|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Stella SGP
71
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
nom nom nom MOAR TEARS! |
Stella SGP
71
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Stella SGP wrote:nom nom nom MOAR TEARS! Quotes from supporters of T2BPO. As you can see they are idiots. Still not a single reason for keeping them not one. Pffft tons of reason have been given over many years already. You're just too lazy to read what others have written.
Most of us just can't be bothered regurgitating the same stuff over and over again in every new thread you create.
So I have simply come to harvest you noob tears since you refuse to see what others have written before.
MOAR TEARS! I need to fill up my tanker! |
Stella SGP
71
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Katja Faith wrote:Stella SGP wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Stella SGP wrote:nom nom nom MOAR TEARS! Quotes from supporters of T2BPO. As you can see they are idiots. Still not a single reason for keeping them not one. Pffft tons of reason have been given over many years already. You're just too lazy and daft to read what others have written. That's it, keep feeding the troll. Keep the non-sense running.
But i'm bored... |
Stella SGP
182
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Exactly and that is the point and you hit the nail on the head. A single inventor can not compete in a single item against a T2BPO owner and that is why T2BPO need removed. People come out with the same rubbish excuse ''well invent something else''. Why should I? Why should I not invent this item just because CCP have gifted another player the ability to create the item with out invention, zero effort and the ability to undercut every single BPC? You can't be that stupid... |
Stella SGP
182
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Nydia Carver wrote:Well they fixed drone regions, next it-¦s T2 BPO-¦s. Hopefully, CCP have been talking about t2npo lately so maybe something is on the cards. Citation needed, I hate it when people put words in CCP's mouth.
|
Stella SGP
195
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 21:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Newer players have the exact same options to get a T2 BPO as a very old player with no T2 BPOs has to get one : just purchase it with ISK.'' Akita T
First line of her post, ehm no new players don't get
A. Option to win a corrupt lottery B. Gifted items for free by CCP C. Gifted items for free by a member of CCP D. Have access to Rats that drop T2BPO
If Akita T wishes to answer to this let her or if anyone else would like to explain
''Newer players have the exact same options to get a T2 BPO as a very old player with no T2 BPOs has to get one : just purchase it with ISK.''
then please do.
Remove T2BPO Yawn... Nothing new to see here.
The reason why you get nothing but insults in reply to your whine is because it is exactly what it is, whining. You are not bringing your points to the table in a rational manner. All you are doing is throwing around wild accusations and WA WA WA crying. You really expected someone to waste their braincells to respond?
Did you bother reading the whole thread by Akita or did you stop after the first line? Some of the best minds in EVE argued their points in that thread, regardless of whether its for or against. Anything and everything has already been discussed to death in Akita's thread and no-one can be bothered to regurgitate this stuff over and over and over again everytime some clueless guy starts a thread about it. People get tired you know.
Need a hug? Only 2 mil per minute. |
Stella SGP
200
|
Posted - 2012.05.10 21:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
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. |
Stella SGP
209
|
Posted - 2012.05.16 03:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
Daxine Myth wrote:Well at least T2BPO's are being removed from high sec which is a small nerf. Wow... Just wow... Where do you people get these ideas from anyway? I would kill to have that stuff you're smoking. |
|
|
|