of research before it's usable for production.

I understand what you are trying to say, but your example isn't well chosen. A Titan costs more to replace than a well researched Titan BPO. Researched Titan BPOs are not in short supply and haven't been for some time, you can usually get well researched ones for less than NPC price.

Jagoff Haverford wrote:
With this many changes, nobody is going to agree with every change. It may even be amazing if I end up agreeing with the majority of them. But we've needed changes for a very long time, and I'm very appreciative to see CCP make the effort.

+1
#812 - 2014-04-16 11:46:25 UTC
Tippia wrote:


Currently: BPO is used for a 100-unit production run — total time 213h for 100 units at the expected 2h8m/unit.
Post-patch: BPO is used for a 10×10 copy run, and the 10 BPCs are then run in parallel — total time 200 hours for the copying + 21h18m for the production = 211h8m for 100 units at 2h11m/unit.

Except that is fail maths. Because it's not the most efficient method post patch. Even if we take your 'almost identical time'.
What actually happens is you run one line on the copies, then a second line gets run every time that 8 minute saving loops into 2 hours. Making for.... Hey, wouldn't you know it. 2 Hours/Unit. Hey presto. Higher market share.

Now if you are right and the copy time is barely different, it won't change the market share 'much', However that 'much' will still be enough in several edge cases to tip the market on smaller volume items relative to the number of T2 BPO's out there.

And to whoever it was trying to claim 'Something to aspire to' T2 BPO's are not something to aspire to, because you can not make them new. Buying someone's cast off means either you got ripped off and paid enough for them to part with something profitable, in which case you paid far too much isk i.e. scam, or it was a basically non profitable T2 BPO, and you paid too much isk, i.e. scam. Aspiring to things implies you can actually achieve them new, not hand me downs of a poorly grandfathered item.
#813 - 2014-04-16 11:53:57 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
I still see an easy button. The T2 BPO holder always gets a copy with little overhead in producing that copy

Well that clearly isn't true. At least think about what you post.


so little is relative to the reader? they drop in an R.dB and some data sheets for modules? to the inventor thats little when you consider the previous changes that were made to research agents and FW making datacores essentially a buy only product now. which of course can be lost in the invention process unlike the R.dB or other consumables for T2BPO copying.
#814 - 2014-04-16 11:54:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Except that is fail maths. Because it's not the most efficient method post patch. Even if we take your 'almost identical time'.
What actually happens is you run one line on the copies, then a second line gets run every time that 8 minute saving loops into 2 hours. Making for.... Hey, wouldn't you know it. 2 Hours/Unit. Hey presto. Higher market share.
Sure. I'm talking about a single run, mainly to illustrate the point, and you're showing what happens if you keep running on repeat — the previous run's copies are absorbed into the time the second run is being copied.

The point is still the same: the goal is not to increase production output — it's to counter delays in the copy+produce cycle. That difference is so small as to make pretty much no difference in the overall supply for these high-volume items, and it will still be the inventors that control the market. The BPO holders still can't compete on volume because their volumes will be pretty much the same (not to mention that inventors benefit from the copying speed increase as well and can adjust to the market trends faster than ever before).


Oh, and with the current material reqs, that BPO holder also have to eat an additional 144k ISK cost on each run. Poor thing. P
In Tea We Trust
#815 - 2014-04-16 11:54:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Sure, but again, the “less than” reduction is there to make it possible to produce from the BPCs rather than the BPOs. I'm feeling fairly certain that it will only be so much lower that it just compensates for the added production step.

I expect much the same thing.

Currently a lot of T2 BPOs are being produced from using POS arrays to gain a higher production output. This increased production output from POS arrays is likely to remain in some form.

Some T2 BPOs are even being produced from in player owned outposts, with even greater production output bonuses, although I will join you in admiring the size of the balls required to take those kinds of risks with a T2 BPO. This possibility will remain (and be encouraged) by the new functionality.

In the future we are expecting to see a copy time reduction on T2 BPOs that makes it viable to produce from BPCs rather than produce from the BPO itself. But will that be true when comparing copying in a safe NPC hi-sec station to producing in faster facilities?
C C P Alliance
#816 - 2014-04-16 11:55:08 UTC
Querns wrote:
I thought of a potential gotcha: Will POS assembly modules also have their slots removed? Will you be able to, e.g., run an infinite number of ammo jobs from a single ammo assembly array?


Yes, slots are being removed on everything, however, cost scaling will still be applicable to Starbases as well. Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details.
In Tea We Trust
#817 - 2014-04-16 11:58:10 UTC
Aeonidis wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
I still see an easy button. The T2 BPO holder always gets a copy with little overhead in producing that copy

Well that clearly isn't true. At least think about what you post.


so little is relative to the reader? they drop in an R.dB and some data sheets for modules? to the inventor thats little when you consider the previous changes that were made to research agents and FW making datacores essentially a buy only product now. which of course can be lost in the invention process unlike the R.dB or other consumables for T2BPO copying.

What about the truely massive opportunity cost of having a T2 BPO rather than it's value in isk?
#818 - 2014-04-16 11:59:30 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Will we be able to select several single run bpc's to run multiple invention/manufacturing jobs at once?

?
In Tea We Trust
#819 - 2014-04-16 11:59:52 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details.

This is what us waiting looks like.

There is already blood on the dance floor.
In Tea We Trust
#820 - 2014-04-16 12:03:09 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Will we be able to select several single run bpc's to run multiple invention/manufacturing jobs at once?

?
That will probably be part of the UI changes.
Forum Jump