Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 09:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
Q A) What are T2BPO?
T2BPO stands for Tech Two Blueprint Original. They are in game items that allow the creation of TECH II items with out the need for an invention process
Where did they come from?
They were seeded into the game in a variety of ways
1. They were dropped by Rats in certain systems. Many deemed this unfair and pointed to the fact that CCP were intentionally aiming drops at particularly alliances/corps by generating the drop in their space
2. They were given out in a lottery that required research points as tickets. Many deemed this unfair as it gave those with far larger banks of research point ie older players a distinct advantage. Information about the workings of the lottery were also released to key players. This information was regarding the amount of BPO's in each individual lottery and how many tickets were participating. This gave key players insight into which lottery to enter giving them far greater chances of obtaining T2BPO's. Some even rumour that the lottery was in no way random and that CCP employee's simply chose which players to gift BPO's
3. They were simply handed as assets in secret to certain players by CCP
4. An incident where non authorised handing of T2 BPO to a player from a CCP employee occurred. These BPO's were recovered but not after several EVE players were sanctioned for bringing the incident to light. (Discussing Bans is bannable, so I best not go into this too much less I get banned). Simply put CCP's behaviour over the incident could be described disgusting at best
Q B) Who owns them?
1. Players that obtained items as stated above
2. Players who have WORKED for them by other means and purchased them from players who were gifted them using IS
3. Players who purchased them illegally using RMT
4. Players who ganked them out of ships or stole them from corp while unlocked
Q C) Why are there calls to remove them?
1. They were seeded and distributed into the game unfairly
2. Figures have been released by CCP revealing the extent of the wealth they can generate at little effort
3. They can be locked in corp hangers and still used but not stolen unless through a corp vote they are unlocked. (makes zero sense if the item is locked it should not be able to be used.
4. In many cases the invention process can not compete with the BPO but this does vary from item to item
5. They never expire and have unlimited runs
Q D) How should they be removed?
1. Immediately by returning spent RP and taking the BPO out of game
2. If owning player paid ISK for them the trade should be reverted and ISK returned while original owner is reimbursed with research points
Q E) How will TECH II be produced after removal?
By invention process which allows fair competition
Q F) Anything else that should be known?
1. Some T2BPO are not profitable due to limited demand for the produced item. 2. Some T2 items do not have a T2BPO but require invention as sole creator 3. Burning copies of T2BPO reqs items as well as time and copying costs 4. The % of the market the BPO covers varies immensely between items 5. The retail cost of the BPO's vary immensely between items. 6. Read other posts |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 09:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
(Reserved) |
Skorpynekomimi
Omega Vector
165
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 10:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Shut UP about them already. Sick of hearing it. |
Gatan Hahran
Brukterer DUCT TAPE UNION
91
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 10:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
my neighbour got an iphone4. i cant afford one so they need to take it away from him.
|
Tekota
The Freighter Factory
232
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 11:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
Another thread? Really, we're used to multiple T2 BPO threads round these parts, they're a regular occurrence, but when one person starts multiple threads in a few days it gets a little silly.
Look, we've been over this for *years*. There actually are some reasonable arguments for the removal of T2 BPOs but you consistently fail to hit *any* of them, blow up years old space drama, spout some really uninformed drivel as fact and in the process you weaken your own argument hopelessly.
"Brewlar Kuvakei" wrote:3. They can be locked in corp hangers and still used but not stolen unless through a corp vote they are unlocked. (makes zero sense if the item is locked it should not be able to be used.)
Just this one quote from above is a face / palm moment - BPO locking has no particular relevance to T2 BPOs in the slightest, and locking and use from locked prints (T1 as well) has a very valid and common use. Yet somehow you seem to think this is somehow proof of some ongoing conspiracy between evil devs and evil players against you.
As someone who has *some* sympathy for the position that T2 BPOs time are up I would ask you to cease making such unbelievably misinformed weak strawman arguments. I don't want to look so frothy mouthed by association. |
Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro In Vitro.
306
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 11:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
Still selling [T2H8R] shares. 1M each and all proceeds go towards the purchase and trashing of T2 BPOs.
If you really want to see T2 BPOs starting to be removed from the game then this is how you do it. We're about halfway to the first one visiting the recycler.
Link in sig. Do it! Help rid New Eden of T2 BPOs:-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=62797 The Full Pocket Aggro blog:-á http://fullpocketaggro.blogspot.com/ Now showing: The incursion situation |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 11:48:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tekota wrote:Another thread? Really, we're used to multiple T2 BPO threads round these parts, they're a regular occurrence, but when one person starts multiple threads in a few days it gets a little silly. Look, we've been over this for *years*. There actually are some reasonable arguments for the removal of T2 BPOs but you consistently fail to hit *any* of them, blow up years old space drama, spout some really uninformed drivel as fact and in the process you weaken your own argument hopelessly. "Brewlar Kuvakei" wrote:3. They can be locked in corp hangers and still used but not stolen unless through a corp vote they are unlocked. (makes zero sense if the item is locked it should not be able to be used.) Just this one quote from above is a face / palm moment - BPO locking has no particular relevance to T2 BPOs in the slightest, and locking and use from locked prints (T1 as well) has a very valid and common use. Yet somehow you seem to think this is somehow proof of some ongoing conspiracy between evil devs and evil players against you. As someone who has *some* sympathy for the position that T2 BPOs time are up I would ask you to cease making such unbelievably misinformed weak strawman arguments. I don't want to look so frothy mouthed by association.
I just feel an element of risk should be involved in sharing blueprints, I agree all blue prints should be unlocked to allow corp manufacture. It's like letting some one borrow a ship but having CCP return it if he steals it. Same should apply to blueprints if locked they should be inascessible for manufacture.
Also the last thread was locked or I would not have started this thread which I will keep updated as I feel strongly about tech II BPO and the need for overdue removal from game. |
General Trajan
State War Academy Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 11:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
getting rid of T2 BPOs is heading in the wrong direction IMO.
everybody and their grandmother can simply obtain a T1 BPO of a cruiser, BC or BS or whatev as long as they have the isk. so why can't it be that way for T2 BPs as well?
i say EVERYBODY should be able to get a T2 BPO as long as they have the isk. idk make another special level of research (or skill to train) that gives EVERYBODY the greater chance of getting a T2 BPO rather than just a T2 BPC.
"my neighbor got an iphone4. so i topped his ass buy getting the new droid razr maxx" |
Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro In Vitro.
306
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Also the last thread was locked or I would not have started this thread which I will keep updated as I feel strongly about tech II BPO and the need for overdue removal from game.
Still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is. Help rid New Eden of T2 BPOs:-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=62797 The Full Pocket Aggro blog:-á http://fullpocketaggro.blogspot.com/ Now showing: The incursion situation |
Gatan Hahran
Brukterer DUCT TAPE UNION
91
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
General Trajan wrote:getting rid of T2 BPOs is heading in the wrong direction IMO.
i say EVERYBODY should be able to get a T2 BPO as long as they have the isk
Thats exactly how it is NOW.
earn 5b open contracts buy t2 bpo be happy about overpowered 1% return per month notice that u wanna earn more isk start inventing again which gives you 150% profit per day ????? profit |
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
239
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
He's either trolling or just doesn't want to listen to any other perspectives on this topic other than his own.
Just ignore him from now on and his thread crusade will die. Problem solved. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Sorry the only other pespective is ''Your trolling'', ''buy one'' <-- even though you got yours for free as a CCP gift? ''Shut up''. So far these are the only comments advocating that T2BPO are fair and should stay. |
Gatan Hahran
Brukterer DUCT TAPE UNION
91
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:22:00 -
[13] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Sorry the only other pespective is ''Your trolling'', ''buy one'' <-- even though you got yours for free as a CCP gift? ''Shut up''. So far these are the only comments advocating that T2BPO are fair and should stay.
You dont even read what other people write in your threads or you would know that i started 2009 and made the isk from invention. |
General Trajan
State War Academy Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
Gatan Hahran wrote:General Trajan wrote:getting rid of T2 BPOs is heading in the wrong direction IMO.
i say EVERYBODY should be able to get a T2 BPO as long as they have the isk
Thats exactly how it is NOW. earn 5b open contracts buy t2 bpo be happy about overpowered 1% return per month notice that u wanna earn more isk start inventing again which gives you 150% profit per day ????? profit
you mean to tell me that if all 40k accounts that normally log on everyday has the chance of getting a T2 BPO? even if they all had 5 billion? that many T2 BPOs are even in the game? of every item at that? in unlimited supply like it is for T1 you can find on the market?
not as exactly as it seems to me. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:36:00 -
[15] - Quote
General Trajan wrote:Gatan Hahran wrote:General Trajan wrote:getting rid of T2 BPOs is heading in the wrong direction IMO.
i say EVERYBODY should be able to get a T2 BPO as long as they have the isk
Thats exactly how it is NOW. earn 5b open contracts buy t2 bpo be happy about overpowered 1% return per month notice that u wanna earn more isk start inventing again which gives you 150% profit per day ????? profit you mean to tell me that if all 40k accounts that normally log on everyday has the chance of getting a T2 BPO? even if they all had 5 billion? that many T2 BPOs are even in the game? of every item at that? in unlimited supply like it is for T1 you can find on the market? not as exactly as it seems to me.
If there is no problem with T2BPO just let NPC stations sell it like T1 and foget the massive price tag just make them cheap and easy, That's the way CCP's pets have it allready with their private T2BPO.
Sadly there is a problem there was problem with the very idea of T2 BPO running alongside invention: the corrupt and unfair way in which T2BPO were seeded just made matters worse.
|
Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro In Vitro.
306
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:38:00 -
[16] - Quote
so get your 5b faster than the muppets who fail so hard at making isk. or put your money where your mouth is and buy some [T2H8R] shares.
your choice.
(of course you can always whine on the forums instead.) Help rid New Eden of T2 BPOs:-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=62797 The Full Pocket Aggro blog:-á http://fullpocketaggro.blogspot.com/ Now showing: The incursion situation |
Gatan Hahran
Brukterer DUCT TAPE UNION
91
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
General Trajan wrote:Gatan Hahran wrote:General Trajan wrote:getting rid of T2 BPOs is heading in the wrong direction IMO.
i say EVERYBODY should be able to get a T2 BPO as long as they have the isk
Thats exactly how it is NOW. earn 5b open contracts buy t2 bpo be happy about overpowered 1% return per month notice that u wanna earn more isk start inventing again which gives you 150% profit per day ????? profit you mean to tell me that if all 40k accounts that normally log on everyday has the chance of getting a T2 BPO? even if they all had 5 billion? that many T2 BPOs are even in the game? of every item at that? in unlimited supply like it is for T1 you can find on the market? not as exactly as it seems to me.
Yes, everyone has the chance of getting T2 BPO. That everyone has a chance to buy a T2 BPO does not mean that everyone will have a T2 BPO. Almost all players prefer to put their isk into stuff that creates more ingame fun for them or provides a better return on investment. The fact that everyone has the chance to get rich does not mean that everyone will be rich. The beauty of free market is that even if a lot more people want to buy a T2 BPO everyone still will be able to open contract menu and buy one. Its not like in communisn where the stores just are empty. If demand raises, the price will raise too, making sure that there is always supply ready for people who want to buy this glorious waste of isk. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 12:46:00 -
[18] - Quote
Lauren Hellfury wrote:so get your 5b faster than the muppets who fail so hard at making isk. or put your money where your mouth is and buy some [T2H8R] shares.
your choice.
(of course you can always whine on the forums instead.)
Why would I pay an eve pet for his BPO he should not have been given in the first place?
I think my method of making noobs aware of T2BPO before they subscribe an eve account with the ambition of manufacturing is more likely to see the removal off all T2BPO. When CCP see that T2BPO is hurting subscription they will be more inclined to remove them. I know 2 people who have rage quit over T2BPO and T2BPO is the reason I would never consider manufacture. ( Yes I know invention can compete in some T2 fields) but it is the principle that keeps me out of the game.
|
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 13:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
Do you realize there are rules against reopening threads that have been locked???? BTW still a bad troll -1/10 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 13:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
lol fourm troll wrote:Do you realize there are rules against reopening threads that have been locked???? BTW still a bad troll -1/10
Not a troll and you know so your rating your own. Last thread was locked under the guise that petitions are against forum rules this is not a petition it's a discussion. |
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 15:30:00 -
[21] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Lauren Hellfury wrote:so get your 5b faster than the muppets who fail so hard at making isk. or put your money where your mouth is and buy some [T2H8R] shares.
your choice.
(of course you can always whine on the forums instead.) Why would I pay an eve pet for his BPO he should not have been given in the first place? I think my method of making noobs aware of T2BPO before they subscribe an eve account with the ambition of manufacturing is more likely to see the removal off all T2BPO. When CCP see that T2BPO is hurting subscription they will be more inclined to remove them. I know 2 people who have rage quit over T2BPO and T2BPO is the reason I would never consider manufacture. ( Yes I know invention can compete in some T2 fields) but it is the principle that keeps me out of the game.
t2 bpos dont stop people staring eve, and when they do start its like arrr ohhh shiney stars and space ships. not oh look if i go from 5k to 450b i cant compeat because of a bpo. t2 bpos are not hurting manufacturing either, if a modual sells well people invent it. it dosnt matter if it has a t2 bpo as invention will produce way more than a t2 bpo ever could. if your friends did quit over t2 bpos, and i highly doubt your telling the truth, there morons who cant do maths or understand spredsheets. CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Katja Faith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
20
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 15:49:00 -
[22] - Quote
Bad troll is bad. And boring. Thread reported for reopening a locked thread. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:04:00 -
[23] - Quote
Not one good reason for T2BPO's or one argument about the distrubution of T2BPO's. Just whines and bitches about posting the obvious that T2BPO badly needs removed and this sad chapter of EVE closed forever. You've had good years of effortless uncompeting manufacture it's time to play EVE like the rest of us mortals who don't have a bat phone direct to a CCP Dev. |
Stella SGP
71
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
nom nom nom MOAR TEARS! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:11:00 -
[25] - Quote
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. |
Stella SGP
71
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:15:00 -
[26] - 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! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:17:00 -
[27] - Quote
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.
I'm reading them and it seems just a lot of retards making personal attacks at the very thought of someone suggesting they give up their CCP silver spoon. |
Katja Faith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
20
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:18:00 -
[28] - Quote
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. |
Stella SGP
71
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:23:00 -
[29] - 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... |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
259
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 17:57:00 -
[30] - Quote
Again with this crap?
Give it a break, already
(And re-posting threads that were locked is against the forum rules, by the way. You wouldn't want to get forum-banned now, would you? Although everyone else probably would welcome that, so keep it up!) The invention of ice-hockey is proof that Canada deserves to rule the world. Eh.
|
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
259
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 18:11:00 -
[31] - 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.
The barely-literate tears of idiots have been demonstrated to have a pump-octane rating of 100, with massively reduced CO, CO(subscript)2, and NOx emisions, and reduced fuel-consumption...
MOAR!! Do your part for the environment, and fine very-high-performance engines everywhere! The invention of ice-hockey is proof that Canada deserves to rule the world. Eh.
|
Prince Kobol
523
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 18:18:00 -
[32] - Quote
Not this subject again...
ARGHHHHH
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
120
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 19:06:00 -
[33] - 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.
Reasons were given in the locked thread, but since they weren't supporting your silly crusade, you ignored them. Keep making a fool of yourself. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 19:49:00 -
[34] - Quote
Looks lile i have more supporters than u now, this thread was locked for a reason. Maybe u do want to get banned |
Dennmoth Ferdier
The Scope Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 21:56:00 -
[35] - Quote
Here, I spent a good 5 minutes googling this for you, please take the time to read it.
If you have joined only recently, you might not know who Akita T is. He is / was a substantial Science & Industry common sense, reason & logic powerhouse, of who I myself, along with many other people, had the pleasure of learning a lot from by reading his posts.
I hope this will enlighten you, the thread makes a good read, albeit a long one.
http://eve-search.com/thread/1360780-0 |
Boomhaur
9
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 22:20:00 -
[36] - Quote
Welcome to Eve Online, life is unfair, everyone is out to get YOU. It's not just your paranoia. We are out to steal, murder, exploit, scam, and a million other unmentionable things we are trying to do to you when you hit that log in button.
So why are you complaining about the poor old T2 BPO, after all this game was never meant to be fair, we pride ourselves in being probably the most evil sick sadistic MMO out there.
Oh and can you send me your stuff when you leave. |
Dersk
EXPCS Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance
52
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 22:24:00 -
[37] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:a lot of retards making personal attacks
You injure my faith in humanity. |
Haulie Berry
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 06:07:00 -
[38] - Quote
Every CCP analysis of T2 BPOs has unambiguously shown that they are not a problem. This is based on objective data, as opposed to threads like this which are wholly the product of someone's personal feelings (mostly envy).
That being the case, removal of T2 BPOs would effectively constitute the deletion of hundreds of billions in individual asset value not for the objective good of the game, but rather solely to quell the complaints of a vocal minority of players who are bad at math. This would not be a good precedent. |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
178
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 07:06:00 -
[39] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Every CCP analysis of T2 BPOs has unambiguously shown that they are not a problem. This is based on objective data
Where is this objective data? Does it apply to all modules and ships or only to modules?
BTW, the issue of "XYZ BPO being a problem" is the same as "XYZ Invention not good enough", even if there's no actual "XYZ BPO".
And yes, for a lot of ships invention is not good enough. |
|
ISD 3-14
Community Communications Liaisons
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 07:21:00 -
[40] - Quote
Please follow forum rules. Don't duolicate your thread. Thank you.
CCP Spitfire wrote:Petitions are not allowed on the forums.
Thread locked.
ISD 3-14 Community Communication Liaisons (CCL) -Æ-+-+-+-+-é-æ-Ç -¦-Ç-â-+-+-ï -+-+ -¦-+-¦-+-+-+-¦-¦-¦-ü-é-¦-+-Ä -ü -+-¦-Ç-+-¦-¦-+-+ Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
Haulie Berry
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 07:26:00 -
[41] - Quote
Quote:Where is this objective data?
In every QEN that has ever discussed the topic.
Quote:Does it apply to all modules and ships or only to modules?
It applies to the economy as a whole.
Quote: BTW, the issue of "XYZ BPO being a problem" is the same as "XYZ Invention not good enough", even if there's no actual "XYZ BPO". Lol
And yes, for a lot of ships invention is not good enough.
About the only thing "wrong" with invention is that it's a hand-numbing clickfest.
The reason that invention doesn't seem to be "good enough" for some items is not because of the system, but because of the aforementioned math-averse players.
Ewar frigates, for example. There's no BPO. They almost invariably are either money losers or provide margins so thin that the production line is better used on something else.
If you were to "improve" invention - say by somehow allowing the ME of blueprints to be increased (as is so frequently suggested) - that situation would not change. The cost of building them would decrease, and the price would decrease to match. The problem is that the supply vastly outstrips the demand, and it is doing this solely with invention.
The industrialists responsible for saturating those markets are the same people who complain about BPOs. There's probably a touch of Dunning-Kruger at play here. They're bad at this to the point that they can't even identify that they are bad at it, and BPOs, to the neophyte industrialist, make for an easy scapegoat. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
37
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 20:02:00 -
[42] - Quote
I'm glad this thread got unlocked as I hope it will become the focal point for peoples abhorrence to T2BPO and that it makes noobs aware of their existance. I hope that people can refrain from making personal attacks just because they disagree with the removal of T2BPO. |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
345
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 20:15:00 -
[43] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'm glad this thread got unlocked as I hope it will become the focal point for peoples abhorrence to T2BPO and that it makes noobs aware of their existance. I hope that people can refrain from making personal attacks just because they disagree with the removal of T2BPO.
But it won't:
T2 BPOs are completely irrelevant to the vast majority of those of us who invent, make piles of money at it, and view T2 BPOs as an intellectual curiosity, if we think about them at all.
"Noob" is a pejorative, by the way--it helps to not insult your intended audience if you're trying to sway them to your foolish crusade.
Your reasoning is fallacious.
Your arguments are spurious and fuelled by selfish, whinging jealousy.
No-one cares.
Next!
In irae, veritas. |
Haulie Berry
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 21:05:00 -
[44] - Quote
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:
Your arguments are spurious and fuelled by selfish, whinging jealousy.
No-one cares.
Next!
Bears repeating. |
Bluestream3
the Goose Flock
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 21:23:00 -
[45] - Quote
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote: But it won't:
T2 BPOs are completely irrelevant to the vast majority of those of us who invent, make piles of money at it, and view T2 BPOs as an intellectual curiosity, if we think about them at all.
"Noob" is a pejorative, by the way--it helps to not insult your intended audience if you're trying to sway them to your foolish crusade.
Your reasoning is fallacious.
Your arguments are spurious and fuelled by selfish, whinging jealousy.
No-one cares.
Next!
Ok. Saying that T2 BPOs are completely irrelevant to inventors is just as much of a logic fail as to say that the minerals I mine are free. Also don't say that no one cares, you seem to care at least a bit since you're writing in this thread and there are several others that do too, me included obviously.
Then again I think it would be good to just wait and see what happens. If I understand it correctly the upcoming expansions will be iterating on a couple of different areas, please correct me if I'm wrong but I think industry or manufacturing was one of the areas. And while I don't expect them to just remove T2 BPOs, but I'm sure they'll at least mention them or share their thoughts in some way, because let's face it, wether you want them gone or not, it's a pretty widely discussed topic when it comes to manufacturing and ignoring it would be very dissappointing (even if the owners would obviously prefer it that way ;)). |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
37
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 21:32:00 -
[46] - Quote
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'm glad this thread got unlocked as I hope it will become the focal point for peoples abhorrence to T2BPO and that it makes noobs aware of their existance. I hope that people can refrain from making personal attacks just because they disagree with the removal of T2BPO. But it won't: T2 BPOs are completely irrelevant to the vast majority of those of us who invent, make piles of money at it, and view T2 BPOs as an intellectual curiosity, if we think about them at all. "Noob" is a pejorative, by the way--it helps to not insult your intended audience if you're trying to sway them to your foolish crusade. Your reasoning is fallacious. Your arguments are spurious and fuelled by selfish, whinging jealousy. No-one cares. Next!
T2BPO are not irreleveant did you even read the data released by CCP? |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
120
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 21:55:00 -
[47] - Quote
Bluestream3 wrote: Ok. Saying that T2 BPOs are completely irrelevant to inventors is just as much of a logic fail as to say that the minerals I mine are free. Also don't say that no one cares, you seem to care at least a bit since you're writing in this thread and there are several others that do too, me included obviously.
"Completely irrelevant" is an exageration. "Largely irrelevant" would be apt.
Can you name one specific item where inventor margins would be significantly improved if T2 BPOs were removed? (Hint: this is a trap question. Even if you find one, which is doubtful, I have plenty of counter-examples to pick from)
If not, that is empirical evidence that the existence of those BPOs aren't significantly affecting inventors, and so, yes, they are "largely irrelevant". Very far from what this Don Quichotte of an OP is claiming. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
240
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 22:22:00 -
[48] - Quote
The main issue with your whole set of threads is that you have already determined that T2 BPOs are unfair and should be removed. That seems to be the reoccurring theme in these types of threads. Most of us don't think they are a problem or need to be removed. But you didn't ask that, you just jumped in feet first with 'they are unfair' and thus you get the back and forth.
All the data produced and analysis shows that T2 BPOs fill low demand items that have low volume or the items are so high demand that inventors can make isk comparable to those with T2 BPOs due to production times and number of blueprints.
So basically, if you want to continue this, I suggest you get some facts and numbers to argue first *if* they are harming the economy enough that they should be removed, then talk about how. But trying to find a problem to your solution is t going to get you anywhere. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Bluestream3
the Goose Flock
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 22:24:00 -
[49] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Bluestream3 wrote: Ok. Saying that T2 BPOs are completely irrelevant to inventors is just as much of a logic fail as to say that the minerals I mine are free. Also don't say that no one cares, you seem to care at least a bit since you're writing in this thread and there are several others that do too, me included obviously.
"Completely irrelevant" is an exageration. "Largely irrelevant" would be apt. Can you name one specific item where inventor margins would be significantly improved if T2 BPOs were removed? (Hint: this is a trap question. Even if you find one, which is doubtful, I have plenty of counter-examples to pick from) If not, that is empirical evidence that the existence of those BPOs aren't significantly affecting inventors, and so, yes, they are "largely irrelevant". Very far from what this Don Quichotte of an OP is claiming.
All of them. The kind of argument you're trying to get started here is a never-ending discussion that I don't want to get involved in at the moment, now flame away for that. However it is obvious that it's cheaper to build items from T2 BPOs than it is from invention. As long as some percent of items is produced cheaper from originals than the rest of the supply, they will have an impact on the market, small or large.
Without the numbers released from CCP we can't say anything and in my opinion, anyone who claims to know what would happen is simply lying because there's just no way to know. Personally, I think the numbers released by CCP speaks for themselves. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 22:36:00 -
[50] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
T2BPO are not irreleveant did you even read the data released by CCP?
What I saw was that a tiny number of BPO's is enough to supply a market with tiny demand. If my goal was to strike it rich building a bunch of expensive ships that nobody wants to buy then sure, competing against BPO's would be a huge problem. Thankfully, I'm nowhere near that stupid.
As a new and thriving industrialist, they are completely irrelevant to the success or failure of my ventures. Compared to their cost of acquisition, they make next to nothing in profit. They're completely irrelevant to the balance of the market. Nobody's getting rich off of them. The only thing T2 BPO's pertain to is a sense of injury that a long, long time ago some people allegedly got a bunch of BPO's through some vaguely crooked channels, and the rest of didn't and never will again.
Boo friggin' hoo. Did you read what this game says on the box? It's been designed as unfair FROM THE GROUND UP. That's what it's advertised as. That's why people pay for it, to play a game of Space Jerks where anything goes. I would be frankly upset if a huge faction with trillions upon trillions in assets COULDN'T abuse the system. What the hell is all that money for, it not for dominating the galaxy?
Do you honestly think it's some sort of a secret that Eve is a cruel, unfair game? You really think that if CCP was worried about one player gaining an advantage over another through less-than-honorable means they'd start with removing T2 BPO's?
I usually find there's a Zappa lyric that pertains to just about everything. Here's yours:
Frank Zappa wrote: Maybe you should stay with yo' mamma. She could do your laundry 'n cook for you.
You ain't really made for bein' out in the street Ain't much hope for a fool like you 'Cause if you play the game, you will get beat
|
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
39
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 22:50:00 -
[51] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
T2BPO are not irreleveant did you even read the data released by CCP?
What I saw was that a tiny number of BPO's is enough to supply a market with tiny demand. If my goal was to strike it rich building a bunch of expensive ships that nobody wants to buy then sure, competing against BPO's would be a huge problem. Thankfully, I'm nowhere near that stupid. As a new and thriving industrialist, they are completely irrelevant to the success or failure of my ventures. Compared to their cost of acquisition, they make next to nothing in profit. They're completely irrelevant to the balance of the market. Nobody's getting rich off of them. The only thing T2 BPO's pertain to is a sense of injury that a long, long time ago some people allegedly got a bunch of BPO's through some vaguely crooked channels, and the rest of didn't and never will again. Boo friggin' hoo. Did you read what this game says on the box? It's been designed as unfair FROM THE GROUND UP. That's what it's advertised as. That's why people pay for it, to play a game of Space Jerks where anything goes. I would be frankly upset if a huge faction with trillions upon trillions in assets COULDN'T abuse the system. What the hell is all that money for, it not for dominating the galaxy? Do you honestly think it's some sort of a secret that Eve is a cruel, unfair game? You really think that if CCP was worried about one player gaining an advantage over another through less-than-honorable means they'd start with removing T2 BPO's? I usually find there's a Zappa lyric that pertains to just about everything. Here's yours: Frank Zappa wrote: Maybe you should stay with yo' mamma. She could do your laundry 'n cook for you.
You ain't really made for bein' out in the street Ain't much hope for a fool like you 'Cause if you play the game, you will get beat
Funny that pay to win was so opposed then. It's basically the same as what you jsut described. Something that allows one player a distinct advantage over others.
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 23:42:00 -
[52] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Funny that pay to win was so opposed then. It's basically the same as what you jsut described. Something that allows one player a distinct advantage over others.
Oh, you mean PLEX? |
Aggressive Nutmeg
156
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 00:38:00 -
[53] - Quote
I don't own any T2BPO's but I like that we have the option of pursuing these items to form a rare collection.
T2BPO collection is another fun option within Eve - at least for some people, I suspect.
Remove T2BPO's and you make this universe just a little bit less interesting. Never make eye contact with someone while eating a banana. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 05:56:00 -
[54] - Quote
Hint for the economic noobs: Selling price is related to building cost ONLY on very low-demand items, when margins are so razor-thin that most productors give up on supplying the market. For any item with a reasonnable transaction volume, the ONLY thing that determine the selling price is how much buyers are ready to fork out for it. |
Voogru
Massive Damage We Are John Galt
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 07:03:00 -
[55] - Quote
Quote:1. They were dropped by Rats in certain systems. Many deemed this unfair and pointed to the fact that CCP were intentionally aiming drops at particularly alliances/corps by generating the drop in their space
lol. |
Voogru
Massive Damage We Are John Galt
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 07:06:00 -
[56] - Quote
Lauren Hellfury wrote:Still selling [T2H8R] shares. 1M each and all proceeds go towards the purchase and trashing of T2 BPOs.
If you really want to see T2 BPOs starting to be removed from the game then this is how you do it. We're about halfway to the first one visiting the recycler.
Link in sig. Do it!
You know what would be really smart? Rather than destroying the bpos right away, build from them and use the profits to buy more T2 BPO's!
Then once you have trillions of ISK worth of all of the BPO's, then trash them all! |
Kurfin
Space Research and Technology Investments
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 08:41:00 -
[57] - Quote
Does anyone know how many T2BPOs are in use? They were seeded a quite a while ago, so I'd imagine there are plenty on inactive accounts and in dead corp hangers and some for unwanted modules/ships simply won't get used a significant amount. What really affects invention profits is the same thing that affects all manufacturing, people not doing their sums and routinely selling below cost price.
Of course, if to even the playing field between T2BPO holders and inventors CCP tweaked the invented BPCs ME to positive figures I wouldn't complain. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 11:31:00 -
[58] - Quote
When they were seeded, it was 8 BPOs for each T2 ship and 16 BPOs for each T2 module.
Quite a few have been lost since then, bewteen destructions and canceled accounts. |
Joshua Aivoras
Tech IV Industries The Methodical Alliance
200
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 12:44:00 -
[59] - Quote
Gatan Hahran wrote:my neighbour got an iphone4. i cant afford one so they need to take it away from him.
Your neighbor is a tool 95% of the players are loving EVE, the other 5%? On the forums. |
Nydia Carver
Hedion University Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 16:15:00 -
[60] - Quote
Well they fixed drone regions, next it-¦s T2 BPO-¦s. |
|
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 16:28:00 -
[61] - Quote
Nydia Carver wrote:Well they fixed drone regions, next it-¦s T2 BPO-¦s. Whats broken about T2BPOs, that you dont have any? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
42
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 18:31:00 -
[62] - Quote
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. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 18:35:00 -
[63] - 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. Rogue drones were actually a problem T2BPOs are not. |
Haulie Berry
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 18:39:00 -
[64] - Quote
There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
42
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:00:00 -
[65] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry.
Meh I play the game the way I want I plex two accounts from afk trading and have isk to do what I want to do in EVE. I wanted to compete in invention but refuse to do so against T2BPO an item that was gifted by ccp to a pet player. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:00:00 -
[66] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry.
If only. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
42
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:09:00 -
[67] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry. If only.
blah blah blah, psychology... I'm off to work to do some hard science and then enjoy my spaceship shooty game. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:14:00 -
[68] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry. Meh I play the game the way I want I plex two accounts from afk trading and have isk to do what I want to do in EVE. I wanted to compete in invention but refuse to do so against T2BPO an item that was gifted by ccp to a pet player. The easiest way to not compete against T2BPOs is dont invent, if you are that well off give up this crusade, you are fighting an up hill battle alone, you will lose. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
42
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:25:00 -
[69] - Quote
lol fourm troll wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry. Meh I play the game the way I want I plex two accounts from afk trading and have isk to do what I want to do in EVE. I wanted to compete in invention but refuse to do so against T2BPO an item that was gifted by ccp to a pet player. The easiest way to not compete against T2BPOs is dont invent, if you are that well off give up this crusade, you are fighting an up hill battle alone, you will lose.
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? |
Haulie Berry
7
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:30:00 -
[70] - 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?
Hey guys, look who still doesn't understand basic economics. |
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
242
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:35:00 -
[71] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:lol fourm troll wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:There's a tiny part of me that would thoroughly enjoy seeing players like the OP who, absent their favorite scapegoat, would finally be forced to accept that they simply aren't smart enough to thrive in industry. Meh I play the game the way I want I plex two accounts from afk trading and have isk to do what I want to do in EVE. I wanted to compete in invention but refuse to do so against T2BPO an item that was gifted by ccp to a pet player. The easiest way to not compete against T2BPOs is dont invent, if you are that well off give up this crusade, you are fighting an up hill battle alone, you will lose. 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? If this were true, then i wouldnt make any isk from T2 ammo production, but I make loads. I'm sure there are T2 bpo owners for these items. So, you really don't understand industry at all then. Well actually you don't seem to understand the market nor the concept of supply and demand. What will you do if you choose to make mauraders and find out its not profitable? Blame T2 bpo owners and refuse to make something else? Or diversify and adjust to the market? Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 19:42:00 -
[72] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote: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?
Hey guys, look who still doesn't understand basic economics. Poor guy he will never learn, there is a list of what t2 has bpos make something off of the list, or something that is expendable. |
Duvida
The Scope Gallente Federation
59
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 20:10:00 -
[73] - Quote
Quote:If this were true, then i wouldnt make any isk from T2 ammo production, but I make loads. I'm sure there are T2 bpo owners for these items.
Now don't you be clouding the issue with facts. Ok, it'd be a stronger case if you can cite a BPO owner for these, but it's still a thing to consider, that it's probably true.
How about this? Keep the T2 BPOs, and let T2 BPC invention give a chance for, in addition to regular T2 BPCs, a T2 BPC for a named item of meta 6 to 9?
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 20:31:00 -
[74] - 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.
Horsecrap.
You can easily compete with any T2 bpo holder simply by masively outproducing him. A T2 BPO is limited to 1 factory slot. You aren't. |
Stella SGP
182
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:03:00 -
[75] - 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 -
[76] - 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.
|
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:30:00 -
[77] - Quote
Stella SGP wrote: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... I know, you know, that I know, that you know, he can be. |
Maximum Panic
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:31:00 -
[78] - Quote
Needed to chime in at the continuous lol fail of the anti-T2BPO thread you are making....the game was different back then and is way different today. I think you are focusing on such a small aspect of the isk making in this game that it is laughable. Do you ever undock?
I had 3 accounts with 9 toons all trained up to Research Management 5 for the lottery. To make use of them I had to grind faction/corp standings wtih each toon. I then spent every day running the one per day research mission to get 2x research points across all these accounts (I am sure many others did that as well). I only hope I never ever have to run another research delivery boy mission as long as I live.
So I played the game as intended and I got dropped 4 BPOs in the lottery accross all my accounts. So you are saying it wasn't fair that I played the game the way it was set up at the time and now 7 years later I need to be punished and just given back some RP so I can get datacores???? While we are at it you can reimburse the players that all played "wrong" at that time and pay them back their account subs. Hell why stop there and in game.....take your activisim to real life and give out reparations for slavery, etc
Well, that was just crazy talk at the end of the last PP -sorry for that, but you need to look at reality. I still have all of my original BPOs . The best one only makes me a cool 100M isk per month in profits on a desireable item that is swamped by invention jobs. Still, it basically pisses off my corp mates when I am in high sec "builidng crap" instead of out defending null or doing cool ratting plexes or major corp operations because it is such low income generating activity.
I would much rather be scanning down and running 10/10 plexs and making 1B isk per night off loot profits - which absolutely dwarfs any isk made vs. time spent on the T2BPOs. Hell on a crappy night with no loot drops I make 20M isk per tick ratting.....so in 5 hours of play I just equalled the best T2BPO that I own that takes 3 hours to set up goods and run and get the stuff to market- net gain for equal activity is then 40M isk per month if I run them instead of ratting. You should just be glad that I still make the low selling rate items for my other 3 BPOs and stock them at market at a fair rate. More often than not some speculator comes along and buys the entire lot out and then places it back on the market at 20% more price - maybe it is you just trying to make sure the inventors get fair prices.
It is time to Panic. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:38:00 -
[79] - Quote
Maximum Panic wrote:Needed to chime in at the continuous lol fail of the anti-T2BPO thread you are making....the game was different back then and is way different today. I think you are focusing on such a small aspect of the isk making in this game that it is laughable. Do you ever undock?
I had 3 accounts with 9 toons all trained up to Research Management 5 for the lottery. To make use of them I had to grind faction/corp standings wtih each toon. I then spent every day running the one per day research mission to get 2x research points across all these accounts (I am sure many others did that as well). I only hope I never ever have to run another research delivery boy mission as long as I live.
So I played the game as intended and I got dropped 4 BPOs in the lottery accross all my accounts. So you are saying it wasn't fair that I played the game the way it was set up at the time and now 7 years later I need to be punished and just given back some RP so I can get datacores???? While we are at it you can reimburse the players that all played "wrong" at that time and pay them back their account subs. Hell why stop there and in game.....take your activisim to real life and give out reparations for slavery, etc
Well, that was just crazy talk at the end of the last PP -sorry for that, but you need to look at reality. I still have all of my original BPOs . The best one only makes me a cool 100M isk per month in profits on a desireable item that is swamped by invention jobs. Still, it basically pisses off my corp mates when I am in high sec "builidng crap" instead of out defending null or doing cool ratting plexes or major corp operations because it is such low income generating activity.
I would much rather be scanning down and running 10/10 plexs and making 1B isk per night off loot profits - which absolutely dwarfs any isk made vs. time spent on the T2BPOs. Hell on a crappy night with no loot drops I make 20M isk per tick ratting.....so in 5 hours of play I just equalled the best T2BPO that I own that takes 3 hours to set up goods and run and get the stuff to market- net gain for equal activity is then 40M isk per month if I run them instead of ratting. You should just be glad that I still make the low selling rate items for my other 3 BPOs and stock them at market at a fair rate. More often than not some speculator comes along and buys the entire lot out and then places it back on the market at 20% more price - maybe it is you just trying to make sure the inventors get fair prices.
It is time to Panic. Well that is the long, but it seems necessary, explanation that will probally end this thread once and for all. Lets hope.
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 21:49:00 -
[80] - Quote
A long post full of inconvenient facts? He will ignore it. :/ |
|
Boomhaur
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:13:00 -
[81] - Quote
Personally I think the OP is just bad at the industrial side at Eve and wants an easier game that he can play. Heck I started playing again about a week ago with 150mil in my wallet and right now I have closer to 10x that amount with what I do for isk (I do a bit of everything, industrial/trading/ratting/etc)
So let me give you a bit of advice Invention is profitable, very profitable. If you don't know how to make a profit doing it, I suggest you learn or give up now as the T2 bpo people don't control the market, we do. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
43
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:14:00 -
[82] - Quote
So your BPO reqs 23/7 supervision that prevents you doing anything else? Ehm no sorry your confusing T2BPO which is easy afk ISK with the click fest that is invention. You also neglect to mention that you could sell those T2BPO's for a few bill or maybe even a few 100bill.
A few 100 bill sounds kind of over the top for the effort you put into getting them. Why nerf incursions when this guy made billlions running a few poxy research agent missions. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
43
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:22:00 -
[83] - Quote
Boomhaur wrote:Personally I think the OP is just bad at the industrial side at Eve and wants an easier game that he can play. Heck I started playing again about a week ago with 150mil in my wallet and right now I have closer to 10x that amount with what I do for isk (I do a bit of everything, industrial/trading/ratting/etc)
So let me give you a bit of advice Invention is profitable, very profitable. If you don't know how to make a profit doing it, I suggest you learn or give up now as the T2 bpo people don't control the market, we do.
Yet again that would depend on the item, I suggest you look at the CCP figures for the % that some items are created using T2BPO. It varies a lot.
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
244
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:22:00 -
[84] - Quote
And again, you fail to address questions asked to you and make wild accusations about people that have T2 BPOs. Are you trying to convince anyone of anything? Because it seems like you've done nothing but shore up the opinion by almost everyone here that you have no clue what you are talking about.
Anywho, no reason to reply to you anymore. Not sure why I bothered posting again. I suggest everyone else stop feeding this thread and watch it die. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:32:00 -
[85] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:A long post full of inconvenient facts? He will ignore it. :/ Wow you nailed it, btw my last post also. |
Haulie Berry
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 23:15:00 -
[86] - Quote
Quote:Yet again that would depend on the item, I suggest you look at the CCP figures for the % that some items are created using T2BPO. It varies a lot.
We all have, which is why everyone here knows that, instead of actually considering the data in its entirety, you're just cherry picking the outliers and presenting them out of context, which is the only way they even remotely appear to support your position.
You keep citing "CCP figures". T2 BPOs were heavily featured in the Q2 2009 QEN. You know what the conclusion was? They're fine, and will have a continually diminishing impact on the market as time wears on. Kind of shows your cherry-picked outliers for exactly what they are. |
Bluestream3
the Goose Flock
15
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 23:24:00 -
[87] - Quote
Maximum Panic wrote:Needed to chime in at the continuous lol fail of the anti-T2BPO thread you are making....the game was different back then and is way different today. I think you are focusing on such a small aspect of the isk making in this game that it is laughable. Do you ever undock
I had 3 accounts with 9 toons all trained up to Research Management 5 for the lottery. To make use of them I had to grind faction/corp standings wtih each toon. I then spent every day running the one per day research mission to get 2x research points across all these accounts (I am sure many others did that as well). I only hope I never ever have to run another research delivery boy mission as long as I live.
So I played the game as intended and I got dropped 4 BPOs in the lottery accross all my accounts. So you are saying it wasn't fair that I played the game the way it was set up at the time and now 7 years later I need to be punished and just given back some RP so I can get datacores???? While we are at it you can reimburse the players that all played "wrong" at that time and pay them back their account subs. Hell why stop there and in game.....take your activisim to real life and give out reparations for slavery, et
Well, that was just crazy talk at the end of the last PP -sorry for that, but you need to look at reality. I still have all of my original BPOs . The best one only makes me a cool 100M isk per month in profits on a desireable item that is swamped by invention jobs. Still, it basically pisses off my corp mates when I am in high sec "builidng crap" instead of out defending null or doing cool ratting plexes or major corp operations because it is such low income generating activity
I would much rather be scanning down and running 10/10 plexs and making 1B isk per night off loot profits - which absolutely dwarfs any isk made vs. time spent on the T2BPOs. Hell on a crappy night with no loot drops I make 20M isk per tick ratting.....so in 5 hours of play I just equalled the best T2BPO that I own that takes 3 hours to set up goods and run and get the stuff to market- net gain for equal activity is then 40M isk per month if I run them instead of ratting. You should just be glad that I still make the low selling rate items for my other 3 BPOs and stock them at market at a fair rate. More often than not some speculator comes along and buys the entire lot out and then places it back on the market at 20% more price - maybe it is you just trying to make sure the inventors get fair prices
It is time to Panic.
Let's ignore the fact that you can make more isk by doing incursions, sanctums, missions, wormholes or whatever, note that if you look at the time spent actively playing, this would probably be a lot closer (set up your t2 bpo for a week of production and then "undock"). I understand how frustrating it would be to lose an advantage you have worked hard for earlier, but I also think you need to understand that things change. The game is not the same that it was those 7 years ago. No matter which side you're on I think everyone agrees that the way T2 BPOs were seeded was a bad move and perhaps it's time to do something about that.
You state you have no profit in a market "swamped with invention jobs", then how do you think their profits look? They will be a lot worse, and that's, in my opinion, the problem. You could also run your BPO on one line and invent on your other 9 and come out on top of all the other inventors running inventions on 10 slots, just because you don't do that doesn't mean every one else wouldn't.
I've been thinking about this quite a bit and I don't think removing T2 BPOs is the way to go. I also think it'd be fine to keep T2 BPOs as effortless as they are right now (in comparison to invention) because even if you own originals, if you're serious about manufacturing, you'd probably invent anyway. The thing I think needs changing is the simple fact that even with all the "effort" that comes with invention, the production cost from a T2 BPO is not even close to the production cost for the same item using invention.
The change I want, and I think many others who say they want the T2 bp "removal", is to make BPOs closer to invention in terms of production costs. How this would be done I don't know. It obviously wouldn't suffice to just increase the ME levels on invented BPCs like many have suggested because that might upset the raw material market in ways not desirable, but there are many other ways of solving that. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
43
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 23:41:00 -
[88] - Quote
Bluestream3 wrote:Maximum Panic wrote:Needed to chime in at the continuous lol fail of the anti-T2BPO thread you are making....the game was different back then and is way different today. I think you are focusing on such a small aspect of the isk making in this game that it is laughable. Do you ever undock
I had 3 accounts with 9 toons all trained up to Research Management 5 for the lottery. To make use of them I had to grind faction/corp standings wtih each toon. I then spent every day running the one per day research mission to get 2x research points across all these accounts (I am sure many others did that as well). I only hope I never ever have to run another research delivery boy mission as long as I live.
So I played the game as intended and I got dropped 4 BPOs in the lottery accross all my accounts. So you are saying it wasn't fair that I played the game the way it was set up at the time and now 7 years later I need to be punished and just given back some RP so I can get datacores???? While we are at it you can reimburse the players that all played "wrong" at that time and pay them back their account subs. Hell why stop there and in game.....take your activisim to real life and give out reparations for slavery, et
Well, that was just crazy talk at the end of the last PP -sorry for that, but you need to look at reality. I still have all of my original BPOs . The best one only makes me a cool 100M isk per month in profits on a desireable item that is swamped by invention jobs. Still, it basically pisses off my corp mates when I am in high sec "builidng crap" instead of out defending null or doing cool ratting plexes or major corp operations because it is such low income generating activity
I would much rather be scanning down and running 10/10 plexs and making 1B isk per night off loot profits - which absolutely dwarfs any isk made vs. time spent on the T2BPOs. Hell on a crappy night with no loot drops I make 20M isk per tick ratting.....so in 5 hours of play I just equalled the best T2BPO that I own that takes 3 hours to set up goods and run and get the stuff to market- net gain for equal activity is then 40M isk per month if I run them instead of ratting. You should just be glad that I still make the low selling rate items for my other 3 BPOs and stock them at market at a fair rate. More often than not some speculator comes along and buys the entire lot out and then places it back on the market at 20% more price - maybe it is you just trying to make sure the inventors get fair prices
It is time to Panic. Let's ignore the fact that you can make more isk by doing incursions, sanctums, missions, wormholes or whatever, note that if you look at the time spent actively playing, this would probably be a lot closer (set up your t2 bpo for a week of production and then "undock"). I understand how frustrating it would be to lose an advantage you have worked hard for earlier, but I also think you need to understand that things change. The game is not the same that it was those 7 years ago. No matter which side you're on I think everyone agrees that the way T2 BPOs were seeded was a bad move and perhaps it's time to do something about that. You state you have no profit in a market "swamped with invention jobs", then how do you think their profits look? They will be a lot worse, and that's, in my opinion, the problem. You could also run your BPO on one line and invent on your other 9 and come out on top of all the other inventors running inventions on 10 slots, just because you don't do that doesn't mean every one else wouldn't. I've been thinking about this quite a bit and I don't think removing T2 BPOs is the way to go. I also think it'd be fine to keep T2 BPOs as effortless as they are right now (in comparison to invention) because even if you own originals, if you're serious about manufacturing, you'd probably invent anyway. The thing I think needs changing is the simple fact that even with all the "effort" that comes with invention, the production cost from a T2 BPO is not even close to the production cost for the same item using invention. The change I want, and I think many others who say they want the T2 bp "removal", is to make BPOs closer to invention in terms of production costs. How this would be done I don't know. It obviously wouldn't suffice to just increase the ME levels on invented BPCs like many have suggested because that might upset the raw material market in ways not desirable, but there are many other ways of solving that.
Bring BPO's down to the same profit of BPC's by reducing efficency's to match the cost of invention? |
Cardval Simalia
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2012.04.19 10:25:00 -
[89] - Quote
I always wondered how people got T2BPO's kinda sux knowing that most got theirs easily and now you have to pay them billions to get one. Also invention should be made to undercut the BPO to make it worth while to invent. |
sodney
Crazy Corporation
11
|
Posted - 2012.04.19 12:20:00 -
[90] - Quote
Since there are no new BPO-¦s getting brought into the game and BPO`s that are either located on banned acocunts or abandoned inactive Accounts or even getting destroyed for whatever reason are NOT getting replaced, T2 BPO`s will slowly but surely leave the game, anyway
If you only compare buildcost between a invention made T2 item and and a item thats made of a BPO, I agree that a T2 BPO must look totally OP. But If you run the numbers, and figure that you can only produce a very limited amount of them, it doesnt look that great anymore. Even "profitable" rated T2 Ship BPO`s rarely make more than 60-70 mil per day.
At the moment, if ppl actually HAVE the money, they can purchase a T2 just by checking forums or public contracts very easily, and just because they got much more valuable over time (and patches) it doesnt make them unfair, since that applies to litteraly any item in this game aswell
At the end of the day this game would become boring very quickly, if there wouldnt be any rare items at all, and no other goals to achieve than some numbers (either pure isk or kills)
Quote:Still selling [T2H8R] shares. 1M each and all proceeds go towards the purchase and trashing of T2 BPOs
If you really want to see T2 BPOs starting to be removed from the game then this is how you do it. We're about halfway to the first one visiting the recycler
Link in sig. Do it!
so you want to make the hated T2 BPO owners even more rich by buying their BPO-¦s to their conditions and prices, just to destroy them? Orwhy cant ppl buy affordable T2 BPO`s and trash them by themselves? Sorry this doesnt look as a scam, it screams for it! |
|
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.19 13:56:00 -
[91] - Quote
+1
Or add a new way to get originals fairly. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.19 22:13:00 -
[92] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:+1
Or add a new way to get originals fairly.
Last thing we need is more of them a swift removal is what is required. |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 06:36:00 -
[93] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Azrael Dinn wrote:+1
Or add a new way to get originals fairly. Last thing we need is more of them a swift removal is what is required.
Well whats the problem in it if everyone could get one some way? |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 10:18:00 -
[94] - Quote
Cardval Simalia wrote:I always wondered how people got T2BPO's kinda sux knowing that most got theirs easily and now you have to pay them billions to get one. Also invention should be made to undercut the BPO to make it worth while to invent.
Never got a bpo from agent, I bought them all. I still buy them. When I started EVE, I bet that Tech 2 would be the future and soon started a POS network for T2 components wich extended to 35 POS in Alparena 0.1 system. I run that network from 2005 to 2007. I made my wealth selling T2 comps to T2 bpo owners and started buying T2 ship bpos for myself. When invention was implemented I had something like 35.000.000 T2 components in stock, I made a killing by selling them at high prices to the new upcoming inventors. I bought more T2 ship bpos
I invented also and produced thousands of ships this way. I bought even more T2 ship bpos thanks to invention What is killing invention now are not the T2 bpos but the moon material prices. When I made inventions I produced regularly from ME-3 T2 ship bpcs. Now you don't make a profit from ME:-1/ME:-2 because the wastage factor has become too expansive
It's fun for me to collect T2 ship bpos, there is nothing as expansive to collect in EVE, I don't care about titans and officer mods... it's even funnier to know that it bothers other players, I don't kill hulks to grief people, I buy and collect T2 bpos !
I'm bored to read these stupid "remove T2 bpos" threads, the hater posters don't even understand what they talk about, bad faith is everywhere in their posts
Inventors would better ask to implement the possibility to invent Adrestias, Vangels, Mimirs... I think it's very unfair that these wonders are so rare ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 85 Bil-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 11:14:00 -
[95] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:Cardval Simalia wrote:I always wondered how people got T2BPO's kinda sux knowing that most got theirs easily and now you have to pay them billions to get one. Also invention should be made to undercut the BPO to make it worth while to invent. Never got a bpo from agent, I bought them all. I still buy them. When I started EVE, I bet that Tech 2 would be the future and soon started a POS network for T2 components wich extended to 35 POS in Alparena 0.1 system. I run that network from 2005 to 2007. I made my wealth selling T2 comps to T2 bpo owners and started buying T2 ship bpos for myself. When invention was implemented I had something like 35.000.000 T2 components in stock, I made a killing by selling them at high prices to the new upcoming inventors. I bought more T2 ship bpos I invented also and produced thousands of ships this way. I bought even more T2 ship bpos thanks to invention What is killing invention now are not the T2 bpos but the moon material prices. When I made inventions I produced regularly from ME-3 T2 ship bpcs. Now you don't make a profit from ME:-1/ME:-2 because the wastage factor has become too expansive It's fun for me to collect T2 ship bpos, there is nothing as expansive to collect in EVE, I don't care about titans and officer mods... it's even funnier to know that it bothers other players, I don't need to kill hulks and industrials to grief people, I buy and collect T2 bpos ! I'm bored to read these stupid "remove T2 bpos" threads, the hater posters don't even understand what they talk about, bad faith is everywhere in their posts Inventors would better ask to implement the possibility to invent Adrestias, Vangels, Mimirs... I think it's very unfair that these wonders are so rare
Yet again I don't mean to attack those who bought or worked for their BPO as my post details. However I do think those that were gifted them should be removed. They are OP and CCP's releascing of select stats proves it.
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
14
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 13:22:00 -
[96] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:They are OP and CCP's releascing of select stats proves it.
Which stats are these?
|
March rabbit
Trojan Trolls Red Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 13:29:00 -
[97] - 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. 1st and enough reason: they are exist already. So YOU have to give good reasons why those T2BPOs should disappear.
By now you only throwing some kind of crap about CCP pets, mafia and other tales. Give 1(!!!) good reason then we will talk. Noone wants to listen to your nightmares.
Elsewere - you ARE troll. Gratz. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 13:35:00 -
[98] - Quote
March rabbit 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. 1st and enough reason: they are exist already. So YOU have to give good reasons why those T2BPOs should disappear. By now you only throwing some kind of crap about CCP pets, mafia and other tales. Give 1(!!!) good reason then we will talk. Noone wants to listen to your nightmares. Elsewere - you ARE troll. Gratz.
Bots exist lets keep them?
STFU
Next question?
|
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.20 15:02:00 -
[99] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Bots exist lets keep them?
STFU
Next question?
Bots are against EULA. Compare what can be compared.
Anyway, reading your posts I see a general lack of sense, a will to judge from a very partial knowledge of EVE Online history and gameplay, and a dire misunderstanding of the game mechanics... ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 85 Bil-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Andar Makanen
HISec Seniors Clan
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.22 13:13:00 -
[100] - Quote
Maybe it was locked because it's beating a dead horse. |
|
Katerwaul
The Scope Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 04:56:00 -
[101] - Quote
So tired of seeing these proposals in here that I've submitted a proposal to the Features & Ideas Discussion to have them banned from this forum. I don't even have the energy for a sarcastic, witty reply.
Like I've said before...
"Katerwaul" wrote:I'm glad I missed all of the drama that ensued during my hiatus last year and avoided the invidia and avaritia that seems to have poisoned so many with such ira.
The dead horse became a bag of glue long ago. Feel free to stop kicking it whenever you'd like. Working with everyone to improve New Eden -- Internet Spaceships Iz Serious Business. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 13:01:00 -
[102] - Quote
You think because T2BPO has been broken for a long time we should just leave it? Many things have been broken in eve and took years to fix. T2BPO is broken it always has been and one day it will be fixed probably when CCP realize what a terrible advert it is for the game and how it deters people from subbing further when they realize that T2BPO gifts get handed out by CCP to their pet players that negatively effect the way they play the game ie through invention.
The people who rally to the forums to dismiss these threads are those who benefit from CCP's hand outs and they provide nothing but insults to defend T2BPO's. I don't blame them as it is really hard to justify the existence of these items and it takes no effort to bash them as they are so clearly broken, my first post in this thread provides these details. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
254
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 14:01:00 -
[103] - Quote
I really wish blocking posts from someone blocked threads they create so I didn't have to see this idiot thread anymore. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jon Taggart
State War Academy Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 16:07:00 -
[104] - Quote
Akita T's thread on this subject cannot be posted enough.
Link
Go ahead. Refute them. If you dare! |
Haulie Berry
20
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 16:18:00 -
[105] - Quote
Jon Taggart wrote:Akita T's thread on this subject cannot be posted enough. Link Go ahead. Refute them. If you dare!
A noble effort, but wasted.
I mean, really, have you read the guy's posts?
Quote:...it deters people from subbing further when they realize that T2BPO gifts get handed out by CCP to their pet players...
His position is so indefensible that he's just... making things up at this point. You're not dealing with an intelligent, rational mind that will respond to petty trifles like "facts" and "logic" - you're dealing with an infant child who is going to scream and cry until they get their way or are all cried out. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 18:44:00 -
[106] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:You think because T2BPO has been broken for a long time we should just leave it? Many things have been broken in eve and took years to fix. T2BPO is broken it always has been and one day it will be fixed probably when CCP realize what a terrible advert it is for the game and how it deters people from subbing further when they realize that T2BPO gifts get handed out by CCP to their pet players that negatively effect the way they play the game ie through invention
The people who rally to the forums to dismiss these threads are those who benefit from CCP's hand outs and they provide nothing but insults to defend T2BPO's. I don't blame them as it is really hard to justify the existence of these items and it takes no effort to bash them as they are so clearly broken, my first post in this thread provides these details.
This is you very own point of view. As stated before this a been debated FOR YEARS and things will not change, because the debate is over already. Clever and respected people (i.e : Akita T) have already posted on this subject and a consensus has been reached
You are alone thinking this way and whatever we could say to explain why you are wrong... well, there is no deaf as those who will not hear.
EDIT : please moderator, lock this thread for trolling ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 20:44:00 -
[107] - Quote
''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 |
Stella SGP
195
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 21:24:00 -
[108] - 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. |
Haulie Berry
21
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 21:24:00 -
[109] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
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
[citation needed]
You do understand that your wholly fictional history of T2BPO's does not make for a valid argument, yes? |
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 21:33:00 -
[110] - 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.''
|
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 21:37:00 -
[111] - Quote
Five Thirty wrote: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.''
was here for the lottery but didnt win, bought some with isk that i made from invention.. working as intended CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 22:51:00 -
[112] - Quote
If Akita T's first line was not complete rubbish it would make her article worth reading. i read the whole thing but sadly it goes from the first line being complete rubbish all the way through to the end. |
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 22:53:00 -
[113] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:If Akita T's first line was not complete rubbish it would make her article worth reading. i read the whole thing but sadly it goes from the first line being complete rubbish all the way through to the end.
Since you are obviously unable to use logic and / or reason, it has become clear that you are just trolling.
Decent bit of work getting so many bites, so cheers on that at least.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 22:56:00 -
[114] - Quote
Five Thirty wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:If Akita T's first line was not complete rubbish it would make her article worth reading. i read the whole thing but sadly it goes from the first line being complete rubbish all the way through to the end. Since you are obviously unable to use logic and / or reason, it has become clear that you are just trolling. Decent bit of work getting so many bites, so cheers on that at least.
Yet again more ''trolling'' blah blah blah not one single reason for keeping T2BPO. Every argument points to removing only CCP pets keep defending T2BPO. |
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 23:00:00 -
[115] - Quote
Let me explain it very simply to you:
What is stopping you from buying your very own T2BPO and joining in on this endless revenue stream you seem to think spouts from each and every one?
I know many people who own T2BPOs and every single one of them were purchased with ISK, which they earned by doing other profit making activities.
It sounds like you're just too lazy to do the work required. |
Haulie Berry
21
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 23:05:00 -
[116] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where as in my posts I'm 100% truthfull as you can see from the original post. I'd like to see people argues against the facts but they simply can only insult as my facts are sound and as stated T2BPO needs removed if CCP is to shed its corrupt small game dev image. CCP or EVE will not be able to grow into anything more untill T2BPO are removed.
I like how you continually refer to your entirely fictitious history of BPO distribution as "fact".
You've progressed from ignorance to outright lies. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 23:10:00 -
[117] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where as in my posts I'm 100% truthfull as you can see from the original post. I'd like to see people argues against the facts but they simply can only insult as my facts are sound and as stated T2BPO needs removed if CCP is to shed its corrupt small game dev image. CCP or EVE will not be able to grow into anything more untill T2BPO are removed. I like how you continually refer to your entirely fictitious history of BPO distribution as "fact". You've progressed from ignorance to outright lies.
Sorry where did I lie?
Please stop slandering. Anyone who supports T2BPO is not familiar with fact so please indulge me. |
Haulie Berry
21
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 23:16:00 -
[118] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where as in my posts I'm 100% truthfull as you can see from the original post. I'd like to see people argues against the facts but they simply can only insult as my facts are sound and as stated T2BPO needs removed if CCP is to shed its corrupt small game dev image. CCP or EVE will not be able to grow into anything more untill T2BPO are removed. I like how you continually refer to your entirely fictitious history of BPO distribution as "fact". You've progressed from ignorance to outright lies. Sorry where did I lie? Please stop slandering. Anyone who supports T2BPO is not familiar with fact so please indulge me.
...pretty much all of it. You assert that the lottery was "corrupt". Prove it was corrupt.
You assert that T2 BPOs were dropped by rats. When was this? The only BPOs ever distributed through any means other than the lottery were Miner IIs. They were distributed as part of an in-game event. So when, then, were they ever dropped by rats? At which point in the game's history could I fit up a ship, fly to a belt, pop a rat and get a T2 BPO? Which rats?, in which regions? Which BPOs were dropped?
You assert that CCP handed BPOs to players. The only occurrence of this that I am aware of is the T20 scandal. Those BPOs were recovered and redistributed via lottery, thus can no longer be said to be in the hands of anyone who gained them illegitimately. |
Katja Faith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 23:29:00 -
[119] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:--troll bait snipped--
Assuming you're not an alt of the troll, why on earth are you feeding it?
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 23:51:00 -
[120] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where as in my posts I'm 100% truthfull as you can see from the original post. I'd like to see people argues against the facts but they simply can only insult as my facts are sound and as stated T2BPO needs removed if CCP is to shed its corrupt small game dev image. CCP or EVE will not be able to grow into anything more untill T2BPO are removed. I like how you continually refer to your entirely fictitious history of BPO distribution as "fact". You've progressed from ignorance to outright lies. Sorry where did I lie? Please stop slandering. Anyone who supports T2BPO is not familiar with fact so please indulge me. ...pretty much all of it. You assert that the lottery was "corrupt". Support this assertion. How was it corrupt? Were players gifted RPs they didn't earn? Was the RNG intentionally flawed? What evidence do you have to support this? You assert that T2 BPOs were dropped by rats. When was this? The only BPOs ever distributed through any means other than the lottery were Miner IIs. They were distributed as part of an in-game event. So when, then, were they ever dropped by rats? At which point in the game's history could I fit up a ship, fly to a belt, pop a rat and get a T2 BPO? Which rats?, in which regions? Which BPOs were dropped? You assert that CCP handed BPOs to players. The only occurrence of this that I am aware of is the T20 scandal. Those BPOs were recovered and redistributed via lottery, thus can no longer be said to be in the hands of anyone who gained them illegitimately.
I'm not sure how much evidence I can provide with out being banned as CCP does ban you for revealing facts on T2BPO. Possibly we need some CCP dev clarification on what facts I can reveal whith out being banned.
Needless to say T2BPO were given to players as assets. The lottery was corrupt in the fact that its workings and details were revealed to select players. Primarly how many tickets in each lottery and how many BPO's in each lottery. This was a massive advantage to players in the know. Yes mining T2BPO's were dropped in events. T20 scandal was the unothorised BPO hand out but these BPO's were recovred.
CCP should give a complete list of current T2BPO and their original owners plus the exact amount of T2 and copies produced of them so we can 100% account for all T2BPO problems. |
|
Haulie Berry
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:01:00 -
[121] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I'm not sure how much evidence I can provide with out being banned as CCP does ban you for revealing facts on T2BPO. Possibly we need some CCP dev clarification on what facts I can reveal whith out being banned.
Lol. "If I told you I would have to kill you!" How very convenient for you.
Fiction presented as fact - commonly known as lies. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:05:00 -
[122] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I'm not sure how much evidence I can provide with out being banned as CCP does ban you for revealing facts on T2BPO. Possibly we need some CCP dev clarification on what facts I can reveal whith out being banned.
Lol. "If I told you I would have to kill you!" How very convenient for you. Fiction presented as fact - commonly known as lies.
You allready stated that you know about T20 so you clearly know about how CCP layed down the ban hammer on discussing it. |
Haulie Berry
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:13:00 -
[123] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I'm not sure how much evidence I can provide with out being banned as CCP does ban you for revealing facts on T2BPO. Possibly we need some CCP dev clarification on what facts I can reveal whith out being banned.
Lol. "If I told you I would have to kill you!" How very convenient for you. Fiction presented as fact - commonly known as lies. You allready stated that you know about T20 so you clearly know about how CCP layed down the ban hammer on discussing it.
More fiction. There were bans handed out in the midst of the scandal, but there is no persistent blanket ban against discussion of T2 BPOs.
Now you've progressed from lies to meta-lies, the sole function of which is to sidestep the fact that you can't actually backup your previous lies. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:16:00 -
[124] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I'm not sure how much evidence I can provide with out being banned as CCP does ban you for revealing facts on T2BPO. Possibly we need some CCP dev clarification on what facts I can reveal whith out being banned.
Lol. "If I told you I would have to kill you!" How very convenient for you. Fiction presented as fact - commonly known as lies. You allready stated that you know about T20 so you clearly know about how CCP layed down the ban hammer on discussing it. More fiction. There were bans handed out in the midst of the scandal, but there is no persistent blanket ban against discussion of T2 BPOs. Now you've progressed from lies to meta-lies, the sole function of which is to sidestep the fact that you can't actually backup your previous lies.
Yet again what lies? OK I put it to a dev to dispute anything in my post for all is true. |
Haulie Berry
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:18:00 -
[125] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Yet again what lies? OK I put it to a dev to dispute anything in my post for all is true.
Pretty sure we've addressed that. At length. You made a bunch of assertions about the illegitimacy of BPO distribution. I asked you to prove it. You said you can't.
Since you're making such accusations, you bear the burden of proof. You've opted not to provide any proof, giving instead the laughably pathetic excuse, "Uhm.. I can't tell you.... it's a secret."
It's cool. Lots of people just make **** up when they don't have a legitimate position. I'm just glad that we could establish that that is, in fact, what you're doing here.
Did you know that Jesus gave State Ravens to his apostles? It's true. CCP must remove State Ravens AT ONCE lest the future of Eve be DOOMED by this heinous act of divinity. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:23:00 -
[126] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Yet again what lies? OK I put it to a dev to dispute anything in my post for all is true.
Pretty sure we've addressed that. At length. You made a bunch of assertions about the illegitimacy of BPO distribution. I asked you to prove it. You said you can't. Since you're making such accusations, you bear the burden of proof. You've opted not to provide any proof, giving instead the laughably pathetic excuse, "Uhm.. I can't tell you.... it's a secret." It's cool. Lots of people just make **** up when they don't have a legitimate position. I'm just glad that we could establish that that is, in fact, what you're doing here.
Ok T20 was unfair a CCP dev gave BPO's to his friends. You really want me to prove it go thuck yourself and use google.
The lottery details were revealed yet again go thuck yourself and use google.
BPO's were dropped you allready stated this by your event rant, go thuck yourself and use your memory.
Simply put thuck off troll and come up with one argument for keeping T2BPO. You can't let it die.
Remove T2BPO, let CCP and Eve grow and move forward. meh lose some pet players in process instead of hordes of newbies. |
Haulie Berry
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:29:00 -
[127] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Ok T20 was unfair a CCP dev gave BPO's to his friends. You really want me to prove it go thuck yourself and use google.
And then they were taken back. So the CCP dev's friends no longer had them. So it has no bearing on the present state of the game. You seem to like ignoring that part.
Quote:The lottery details were revealed yet again go thuck yourself and use google.
Describe the net effect of this event.
Quote:BPO's were dropped you allready stated this by your event rant, go thuck yourself and use your memory.
Yes... the very first BPOs were distributed as part of an in game event. They are not the only rare item to ever be distributed in this way. They were not "dropped by rats" as a matter of course, as you continually suggest. How, precisely, does this have any bearing on T2 BPOs as a whole? As Miner IIs were the only BPOs ever distributed in this fashion, how does this pertain to, say, EANM II BPOs?
I heard that a dev gave Barack Obama a special item that spawns a freighter full of Technetium in his hangar on the second tuesday of every month.
Also, all Jita 4-4 taxes and broker fees go directly to Mittani with the provision that he may only spend them on exotic dancers and spiced wine. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:34:00 -
[128] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Ok T20 was unfair a CCP dev gave BPO's to his friends. You really want me to prove it go thuck yourself and use google.
And then they were taken back. So the CCP dev's friends no longer had them. So it has no bearing on the present state of the game. You seem to like ignoring that part. Quote:The lottery details were revealed yet again go thuck yourself and use google. Describe the net effect of this event. Quote:BPO's were dropped you allready stated this by your event rant, go thuck yourself and use your memory. Yes... the very first BPOs were distributed as part of an in game event. They are not the only rare item to ever be distributed in this way. They were not "dropped by rats" as a matter of course, as you continually suggest. How, precisely, does this have any bearing on T2 BPOs as a whole? As Miner IIs were the only BPOs ever distributed in this fashion, how does this pertain to, say, EANM II BPOs?
I never said all BPO's were dropped this way I listed all the ways in which BPO's were given out as my first post suggests. SO yet again my post is 100% truthfull, please explain which part is a lie again?
By the way you can stop posting now as I've allready stated it's very easy to defend the truth and the remnoval of T2BPO and a lot more effort to try and promote it's continued existance which is based on corruption and lies. Seriously how much real money, time, new subscriptions and wealth has CCP burned keeping these items in game to keep a select few happy?
T2BPO existance is insanity in both game and real world scenarios. |
Haulie Berry
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:43:00 -
[129] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I never said all BPO's were dropped this way I listed all the ways in which BPO's were given out as my first post suggests. SO yet again my post is 100% truthfull, please explain which part is a lie again?
We've been over this several times now. The answer is "all of it". Lies of omission are still lies.
Furthermore, what, exactly, is wrong with having distributed 10? I think it was 10 - BPOs through an ingame event? Is that somehow inappropriate? What should be done with other rare event-distributed items? Should nothing unique ever be distributed as part of an ingame event, or does it only apply to T2 BPOs?
Quote: Seriously how much real money, time, new subscriptions and wealth has CCP burned keeping these items in game to keep a select few happy?
Oh, good call. Back up your lies with alarmist speculation. You even posed it as a question, too - that's a pretty badass Fox News move there. Are Tech2 BPOs harming YOUR child? Story at 11. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:48:00 -
[130] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I never said all BPO's were dropped this way I listed all the ways in which BPO's were given out as my first post suggests. SO yet again my post is 100% truthfull, please explain which part is a lie again?
We've been over this several times now. The answer is "all of it". Lies of omission are still lies. Furthermore, what, exactly, is wrong with having distributed 10? I think it was 10 - BPOs through an ingame event? Is that somehow inappropriate? What should be done with other rare event-distributed items? Should nothing unique ever be distributed as part of an ingame event, or does it only apply to T2 BPOs? Quote: Seriously how much real money, time, new subscriptions and wealth has CCP burned keeping these items in game to keep a select few happy?
Oh, good call. Back up your lies with alarmist speculation. You even posed it as a question, too - that's a pretty badass Fox News move there. Are Tech2 BPOs harming YOUR child? Story at 11.
All of it? good one so with out supporting or answering to these supposed lies with facts we shall say none of it.
Yet again the orignal post is 100% fact and your slowly realising this and you can not point out a single lie with a counter of truth because in fact my OP is 100% truth and it saddens you.
You are no different to any other troll here who has tried to defend what is allready lost T2BPO have no place in eve. Remove them. |
|
Haulie Berry
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 00:56:00 -
[131] - Quote
Yes. All of it.
You:
Quote:1. They were dropped by Rats in certain systems. Many deemed this unfair and pointed to the fact that CCP were intentionally aiming drops at particularly alliances/corps by generating the drop in their space
Reality:
Quote:The next miner II bpcs were also distributed through a Jove Event. Ouria, a Jovan Admiral infected by the Jovan Disease, and nine of his brothers fled to a Station deep inside Stain region, with stolen blueprints in their cargo. CONCORD placed a bounty of 100 million ISK on Ouria's head and 10 million on each of his brothers and many corporations moved to stain in search for the Jovan refugees.
Ouria and five of his fellow Jovians, flying Eidolon battleships, hooked up with the known Minmatar terrorist organization Oracle close to Stain. 18 Oracle members flying cruisers joined forces with the Jovians. A task force consisting mainly of members of the Stain Alliance met the Ouria and his friends in DSS-EZ system. The task force consisted of 15-20 battleships and 15-20 cruisers. The battle raged for awhile and when the smoke cleared all the Jovian ships as well as all the Oracle cruisers were smoldering rubble. It is believed the task force lost less than 10 ships in total.
As Each destroyed Jovan ship dropped a (unlimited) miner II bpc among other valuable loot, a battle for the cargo containers started.
This is known as a "lie of omission" . By failing to mention certain facts, you intentionally leave the uninitiated with the impression that T2 BPOs were routinely seeded in this fashion when, in fact, it was a one time event.
Every other assertion you have made is flawed in the exact same way.
Still anxiously waiting for you to blow the lid off this secret T2 BPO distribution scandal, the details of which are, apparently, known ONLY to you.
Don't fear the banhammer, baby. The truth will set you free. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 01:03:00 -
[132] - Quote
Way I actually liked that post you bothered to google how NPC's dropped BPO's kudos. MY original post stated this but in not so much detail I will now add this to the reserved second post.
Wow it has taken months of trolling but someone on team T2BPO has displayed a grasp of reality and facts.
Yet still my statement regarding this event remain true. |
Haulie Berry
23
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 01:05:00 -
[133] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Way I actually liked that post you bothered to google how NPC's dropped BPO's kudos. MY original post stated this but in not so much detail I will now add this to the reserved second post.
Your original post lied about it via omission, probably because you didn't actually know anything about the event. Someone told you they were dropped once and you just started parroting your own fictional rendition (which bears no resemblance to reality) as if it were fact.
Still waiting to hear about these secretly handed out BPOs that you claim you can't talk about it (admittedly, I really believe you can't talk about them... because you're making it up). |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 01:12:00 -
[134] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Way I actually liked that post you bothered to google how NPC's dropped BPO's kudos. MY original post stated this but in not so much detail I will now add this to the reserved second post. Your original post lied about it via omission, probably because you didn't actually know anything about the event. Someone told you they were dropped once and you just started parroting your own fictional rendition (which bears no resemblance to reality) as if it were fact. Still waiting to hear about these secretly handed out BPOs that you claim you can't talk about it (admittedly, I really believe you can't talk about them... because you're making it up).
T20 is well documented they were handed in secret, google it.
|
Haulie Berry
23
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 01:18:00 -
[135] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
T20 is well documented they were handed in secret, google it.
But you list those as two separate events, Brewlar. See?
Under the general heading...
Quote:They were seeded into the game in a variety of ways
This refers to some as-yet-to-be-identified mystery event:
Quote:3. They were simply handed as assets in secret to certain players by CCP
And this refers to T20:
Quote: 4. An incident where non authorised handing of T2 BPO to a player from a CCP employee occurred. These BPO's were recovered
So, one of the following must be true:
Either, A: You're alleging to have knowledge of a separate distribution scandal that remains a secret. This seems unlikely, as you're clearly an unconnected have-not.
Or:
B: You listed T20 twice, presumably to "pad" your case. For some reason, the first time you mentioned it, you opted to omit the fact that the BPOs were recovered. The net effect, given the juxtaposition of the two statements, is that, to anyone who doesn't know better, you are claiming that BPOs were inappropriately distributed and were NOT recovered. Again, more lying. Are you in politics? Seems right up your alley.
Furthermore, in the event of case B, why would illegitimately distributed BPOs that have since been recovered - and are thus no longer held illegitimately - be a relevant issue in today's Eve? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
50
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 01:21:00 -
[136] - Quote
''You're alleging to have knowledge of a separate distribution scandal that remains a secret. This seems unlikely, as you're clearly an unconnected have-not.''
My point exactly, un-connected is a problem in EVE. Unless you knew a Dev your chances of reciving items like T2BPO were nill which completely kills CCP's illusion of a player based ecconmy and sand box style gameplay.
Untill CCP removes T2BPO's and stops feeding it's Pet players and corps this game will not grow into anything more. Every day it becomes more grind and a clone of WOW. T2BPO is a prime example of this requiring no skill or effort to create, risk free isk just pure grind and gifts. WOW all over.
Remove T2BPO's. |
Haulie Berry
23
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 01:27:00 -
[137] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''You're alleging to have knowledge of a separate distribution scandal that remains a secret. This seems unlikely, as you're clearly an unconnected have-not.''
My point exactly, un-connected is a problem in EVE. Unless you knew a Dev your chances of reciving items like T2BPO were nill which completely kills CCP's illusion of a player based ecconmy and sand box style gameplay.
Untill CCP removes T2BPO's and stops feeding it's Pet players and corps this game will not grow into anything more. Every day it becomes more grind and a clone of WOW. T2BPO is a prime example of this requiring no skill or effort to create, risk free isk just pure grind and gifts. WOW all over.
Remove T2BPO's.
So, CCP gives T2 BPOs to their "pets".
The BPOs are recovered.
CCP is continuing to feed its pets. That seems to be the executive summary of your current position.
How, exactly, does recovering the BPOs equate to "feeding" pets?
And again: Why did your OP include two different renditions of the T20 scandal? Why did one of those renditions fail to mention that the BPOs were removed from circulation? These are not rhetorical questions.
The obvious answer is, "You're making things up to support your agenda", but I think it would still be fun to watch you attempt to explain it. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 10:37:00 -
[138] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''You're alleging to have knowledge of a separate distribution scandal that remains a secret. This seems unlikely, as you're clearly an unconnected have-not.''
My point exactly, un-connected is a problem in EVE. Unless you knew a Dev your chances of reciving items like T2BPO were nill which completely kills CCP's illusion of a player based ecconmy and sand box style gameplay.
Untill CCP removes T2BPO's and stops feeding it's Pet players and corps this game will not grow into anything more. Every day it becomes more grind and a clone of WOW. T2BPO is a prime example of this requiring no skill or effort to create, risk free isk just pure grind and gifts. WOW all over.
Remove T2BPO's. So, CCP gives T2 BPOs to their "pets". The BPOs are recovered. CCP is continuing to feed its pets. That seems to be the executive summary of your current position. How, exactly, does recovering the BPOs equate to "feeding" pets? And again: Why did your OP include two different renditions of the T20 scandal? Why did one of those renditions fail to mention that the BPOs were removed from circulation? These are not rhetorical questions. The obvious answer is, "You're making things up to support your agenda", but I think it would still be fun to watch you attempt to explain it.
Oh sorry CCP devs giving T2BPO's to their mates has to occur on several occasions before you wake up and realise that T2BPO is a giant mistake and a terrible advert for EVE. It gives players that hold these items massive advantages of new players who must invent.
|
Grouchy Smurf
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 11:19:00 -
[139] - Quote
Mr Brewlar Kuvakei,
Assuming that they remove Tech 2 BPOs tomorrow, what stops CCP from handing brand new t2 BPOs to their friends? Hell, it's even better for their friends since their new T2 BPOs would be unique and, therefor, more expensive / important in the economy.
Or do you think that those friends will openly speak up and complain about their gifts?
Here is a free tip: If CCP wants to do something, there is NOTHING you can do to stop it. If they are / were giving away items, removing those items will not help. They will just seed them again. The only ones that will be harmed are the guys that legitimately acquired said items.
ps: Take your conspiracy theories. You know where you can shove them. |
Haulie Berry
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 13:03:00 -
[140] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Oh sorry CCP devs giving T2BPO's to their mates has to occur on several occasions before you wake up and realise that T2BPO is a giant mistake and a terrible advert for EVE. It gives players that hold these items massive advantages of new players who must invent.
That doesn't answer the question. Let's try this again. Here, I'll put numbers on them this time. Maybe that will help.
1. Why did your OP include two different renditions of the T20 scandal?
2. Why did one of those renditions fail to mention that the BPOs were removed from circulation?
3. How is the illegitimate distribution of T2 BPOs which were recovered relevant in today's Eve, and why should it have any bearing on legitimately distributed BPOs? |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 13:08:00 -
[141] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Oh sorry CCP devs giving T2BPO's to their mates has to occur on several occasions before you wake up and realise that T2BPO is a giant mistake and a terrible advert for EVE. It gives players that hold these items massive advantages of new players who must invent.
That doesn't answer the question. Let's try this again. Here, I'll put numbers on them this time. Maybe that will help. 1. Why did your OP include two different renditions of the T20 scandal? 2. Why did one of those renditions fail to mention that the BPOs were removed from circulation? 3. How is the illegitimate distribution of T2 BPOs which were recovered relevant in today's Eve, and why should it have any bearing on legitimately distributed BPOs?
T2BPO were not given fairly, details of the lottery were leaked. So any T2BPO gifted in the lottery should be recovered. So far only T20 BPO's have been recovred.
Meh What ever I'm happy that this thread stays at the top of S+I forum and also at the top of google search on T2 and amongst the top for EVE industry. T2BPO is an embaresment to both CCP and EVE. New players should be made aware of their existance and the corrupt manner that they entered the game. New players can judge if this is a game they wish to play a game where they have to labour with invention ''crafting'' while other players can just instantly produce the same items at a fraction of the cost. |
Haulie Berry
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 13:11:00 -
[142] - Quote
Again, you seem to be avoiding the questions.
I'm just going to assume it's because you know you're fabricating nonsense. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 14:22:00 -
[143] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Again, you seem to be avoiding the questions.
I'm just going to assume it's because you know you're fabricating nonsense.
What part is fabricated yet again? CCP gives players it likes T2BPO's that is well established. Yeah the guy doing it got caught and CCP had to retract those BPO's. How many other prints were not caught? who knows. It is fair to say this untill CCP make avalible information on every T2BPO and it's effect on the market. So far they pick a handfull but it is well known that some markets are completely crippled by T2BPO's undercutting invention. This is wrong it's gimping the game and thus all t2BPO should be removed. |
Haulie Berry
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 14:32:00 -
[144] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Again, you seem to be avoiding the questions.
I'm just going to assume it's because you know you're fabricating nonsense. What part is fabricated yet again? CCP gives players it likes T2BPO's that is well established. Yeah the guy doing it got caught and CCP had to retract those BPO's. How many other prints were not caught? who knows.
Do you not see what you did there?
You:
-Asked which part was fabricated -Glossed over the inconvenient facts -Proceeded with alarmist speculation which you have no evidence to support.
This is "fabrication". You have absolutely zero evidence that there are any illegitimate BPOs in the wild, so at best you just suggest that there "might" be. Here, other people can play, too.
We know that some people have illegitimately purchased ISK via RMT. Sure, a lot of that isk has been deleted and wallets have been set negative, but how much other illegitimate isk is still out there? Who knows?
Has Brewlar Kuvakei participated in RMT? I'm just asking the hard questions here, guys!
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
14
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 14:34:00 -
[145] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:...it is well known that some markets are completely crippled by T2BPO's undercutting invention...
False. It is well known that some markets are completely crippled by lack of demand and a dearth of moon mats. If T2 BPO's we gone tomorrow they would still be terrible candidates for inventors. |
Fango Mango
University of Caille Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 15:25:00 -
[146] - Quote
Where the BPOs came from is irrelevant at this point in time.
They are in the game and many players have made substantial investments to obtain them.
Do you plan to punish long term industrialist today because some else may or may not have "cheated" years ago?
If your problem with T2 BPOs is the affect that they have on the market (a valid complaint in some markets) then propose a solution to THAT problem . . . a couple of ideas that have been floating around over the years.
1) Skills that effectively increase the ME and PE of T2 production At level 5 they would shift the effective ME/PE from a standard BPC from -4/-4 to +1/+1.
2) Increase the build/invention time of T2 items by an order of magnitude. This will reduce the ability of T2 BPOs to "fill" the market and have lots of other "interesting" effects. Hello 5 Mil ISK Cap Recharger II?
3) Allow T1 BPC ME/PE to have an affect on the T2 ME/PE.
-FM
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
52
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 16:02:00 -
[147] - Quote
''Do you plan to punish long term industrialist today because some else may or may not have "cheated" years ago?''
Nope they should be reinbursed no one would be punished. The orignal owners would get their RP paid back so in the end their are only winners as they get to keep the easy isk they maid printing T2 items with zero effort.
T2BPO removal is a win for every eve player and it's a win for the game as a whole. |
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Hedion University Amarr Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 16:06:00 -
[148] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
4. An incident where non authorised handing of T2 BPO to a player from a CCP employee occurred. These BPO's were recovered but not after several EVE players were sanctioned for bringing the incident to light. (Discussing Bans is bannable, so I best not go into this too much less I get banned). Simply put CCP's behaviour over the incident could be described disgusting at best
**********
funny how what... five, six YEARS after the fact and you still cant say his name on the forums lol CCP isnt petty at all
Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game |
Fango Mango
University of Caille Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 20:36:00 -
[149] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Do you plan to punish long term industrialist today because some else may or may not have "cheated" years ago?''
Nope they should be reinbursed no one would be punished. The orignal owners would get their RP paid back so in the end their are only winners as they get to keep the easy isk they maid printing T2 items with zero effort.
T2BPO removal is a win for every eve player and it's a win for the game as a whole.
How do you reimburse T2 BPO holders?
Say someone just bought a BPO last week for 100 Billion. Does CCP pay them 100 Billion ISK for the BPO or do they just screw that player over.
I doubt that CCP wants to screw over their log term subscribers.
CCP certainly can't inject all the ISK it would take to "buy back" all the outstanding T2 BPOs without ruining the entire economy.
So how exactly to you propose to "fairly" reimburse T2 BPO holders?
-FM
|
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
893
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 21:55:00 -
[150] - Quote
Fango Mango wrote: So how exactly to you propose to "fairly" reimburse T2 BPO holders?
Generally, as a game developer you fall back on the phrase "things may change". There's no contract that things will never change or are set in stone.
But they could at least whittle away at the issue.
- Allow the ME of the T1 BPC used in invention to affect the T2 BPC such as "T2 ME=Sqrt(T1 ME)-5". - Increase the supply of datacores (lowering prices, decreasing the cost advantage). - Change decryptors to be used up in a percentage-basis, or increase the drop rate to lower prices. - Change the invention process to produce T2 BPCs with more runs. - Change the invention process to allow batch invention.
I don't see removal ever happening. But one possible approach would be to say "all T2 BPO owners will have their BPOs exchanged for a stack of invented T2 BPCs equating to N years of production". |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 23:33:00 -
[151] - Quote
The by far most important Reason why we need T2 BPO`s so badly is, that all the "not so successfull" Industrialists have someone to blame for their failing. Even if its obvious that a blueprint that makes a couple bil per year when 24/7 manufacturing just cannot be too important for the game.
Quote:"I don't see removal ever happening. But one possible approach would be to say "all T2 BPO owners will have their BPOs exchanged for a stack of invented T2 BPCs equating to N years of production"."
lol
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
55
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 10:39:00 -
[152] - Quote
Problem is any nerf/removal to the massively OP BPO's and owners will cry. Hey but they ''hardly effect the market'' anyway right so don't cry so bad. |
Haulie Berry
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 14:04:00 -
[153] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Hey but they ''hardly effect the market''
Hey, look! You said something correct for a change!
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
55
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 14:15:00 -
[154] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Hey but they ''hardly effect the market'' Hey, look! You said something correct for a change!
Naw I was quoting crap, it flies from T2BPO supporters non stop. |
Haulie Berry
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 14:20:00 -
[155] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Naw I was quoting crap, it flies from T2BPO supporters non stop.
You do understand that the math fully supports the position that they have a negligible impact on the market, right?
I know you seem to think that the make-it-up-as-you-go strategy is valid, but it is pretty readily crushed by basic, irrefutable arithmetic.
Your problem seems to be a gross, willful ignorance about virtually every aspect of the Eve market and manufacturing. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 16:22:00 -
[156] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Hey but they ''hardly effect the market'' Hey, look! You said something correct for a change! Naw I was quoting crap, it flies from T2BPO supporters non stop.
Please dont even try to understand why they say that, just make them stop saying such things!
You should realy take a look at this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=98241&find=unread
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
55
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 16:36:00 -
[157] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Naw I was quoting crap, it flies from T2BPO supporters non stop.
You do understand that the math fully supports the position that they have a negligible impact on the market, right? I know you seem to think that the make-it-up-as-you-go strategy is valid, but it is pretty readily crushed by basic, irrefutable arithmetic. Your problem seems to be a gross, willful ignorance about virtually every aspect of the Eve market and manufacturing.
When 78% of a T2 item is producded by BPOsomething is broken. That means CCP gave 78% of that market to a few select players. While the rest of eve has to work like mad at 22%. This is broken it always has been.
Remove T2BPO or forever be reminded that no matter how hard you try at the end of the day CCP hand outs decide who is at the top particularly in T2BPO manufacture.
|
Grouchy Smurf
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 16:57:00 -
[158] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: When 78% of a T2 item is producded by BPOsomething is broken. That means CCP gave 78% of that market to a few select players. While the rest of eve has to work like mad at 22%. This is broken it always has been.
The only Tech 2 items that are produced by "78%" from BPOs are those that trade in low volumes, and are mostly unprofitable to invent due to the price of materials (the pre-mentioned -4/-4 problem). An example of this item would be the Sleipnir. Less than 10 are sold daily in Jita, and Eveeye gives between 12 and 25 million ISK profit per unit. There is simply to way for inventions to catch up with that.
On the other hand, according to CCP tweets things like Tech 2 weapon modules are created mainly from inventions (between 65 to 80% if I recall correctly).
If you don't have enough profit on an item, move to another one. This is a flexibility that BPO holders don't have. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 17:08:00 -
[159] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
When 78% of a T2 item is producded by BPOsomething is broken. That means CCP gave 78% of that market to a few select players. While the rest of eve has to work like mad at 22%. This is broken it always has been.
Remove T2BPO or forever be reminded that no matter how hard you try at the end of the day CCP hand outs decide who is at the top particularly in T2BPO manufacture.
When you say 78% of an ITEM you are not talking of the average T2 itme your talking of a certain mostlikely not very used item that you picked on twitter.
For example, you probaly picked something stupid like the claymore, I would`nt be suprised if nearly 100% of em are build by BPO`s because its just not profiatble to build them as there maybe 5 of em gettign sold per day. Nobody would invent it, but a T2 BPO owner has either the choice of just dont use the BPO at all or build the ship for a minimal profit.
You can check any of the high demanded Items and you will see those are acutally getting invented a lot because the number of BPO-¦s are too limited that they could cover the entire demand.
Quote:78% of that market to a few select players
everyone can buy these prints, their Owners mostly bought em for a lot of money, they didnt got elected by CCP to have an advantage.
the most easy Way to see that T2 BPO are not OP at all, is to check how much ISK they actually generate, and that tiny bit of isk just cannot affect the whole game that much. |
Shoogie
Serious Pixels
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 17:41:00 -
[160] - Quote
The last T2 BPO was distributed over 5 years ago. Arguing that the lottery was unfair years ago will fall on deaf ears. If you want to get rid of them, you must argue about their effect on the economy.
Three rules: 1. Industrialists pass all their manufacturing costs on to the consumers. 2. The market is PVP. Manufacturers compete with each other to be the lowest priced seller on the market while maximizing their profits. 3. Producing from a T2 BPO is cheaper than inventing. First there is the cost of invention. That can be calculated from the cost of datacores, decryptors, and the average success rate. Additionally, the ME of invented BPCs is worse than BPOs. This increases the quantity of some of the components on the bill of materials. It does not increase the quantity of all, because ME does not effect any "extra" materials in the BOM. The "extra" materials tend to be the more expensive parts.
Putting those three together, you see that since the BPO owners can bring their goods to the market at a cheaper price than inventors. This gives them more room to lower their prices to get their goods sold.
Consider the other half of the market: the consumers.
4. Demand for specific items is inelastic. Changing the price of a Capacitor Recharger 2 by 200k or 500k will not make a consumer choose a different item instead. 5. There are a limited quantity of each T2 BPO in existance. Each BPO can only make a limited number of that specific item. Inventors can make a nearly unlimited quantity of any item they want.
This means that T2 items can be divided into two categories: those items with small demand which can be filled by T2 BPOs, and those items with large demand which need inventors in the market.
For small demand items, the price on the market will be (BPO Manufacturing Cost + profit). Different BPO owners 0.01 isk each other on the market until profit becomes a very small number and one of the BPO owners says, "Screw it, I'm not going to bother manufacturing any more for a while."
For large demand items, the price on the market will be (Invention Manufacturing Cost + profit). Different inventors 0.01 isk each other until profit becomes a very small number and the inventors find different items to build. Note, the BPO owners follow the cost on the market as well because they want to maximize their profit.
Now imagine BPOs disappeared. The demand for the first category of T2 items will be filled by inventors. Prices of these items rise to (Invention Manufacturing Cost + profit). Inventors will keep 0.01 isking each other until profit is a very small number. The profits for the second category of T2 items will remain unchanged.
Therefore, the existance of T2 BPOs has no net effect on the PROFITABILITY of invention. However, prices of a select number of times will rise due to the inefficiency of the invention process. Who benefits from the increased costs? Moon mining alliances. Oh, those are the people the OP thinks get preferential treatment from CCP!
T2 BPOs are the end game of manufacturing. For players who do not want to fly titans and supercarriers, they can spend their isk to collect T2 BPOs. I like the fact that collecting rare, no-longer-available items is an option in the sandbox.
Disclosure: I started the game after the lottery ended, and have never owned a T2 BPO. However, I do make quite a bit of isk each week by inventing.
|
|
Shoogie
Serious Pixels
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 17:52:00 -
[161] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:When 78% of a T2 item is producded by BPOsomething is broken. That means CCP gave 78% of that market to a few select players. While the rest of eve has to work like mad at 22%. This is broken it always has been. You do not understand the implications of this statistic.
If 78% of a T2 item are produced by BPO owners, that means it is a low demand and unprofitable item. If it were a profitable item, then inventors like me would be jumping in to fill the demand.
When I see that stat, I wonder who the 22% were? Are they roleplayers who simply want to be able to say they built their own ships and don't care that it cost them more? Or are they dumb inventors who decided to invent and manufacture this item before running the numbers and determining if it was profitable or not? |
Haulie Berry
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 18:59:00 -
[162] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
When 78% of a T2 item is producded by BPOsomething is broken. That means CCP gave 78% of that market to a few select players. While the rest of eve has to work like mad at 22%. This is broken it always has been.
Remove T2BPO or forever be reminded that no matter how hard you try at the end of the day CCP hand outs decide who is at the top particularly in T2BPO manufacture.
If BPOs were removed tomorrow, do you think you would be able to dive right into a new, highly lucrative 50mm Reinforced Steel Plates II market? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 19:01:00 -
[163] - Quote
Shoogie wrote:
When I see that stat, I wonder who the 22% were? Are they roleplayers who simply want to be able to say they built their own ships and don't care that it cost them more? Or are they dumb inventors who decided to invent and manufacture this item before running the numbers and determining if it was profitable or not?
I dont know wich item it is, but if its a commandship, one possible reason is that its prolly not getting build to make profit. eventually on a location where the ship is not available on market and the said person doesnt have the option to just got to high sec and grab of such items/ships. I bet most of these 22% are not getting traded in Jita.
But after reading Brewlar's arguments, I can easily imagine that some ppl are actually dumb enough to build them for profit,without running the numbers (correctly) |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
16
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 19:14:00 -
[164] - Quote
Shoogie wrote:You do not understand the implications of this statistic.
Oh, he understands it. It's been explained to him over and over again. He just doesn't like what that explanation means, so he ignores it. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 19:48:00 -
[165] - Quote
Gatan Hahran wrote:my neighbour got an iphone4. i cant afford one so they need to take it away from him.
My neighbor got an Iphone 12, I cant get it in this fair market so I should call Apple and have them take the stolen property back.
It would be BAD PRESS for apple if word got out that every one else is forced to buy lower end stuff while the rich .001% can get what wont come out for the next 12 years. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 20:24:00 -
[166] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Gatan Hahran wrote:my neighbour got an iphone4. i cant afford one so they need to take it away from him.
My neighbor got an Iphone 12, I cant get it in this fair market so I should call Apple and have them take the stolen property back. It would be BAD PRESS for apple if word got out that every one else is forced to buy lower end stuff while the rich .001% can get what wont come out for the next 12 years.
your neightbor has a better job than you so he can afford it but you cant. remove jobs? |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 21:16:00 -
[167] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Kara Books wrote:Gatan Hahran wrote:my neighbour got an iphone4. i cant afford one so they need to take it away from him.
My neighbor got an Iphone 12, I cant get it in this fair market so I should call Apple and have them take the stolen property back. It would be BAD PRESS for apple if word got out that every one else is forced to buy lower end stuff while the rich .001% can get what wont come out for the next 12 years. your neightbor has a better job than you so he can afford it but you cant. remove jobs?
ru serous? because im not sure.
(edited) I removed a not so funny pun about jobs |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
18
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 21:34:00 -
[168] - Quote
So you're saying if Apple could somehow produce a phone today that sold for $50,000 and did what a phone from a decade in the future could do for $500, we should protest its sale in the courts? Or at the very least, be unhappy with Apple for their pricing?
That's patently ridiculous. It's the opposite of what happens in reality. Expensive, ultra rare halo products increase brand awareness. Even when they're given away for free to wealthy playboys who could afford them anyways.
Talk sense, damnit. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 03:36:00 -
[169] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:So you're saying if Apple could somehow produce a phone today that sold for $50,000 and did what a phone from a decade in the future could do for $500, we should protest its sale in the courts? Or at the very least, be unhappy with Apple for their pricing?
That's patently ridiculous. It's the opposite of what happens in reality. Expensive, ultra rare halo products increase brand awareness. Even when they're given away for free to wealthy playboys who could afford them anyways.
Talk sense, damnit.
what exactly does real life money have to do with T2 BPO's? your argument is invalid.
the fact of the matter is, there was a short term raffle, where people where hand chosen, to receive something and the rest of the customers where not even allowed to complain about, well im complaining about exactly that.
(edit part) the problem can be rectified, the game will become more attractive to play and every one will be happy, including the T2 BPO holders. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
18
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 14:00:00 -
[170] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:what exactly does real life money have to do with T2 BPO's? your argument is invalid.
the fact of the matter is, there was a short term raffle, where people where hand chosen, to receive something and the rest of the customers where not even allowed to complain about, well im complaining about exactly that.
(edit part) the problem can be rectified, the game will become more attractive to play and every one will be happy, including the T2 BPO holders.
I have no idea. It makes as much sense as comparing them to imaginary super phones, I guess. |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 15:46:00 -
[171] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:
what exactly does real life money have to do with T2 BPO's? your argument is invalid.
it was you who brought up the IphoneG12 example, dont ask us.
Kara Books wrote: the fact of the matter is, there was a short term raffle, where people where hand chosen, to receive something and the rest of the customers where not even allowed to complain about, well im complaining about exactly that..
they won the lottery just as other ppl get lucky with a revenant BPC drop aswell.It was RANDOM who would get it.
YOU are just unhappy with your income and have to blame somebody else for that or cant bear that other player are somewhat more successfull than you. How can somebody have such a coll corp name and cry that much :S...deal with it
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
119
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 16:51:00 -
[172] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Kara Books wrote:
what exactly does real life money have to do with T2 BPO's? your argument is invalid.
it was you who brought up the IphoneG12 example, dont ask us. Kara Books wrote: the fact of the matter is, there was a short term raffle, where people where hand chosen, to receive something and the rest of the customers where not even allowed to complain about, well im complaining about exactly that..
they won the lottery just as other ppl get lucky with a revenant BPC drop aswell.It was RANDOM who would get it. YOU are just unhappy with your income and have to blame somebody else for that or cant bear that other player are somewhat more successfull than you. How can somebody have such a coll corp name and cry that much :S.. .deal with it
I dont count somebody's money, but I will stand up for myself and 99% of the fellow players, lets not become childish.
Giving T2 BPO holders the current Market value in return for the removal of T2 BPO's means several things. 1. Im 100% sure the T2 BPO holders will not complain, because after all they lose nothing.
2. They will know fellow T2 BPO holders will also be giving up the same thing, so they will not be placed into a position where they would have an unfair disadvantage.
What is the point of arguing when I can understand that you have given lots of planning and thought to the T2 BPO strategy you can or are using, you do not want to think of anything other then holding onto some kind of an easy button.
every one just wants to take it away from you, in fact its NOT you or any other PERSON who owns tech 2 blueprint originals, its T2 BPO's that need to be replaced with New, Market friendly, creative and fun for every one solutions. |
Katerwaul
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 16:57:00 -
[173] - Quote
If you want to moan about how the T2 BPOs were handled & the terrible wrongs of them it should be taken to the Crime & Punishment forum. But the Crime & Punishment forum would require that the complaints have relevance and it's well past the point of relevance and into the territory of "feeling sorry for yourself". How dare life not be fair?
If you want to complain about how T2 BPOs shouldn't be in the game it should be taken to the Suggestions & Ideas forum. But the Suggestions & Idea forum doesn't bother feeling sorry for itself and it's residents would descend upon such a thread like so many angry magpies upon an ill-tempered cat. You can hiss and spit all you'd like, but they'll still drive you off.
I'm horribly disappointed that so much good sarcasm was so deeply buried in a forum post that should already be dead.
All "T2 BPO" posts are troll feed as far as I'm concerned. The most important thing these posts do is continue to provide a place for an old wound to fester & putrefy. They don't belong in the Science & Industry forum. Working with everyone to improve New Eden -- Internet Spaceships Iz Serious Business. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 17:06:00 -
[174] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:
every one just wants to take it away from you, in fact its NOT you or any other PERSON who owns tech 2 blueprint originals, its T2 BPO's that need to be replaced with New, Market friendly, creative and fun for every one solutions.
Tbh, I dont see that many complaining, just those who do are over the top loud. Compared to the ~1200 different T2 BPO owners the majority seems to be quite happy as it is.
Your idea, of taking away T2 BPO-¦s for their current value isnt that bad as such (at least T2 owners couldnt complain) but its fairly impossible for CCP to do that. It would be a full time job for them to calculate for every T2 BPO in the game a fair value, because its not that easy for Items that sometimes didnt got traded fro years. If they would have to deal with that, im afraid they wouldnt have time to deal with much more importnat stuff. |
Reverend Cletis
Synister Mynisters
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 17:33:00 -
[175] - Quote
Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
65
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 18:46:00 -
[176] - Quote
Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated.
I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 11:35:00 -
[177] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard.
lol your so funny
eve is gonna die because of t2 bpos....lmfao
earn some isk through invention and go buy one if you are so hooked on the idea there that special CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 12:28:00 -
[178] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard. lol your so funny eve is gonna die because of t2 bpos....lmfao earn some isk through invention and go buy one if you are so hooked on the idea there that special
Eh I never suggested eve will die because of T2BPO but people will not stop complaining about them untill they are either removed or EVE stops. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 12:31:00 -
[179] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard. lol your so funny eve is gonna die because of t2 bpos....lmfao earn some isk through invention and go buy one if you are so hooked on the idea there that special Eh I never suggested eve will die because of T2BPO but people will not stop complaining about them untill they are either removed or EVE stops.
its seams that only you are moaning about them. CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
119
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 14:33:00 -
[180] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard. lol your so funny eve is gonna die because of t2 bpos....lmfao earn some isk through invention and go buy one if you are so hooked on the idea there that special Eh I never suggested eve will die because of T2BPO but people will not stop complaining about them untill they are either removed or EVE stops. its seams that only you are moaning about them.
Its pretty obvious there are 20 or so people offering constructive input while 5 or so (alts?) people are desperately trying to hold onto their unfair disadvantage by trolling a thread with comments like "Moaning" this isnt a forum about ****, and the childish insults only further point out to disrespectful and irresponsible hands that hold onto Tech 2 Blueprint originals. |
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 14:57:00 -
[181] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:
Its pretty obvious there are 20 or so people offering constructive input while 5 or so (alts?) people are desperately trying to hold onto their unfair disadvantage by trolling a thread with comments like "Moaning" this isnt a forum about ****, and the childish insults only further point out to disrespectful and irresponsible hands that hold onto Tech 2 Blueprint originals.
its only an unfair advantage(i take it you ment advantage, not disadvantage) if was impossible to get hold of they.. but you can, anyone can. the sales forum is full of them.
isnt it disrespectful to the people that worked hard in game to buy them(like anyone can) just to get them removed due to a few peoples inability to put in the same hard work? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 16:54:00 -
[182] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Its pretty obvious there are 20 or so people offering constructive input while 5 or so (alts?) people are desperately trying to hold onto their unfair disadvantage by trolling a thread with comments like "Moaning" this isnt a forum about ****, and the childish insults only further point out to disrespectful and irresponsible hands that hold onto Tech 2 Blueprint originals.
Oh god, you're killing me. I nearly died. Please, stop it.
Clearly, it's ludicrous to imagine that people that don't own T2 BPO's have examined the facts and find them completely inoffensive. Forum alts is the only thing that makes sense. Because otherwise, it would mean that there could be something flawed in your own interpretation. Maybe there's something you missed or just don't quite understand. And that would mean that all these people are dropping hints vis-a-vis the relative sharpness of certains tools and sheds because just maybe, to people in possession of all their faculties, you come off as petulant cry babies, idiots, or both.
No, couldn't be. Must be alts. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 18:05:00 -
[183] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: people are desperately trying to hold onto their unfair disadvantage by trolling a thread with comments like "Moaning" this isnt a forum about ****, and the childish insults only further point out to disrespectful and irresponsible hands that hold onto Tech 2 Blueprint originals.
do you think this is:
A: constructive dispassionate input fort the current siutation or B: more or less the definiton of "moaning"
Quote:unfair disadvantage joke aside that you meant advantage, please do me a favour and explain exactly, why it is "unfair" to own a T2 BPO or purchase one. And again, please drop the idea that only chosen people got elected to own them, they are fairly traded goods on the open market. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
121
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 19:38:00 -
[184] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Kara Books wrote:
Its pretty obvious there are 20 or so people offering constructive input while 5 or so (alts?) people are desperately trying to hold onto their unfair disadvantage by trolling a thread with comments like "Moaning" this isnt a forum about ****, and the childish insults only further point out to disrespectful and irresponsible hands that hold onto Tech 2 Blueprint originals.
its only an unfair advantage(i take it you ment advantage, not disadvantage) if was impossible to get hold of they.. but you can, anyone can. the sales forum is full of them. isnt it disrespectful to the people that worked hard in game to buy them(like anyone can) just to get them removed due to a few peoples inability to put in the same hard work?
Yes that was a typo on my end, apologies.
I also worry that reimbursing such valuable items, not to mention the headache of transporting them (the original owners had/have/will have to bear) would not be a simple matter, if the dev's do consider actually taking this step seriously they must first and formost make sure the time and care is taken to carefully consider every one.
This may indeed be a hot topic, in terms of strong beliefs, but its definitely not something small to toy with considering the great impact of T2 BPO's on the EvE economy, simply putting them in or simply taking them out must be planned out from multiple perspectives, from Social to multiple levels within the economy, I.E. alliance infrastructure, impact on Industrial aspects and the consumer of the final product.
It may just come down to one question, is such a large undertaking worth the benefits?
(edited to correct grammar) |
sodney
Corporation 3237801
12
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 20:52:00 -
[185] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: This may indeed be a hot topic,
This is indeed not a hot topic, it is rather deep-frozen. CCP hasn`t ever mentioned anything about removing them in the past 7 years, nor will ever do in the future. I would bet any isk-cent I have on that.
So keep crying or deal with it. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 00:35:00 -
[186] - Quote
sodney wrote:Kara Books wrote: This may indeed be a hot topic,
This is indeed not a hot topic, it is rather deep-frozen. CCP hasn`t ever mentioned anything about removing them in the past 7 years, nor will ever do in the future. I would bet any isk-cent I have on that. So keep crying or deal with it.
Yeah but T2BPO is a bad advert for eve it goes against everything that CCP states the game is. It is good to keep T2BPO in the spot light to show potential subscritptions and other partys that they exist. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 09:13:00 -
[187] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:sodney wrote:Kara Books wrote: This may indeed be a hot topic,
This is indeed not a hot topic, it is rather deep-frozen. CCP hasn`t ever mentioned anything about removing them in the past 7 years, nor will ever do in the future. I would bet any isk-cent I have on that. So keep crying or deal with it. Yeah but T2BPO is a bad advert for eve it goes against everything that CCP states the game is. It is good to keep T2BPO in the spot light to show potential subscritptions and other partys that they exist.
it shows everything that is right in eve.
'if you work you can achive what only a few can, you can own pieces of a long rich history, you can do it all. EVE'
i should work in marketing, not really a fan of coke though, hurts my nose CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 12:46:00 -
[188] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:sodney wrote:Kara Books wrote: This may indeed be a hot topic,
This is indeed not a hot topic, it is rather deep-frozen. CCP hasn`t ever mentioned anything about removing them in the past 7 years, nor will ever do in the future. I would bet any isk-cent I have on that. So keep crying or deal with it. Yeah but T2BPO is a bad advert for eve it goes against everything that CCP states the game is. It is good to keep T2BPO in the spot light to show potential subscritptions and other partys that they exist. it shows everything that is right in eve. 'if you work you can achive what only a few can, you can own pieces of a long rich history, you can do it all. EVE' i should work in marketing, not really a fan of coke though, hurts my nose
If you work hard by knowing a dev you can get stuff given to you for free? If you work hard enought knowing a dev you can have the workings of an illigitimate lottery given to you?
At no point has anyone worked hard to be gifted a T2BPO lets just clear that up right now. Yes a few people did work hard and bought them with ISK from an EVE pet player, Kudos to them, they will be refunded their loss if t2bpo are to be removed. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 13:59:00 -
[189] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
At no point has anyone worked hard to be gifted a T2BPO lets just clear that up right now.
Lets clear it up that you have clearly not been aorund playing this game when that happaned because its just wrong. despite whatever rumours you might have picked up,nobody has ever recieved a gifted T2 BPo from a dev (plz dont bring up the old and already corrected story about a Sabre BPO and BoB)
If you realy think that is the issue you think to have right now and Dev`s would risk their job to give certain players an advantage, you might aswell look for a different game.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Yeah but T2BPO is a bad advert for eve it goes against everything that CCP states the game is. It is good to keep T2BPO in the spot light to show potential subscritptions and other partys that they exist.
please explain to me what Eve stand for then. reset any advantage players managed to earn them selves over years of playing? |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
218
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 14:45:00 -
[190] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:sodney wrote:Kara Books wrote: This may indeed be a hot topic,
This is indeed not a hot topic, it is rather deep-frozen. CCP hasn`t ever mentioned anything about removing them in the past 7 years, nor will ever do in the future. I would bet any isk-cent I have on that. So keep crying or deal with it. Yeah but T2BPO is a bad advert for eve it goes against everything that CCP states the game is. It is good to keep T2BPO in the spot light to show potential subscritptions and other partys that they exist. it shows everything that is right in eve. 'if you work you can achive what only a few can, you can own pieces of a long rich history, you can do it all. EVE' i should work in marketing, not really a fan of coke though, hurts my nose At no point has anyone worked hard to be gifted a T2BPO lets just clear that up right now. Yes a few people did work hard and bought them with ISK from an EVE pet player, Kudos to them, they will be refunded their loss if t2bpo are to be removed.
reread what you wrote..... at no point did anyone work hard........ yes a few worked hard...
you make me lol in rl, little troll you. CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
67
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 16:33:00 -
[191] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
At no point has anyone worked hard to be gifted a T2BPO lets just clear that up right now.
Lets clear it up that you have clearly not been aorund playing this game when that happaned because its just wrong. despite whatever rumours you might have picked up,nobody has ever recieved a gifted T2 BPo from a dev (plz dont bring up the old and already corrected story about a Sabre BPO and BoB) If you realy think that is the issue you think to have right now and Dev`s would risk their job to give certain players an advantage, you might aswell look for a different game. Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Yeah but T2BPO is a bad advert for eve it goes against everything that CCP states the game is. It is good to keep T2BPO in the spot light to show potential subscritptions and other partys that they exist.
please explain to me what Eve stand for then. reset any advantage players managed to earn them selves over years of playing?
Yes because lets all deny that T20 ever happened or that people were given T2BPO for nothing. Lets pretend that they never dropped from Rats during events aimed at certain players. Lets all live in lala land where T2BPO is fair and the players that have been gifted them somehow worked for them and the fact that they can not be stolen and never expire is not a problem at all. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 18:45:00 -
[192] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yes because lets all deny that T20 ever happened or that people were given T2BPO for nothing -T20 was a guy, not a Event, plus it got corrected already, as I said. research better
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Lets pretend that they never dropped from Rats during events aimed at certain players -lower BPO-¦s dropped from rats but were not aimed to certain people
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:the fact that they can not be stolen -T2 BPO-¦s can be stolen, and it happaned already numerous times
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:and never expire is not a problem at all. -t1 BPO`s don't expire aswell, ban them right? |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
121
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 19:29:00 -
[193] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yes because lets all deny that T20 ever happened or that people were given T2BPO for nothing -T20 was a guy, not a Event, plus it got corrected already, as I said. research better Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Lets pretend that they never dropped from Rats during events aimed at certain players -lower BPO-¦s dropped from rats but were not aimed to certain people Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:the fact that they can not be stolen -T2 BPO-¦s can be stolen, and it happaned already numerous times Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:and never expire is not a problem at all. -t1 BPO`s don't expire aswell, ban them right?
T2 BPO's can be replaced with Research.
Tell us Why are T2 BPO's important? What makes them better then Research that would involve the 100% (99%+1%)
Whats good do T2 BPO's bring me, my friend over there and the rest of eve online? |
Kakaka Bukandara
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 03:17:00 -
[194] - Quote
CCP did create invention in order to generate T2 production. Now that people can generate T2 BPCs, it's appropriate that the originals should be removed and T2 production require inventn for everyone. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 04:25:00 -
[195] - Quote
Kakaka Bukandara wrote:CCP did create invention in order to generate T2 production. Now that people can generate T2 BPCs, it's appropriate that the originals should be removed and T2 production require inventn for everyone.
happy first post ! ...bit obvious but I appreciate the effort.
Quote:Whats good do T2 BPO's bring me, my friend over there and the rest of eve online?
To you? Since you dont own one, not much besides slightly cheaper T2 ships/mods.
Also since they are already in the game, it clearly doesnt matter why we should "bring" them in, rather what it would cost to remove them. The Answer is apparently "too much" wich everyone (including CCP) seems to get but you two in this thread ;)
|
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
76
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 15:31:00 -
[196] - Quote
Get rid of them without reimbursement, imo.
They shouldn't exist in the game while invention also exists in the game. Either make T2 BPOs available on the market just like T1 BPOs are, or else get rid of all of them and have done with it. If T2 BPO owners believe that it's unfair to go without reimbursement, they need to take a long hard look in the mirror. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Haulie Berry
26
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 15:36:00 -
[197] - Quote
Mechael wrote:Get rid of them without reimbursement, imo.
They shouldn't exist in the game while invention also exists in the game. Either make T2 BPOs available on the market just like T1 BPOs are, or else get rid of all of them and have done with it. If T2 BPO owners believe that it's unfair to go without reimbursement, they need to take a long hard look in the mirror.
I think this guy's entire NAV should be arbitrarily deleted because his avatar is ugly. If he doesn't like that, he needs to take a long hard look in the mirror. |
VaMei
Meafi Corp
154
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 17:24:00 -
[198] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:rather what it would cost to remove them. The Answer is apparently "too much" wich everyone (including CCP) seems to get but you two in this thread ;)
What is would cost is the trust hi-end investors place in the future value of their investments. It's bad enough when high value items get nerfed by needed gameplay changes (e.g. the effect of the super cap nerfs on the investments on manufacturers, pilots & character sales), but to outright remove something of high value from the game? There's a load of trust being flushed down the drain to do that, and every investor out there is going to be wary of any future investment of time & money. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1069
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 17:46:00 -
[199] - Quote
Copy-pasting ALMOST the exact same reply made in the other "T2 BPOs are evil" thread, with a couple of additions
...
First rule of EVE : EVE IS INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED TO BE UNFAIR TO SOME DEGREE. The particular complaint regarding the mere continued existence of T2 BPOs characterizing them as "unfair to exist" is very much akin to complaining that suicide-ganking is allowed, or that 100 battleships can attack a single freighter at the same time if they want to.
The question of whether T2 BPOs are "unfair" is a wholly irrelevant one, as they're SUPPOSED to grant some advantage. And they do. Besides, it's NOT really an unfair advantage, just like suicide-ganking or alpha-ing is not an unfair advantage either (at least within the bounds of allowed and even desired EVE advantages).
Invention was NOT supposed to completely and utterly REPLACE the T2 BPOs, just supplement them wherever a need existed. And they did that spectacularly well, or don't you remember 30 mil T2 cap rechargers or 700 mil Hulks back when all moongoo was stupidly cheap ? For newer items, they could be made to be the only source, so they were. That's not acknowledging T2 BPOs are bad, that's just acknowledging there's no good way to distribute NEW ONES without much scandal.
...
The relevant questions are: 1) Would the game improve by ONLY removing T2 BPOs and changing nothing else ? *1b) For whom ? *1c) And for how long ? 2) How exactly do you plan to compensate current T2 BPO owners for the loss of the BPO in case of a removal ? *2b) If you say no reimbursement, how would you feel if a large portion of your NAV was wiped out just because somebody else felt it's not ok for you to have it ? *2c) Would you differentiate between lottery winners and current owners that purchased them (and how) ? *2d) How would that reimbursement affect the rest of the economy (domino effect) ? 3) What else (other than touching anything regarding T2 BPOs) can be done to improve the game in the areas people seem to be complaining about when they ask for a removal of T2 BPOs ? *3b) Would improvements in the output of invention (runs, ME/PE levels) in certain conditions not be more appropriate instead ? *3c) How about an uncapping of all moongoo production from the fixed max level we're currently living with ?
Also, this : http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1360780 The horse has been beaten to death, cloned, beaten to death again, reanimated and beaten to death again so many times it's not even funny anymore. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 02:16:00 -
[200] - Quote
With the planned changes to moon mining and data cores CCP has the perfect opportunity to either remove T2BPO or just make them irrelevant by buffing invention to exceed T2BPO in ME. Hopefully T2BPO's get the long needed nerf or removal finally. |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1070
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 03:41:00 -
[201] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:remove T2BPO No.
Quote:or just make them irrelevant by buffing invention to exceed T2BPO in ME. Yes, to some degree anyway.
All they really need to do is buff base invention values to 0/0 ME/PE, let T1 BPC ME/PE levels influence T2 BPC ME/PE levels (at, say, 1/20 strength) and buff chance of invention success, number of runs and decryptor bonuses, then add new ways to obtain moongoo that depend on player invested time rather than territory held.
...
What would you want to bet they're not buffing invention at all, nor removing any T2 BPOs ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 11:31:00 -
[202] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:With the planned changes to moon mining and data cores CCP has the perfect opportunity to either remove T2BPO or just make them irrelevant by buffing invention to exceed T2BPO in ME. Hopefully T2BPO's get the long needed nerf or removal finally.
it has just nothing to do with each other so it is not a better oportunity. Also Datacores are gona cost isk wich will make T2 BPO`s even more powerfull, eventually.So yea CCP totaly cares about T2 BPO`s, heh.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO's get the long needed nerf or removal finally.
never give up a pointless war! |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1070
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 12:38:00 -
[203] - Quote
I wonder if he'll actually address my last 2 post on the previous page :P http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 13:07:00 -
[204] - Quote
Never mind laughing down all the cockamamie ideas proposed to recall or void BPO's, or improve the ME of invention. Such proposals are naive in the extreme and would actually do more harm than good to invention as a source of income. The reality is the proponents of such ideas are just flat out incapable of grasping why they're wrong. But let's pretend they'r right.
Instead, here's why T2 BPO's are an excellent feature of Eve and aught to remain in the game for their own sake.
Eve isn't like most games. You can really spend some time executing a plan. The ceiling is so high that it can take years for an enterprise to reach its goal. That's amazing! I can't think of another game that even attempts that, let alone approaches the same level of success in achieving it.
T2 BPO's exist to provide one such long term goal for people who enjoy industry. They're not really there for people who just want to generate ISK for a PLEX every month or to pay for their PVP. They represent a hefty investment just so that a single production line makes a couple hundred thousand more ISK an hour. There are any number of things the junior and intermediate industrialist can do that provide a better result in less time than saving up for a BPO.
If you took T2 BPO's out, the game would be a lot less interesting. Not only for the people who played and planed for ages in order to acquire one, but also for the people who wish to in their own future endeavors. There are any number of games where anybody who spends a month or two getting to level cap is on equal footing with the rest of the server. The long term goal of an extremely rare asset like a T2 BPO is one of the unique and integral selling points of Eve. Never mind how they got here in the first place. Even if they were specifically gifted to Eve's most prominent players, those players didn't reach such status by grinding rats and missions for a couple of months. If you're 100% right that just means they used cunning and back room deals and bribery to secure a handful of amazing assets. What other game would let you even contemplate such a strategy?
Even if we cede all your points, and agree completely that they are over powered money faucets, were handed out for free by corrupt game developers to their favorite cronies, and distort the economy to such a huge extent that whole segments of the market are off limits to inventors as a result, T2 BPO's would still be an awesome thing to have in the game.
If you took them out just so that anybody who's trained up a month's worth of skills and saved a pittance in seed money can play the industry game at its maximum level, Eve would be a blander, less exciting, less attractive game. The fact that the arguments put forward in favor of removing BPO's are total bunk doesn't even matter.
They're here. They're awesome. You don't have one. Get used to it. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 13:25:00 -
[205] - Quote
''T2 BPO's exist to provide one such long term goal for people who enjoy industry. They're not really there for people who just want to generate ISK for a PLEX every month or to pay for their PVP. They represent a hefty investment just so that a single production line makes a couple hundred thousand more ISK an hour. There are any number of things the junior and intermediate industrialist can do that provide a better result in less time than saving up for a BPO.''
Well CCP should not have given them out to their friends and pet corp/allinces then and actually made them something to work for, sadly they did not. Remove T2BPO fix industry make it a sandbox game. |
Reverend Cletis
Synister Mynisters
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 13:33:00 -
[206] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard.
Thanks man.
Good to know that the whiners still cba to get off their backsides to go out and earn enough to get a T2 bpo or just STFU and quit being Entitlement Babies.
MeMeMeMeMe Whaaaaaaa!
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 13:44:00 -
[207] - Quote
Reverend Cletis wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard. Thanks man. Good to know that the whiners still cba to get off their backsides to go out and earn enough to get a T2 bpo or just STFU and quit being Entitlement Babies. MeMeMeMeMe Whaaaaaaa!
Earn enougth what? Sorry how much do T2BPO cost orginally oh yeah sweet nothing except knowing a CCP Dev. OK can I have some sweet CCP Dev love in the form of gifted T2BPO. Cry cry cry.
STFU |
Reverend Cletis
Synister Mynisters
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 13:50:00 -
[208] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Would someone be kind enough to wake me up when these inane T2bpo whine threads stop?
Much appreciated. I will send you a PM when they are removed or when EVE online finnaly goes to the MMO graveyard. Thanks man. Good to know that the whiners still cba to get off their backsides to go out and earn enough to get a T2 bpo or just STFU and quit being Entitlement Babies. MeMeMeMeMe Whaaaaaaa! Earn enougth what? Sorry how much do T2BPO cost orginally oh yeah sweet nothing except knowing a CCP Dev. OK can I have some sweet CCP Dev love in the form of gifted T2BPO. Cry cry cry. STFU
--------> Location of forums where T2 BPO's are sold <------- Location of wallet that shows how many iskies you have.
When Wallet > T2 BPO cost. Purchase. Win \o/!
Akita T, you have to have saintly patience to deal with the constant harping on this issue. You have my respect.
I think I shall have to purchase as many T2 BPO's as I can regardless of any sort of profitability. Just cause I can. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1071
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 14:14:00 -
[209] - Quote
Reverend Cletis wrote:Akita T, you have to have saintly patience to deal with the constant harping on this issue. You have my respect. TBQFH, I'm kind of busy right now trying to balance an entire game economic system, and I'm using the EVE-O forums as a break in-between datacrunching sessions... you know what they say, when you hit a speedbump, get back to the well-known basics for a while to clear your head...
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Well CCP should not have given them out to their friends and pet corp/allinces then and actually made them something to work for, sadly they did not. Remove T2BPO fix industry make it a sandbox game. Do you even know what actually happened then ? It was something like 10 T2 BPOs (not very good ones either) out of over 10000 total, they were removed as soon as they were discovered and thrown back in the lottery pool, and people involved were punished. Or if you mean those early Miner II BPOs, those were also minuscule numbers, and the lottery was introduced instead to avoid exactly the type of careless accusations you've just spouted. Get your facts straight. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 14:18:00 -
[210] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Well CCP should not have given them out to their friends and pet corp/allinces then and actually made them something to work for, sadly they did not. Remove T2BPO fix industry make it a sandbox game.
If certain corps are 'pets' it's because they spent uncountable man hours to get that way. So that's just awesome that you can succeed so much at this game you effectively become a sleazy, corrupt, fat cat gangster. And if certain players got theirs through personal, social contacts that's also awesome. I started playing Eve after hearing people talk excitedly about the Machiavellian plots and intrigues that went on completely outside of the game in order to pull off a major coup within it. That's awesome. Both things you're complaining about are awesome. You take them away, you don't have Eve anymore. You make the game less of a sandbox and more like Space Ships: Online. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 16:00:00 -
[211] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Reverend Cletis wrote:Akita T, you have to have saintly patience to deal with the constant harping on this issue. You have my respect. TBQFH, I'm kind of busy right now trying to balance an entire game economic system, and I'm using the EVE-O forums as a break in-between datacrunching sessions... you know what they say, when you hit a speedbump, get back to the well-known basics for a while to clear your head... Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Well CCP should not have given them out to their friends and pet corp/allinces then and actually made them something to work for, sadly they did not. Remove T2BPO fix industry make it a sandbox game. Do you even know what actually happened then ? It was something like 10 T2 BPOs (not very good ones either) out of over 10000 total, they were removed as soon as they were discovered and thrown back in the lottery pool, and people involved were punished. Or if you mean those early Miner II BPOs, those were also minuscule numbers, and the lottery was introduced instead to avoid exactly the type of careless accusations you've just spouted. Get your facts straight.
So details of the lottery were never leaked including how many T2BPO's and how many tickets were in each one? Oh you forgot to mention that Akita how careless of yourself.
Remove T2BPO make eve real a sandbox community instead of a game where CCP drop massive benefits into allince's pockets to shape the game in a way they see fit. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
123
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 16:09:00 -
[212] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Kakaka Bukandara wrote:CCP did create invention in order to generate T2 production. Now that people can generate T2 BPCs, it's appropriate that the originals should be removed and T2 production require inventn for everyone. happy first post ! ...bit obvious but I appreciate the effort. Quote:Whats good do T2 BPO's bring me, my friend over there and the rest of eve online? To you? Since you dont own one, not much besides slightly cheaper T2 ships/mods. Also since they are already in the game, it clearly doesnt matter why we should "bring" them in, rather what it would cost to remove them. The Answer is apparently "too much" wich everyone (including CCP) seems to get but you two in this thread ;)
Exactly I don't own one because I don't manufacture anything, im perfectly happy buying up everything and relisting at a higher price, Don't need them to be profitable, but it would be nice if those certain T2 BPO owners would go away I would make a whole lot more ISK if 1000 stacks didn't just appear within 48 hours cutting off my profit margin.
Merchants would definitely benefit from the removal of T2 BPO's and Most definitely benefit from NPC seeded T2 BPC's (more stuff to sell) |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 16:25:00 -
[213] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:
Merchants would definitely benefit from the removal of T2 BPO's and Most definitely benefit from NPC seeded T2 BPC's (more stuff to sell)
hahaha wich NPC T2 BPC drops? you mean those rig T2 BPC`s you can get from the radar sites, right? well sorry son, but there are no T2 Rig BPO`s in the game you can comnplain about.
Just to get it right, you admintting that your not an industrialist and have actually no clue about it, but you would like to remove the T2 BPO`s including their owners just becuase they are competition or bad for your business??! And thats the reason for all this moaning?
fair enoughjavascript:if (typeof posting=='undefined'||posting!=true) {posting=true;__doPostBack('forum$ctl00$PostReply','');} |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1071
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 16:56:00 -
[214] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:So details of the lottery were never leaked including how many T2BPO's and how many tickets were in each one? And what EXACTLY are you trying to insinuate with THAT anyway ? Care to be a bit more specific in your aimless allegations ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
261
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 17:34:00 -
[215] - Quote
Why do people continue to bump this thread? You all realize he's one of the best trolls of all time or a complete noob that has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Why bother wasting the time trying to convince him of anything? He clearly doesn't have the intellectual capacity for objective thought or enough schooling to conclude he might agree with you. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 17:40:00 -
[216] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: So details of the lottery were never leaked including how many T2BPO's and how many tickets were in each one? Oh you forgot to mention that Akita how careless of yourself.
Remove T2BPO make eve real a sandbox community instead of a game where CCP drop massive benefits into allince's pockets to shape the game in a way they see fit.
If an organization used their networks to gather intelligence on how to best acquire an asset, that's playing smart. That's maximizing your likelihood of success using all the tools you have available. So what if it's cheating? Being able to cheat is part of what makes Eve awesome.
You say major alliances receive preferential treatment. What actually happens is major alliances work long and hard to put themselves in a position of power and reap the rewards. What sort of a sandbox would you like? One where wealth and power are meaningless? Where holding all the cards means you're just as likely to succeed as the next guy? Eve is uniquely awesome because as much goes on outside of the game as inside. If you couldn't use your digital wealth and power to garner social, diplomatic support, to garner more wealth and power, it wouldn't be Eve. You're complaining about this game's best feature. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 17:43:00 -
[217] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Why do people continue to bump this thread? You all realize he's one of the best trolls of all time or a complete noob that has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Why bother wasting the time trying to convince him of anything? He clearly doesn't have the intellectual capacity for objective thought or enough schooling to conclude he might agree with you.
Build times are long, and something about posting in this thread is as satisfying as scratching an itch. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
261
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 17:50:00 -
[218] - Quote
Lol fair enough. I wouldn't mind podding this guy a few times actually. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Ame Umida
MunchkinWarriors Omega Vector
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 20:53:00 -
[219] - Quote
Can a GM PLEASE lock this thread? It is useless and is a waste of time and accomplishes nothing. Thank you! |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
77
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 08:46:00 -
[220] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:If you took T2 BPO's out, the game would be a lot more interesting.
Fixed that for you. T2 BPOs (and blueprints in general) are something that can be used without any risk, unlike every other item in the game. Rare/unique ships/modules/etc must be undocked, and therefore put at risk, to use. For something as valuable as a T2 BPO this is unacceptable. Really, it's unacceptable for anything in EVE, regardless of value.
If stations were destructible, on the other hand, I might not be complaining. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1073
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 09:14:00 -
[221] - Quote
Mechael wrote:T2 BPOs (and blueprints in general) are something that can be used without any risk, unlike every other item in the game. Rare/unique ships/modules/etc must be undocked, and therefore put at risk, to use. For something as valuable as a T2 BPO this is unacceptable. Really, it's unacceptable for anything in EVE, regardless of value. If stations were destructible, on the other hand, I might not be complaining. Let me get this straight - you're saying you don't like the idea of blueprints in general, regardless of whether they are BPCs or BPOs, be it T2, T1, capital or T3 ? Only a handful of T2 BPOs are noticeably more valuable than, say, a titan BPO, so your "unacceptable" comment must almost certainly first extend to supercap BPOs and only then to the rest of the less valuable T2 BPOs, no ? You still don't need to advocate a removal of T2 BPOs for that, as it would only be a partial solution to what you claim you can identify as a problem.
IF you are truly serious about that (it's irrelevant whether I agree or disagree with your position), you would be better served in advocating a removal of allowed item types for NPC manufacture/research slots, making production in a POS for most items a must. I would say you would probably want to only allow T1 item and T2 component (not T2 item) manufacture in those NPC lines, with all T2 items, capital components and capital ships (freighters included) requiring a POS. Then you can further advocate that blueprints need to be at the EXACT location of the manufacture/research (as opposed to sitting safely in a station's corp hangar in the same system) so that they ARE being put "in harm's way".
I wonder what kind of support you'd be getting for that. I suspect it would be minimal. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
74
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 10:56:00 -
[222] - Quote
I think T2BPO's and BPO's in general should have to be unlocked to allow their use. This would be great nerf to T2BPO as it would allow them to be easily stolen by other corp members. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1073
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 12:40:00 -
[223] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I think T2BPO's and BPO's in general should have to be unlocked to allow their use. This would be great nerf to T2BPO as it would allow them to be easily stolen by other corp members. Based only on your unjustified and blind hatred of them, no doubt, because you have repeatedly failed to make any serious logical arguments as to why anything you suggest would be better for anybody in particular as opposed to simply providing you with schadenfreude.
And again, before you can accuse me of self-interest because god forbid I might have hell knows how many of mine... I can EASILY afford quite a few if I wanted to buy some, just check my wallet : http://eveboard.com/pilot/Akita_T I don't have any T2 BPOs, neither does my corp. I don't plan on getting any either. I don't want to be bothered with using them. I make more ISK with far less hassle and effort. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 13:02:00 -
[224] - Quote
Mechael wrote:Salo Aldeland wrote:If you took T2 BPO's out, the game would be a lot more interesting. Fixed that for you. T2 BPOs (and blueprints in general) are something that can be used without any risk, unlike every other item in the game. Rare/unique ships/modules/etc must be undocked, and therefore put at risk, to use. For something as valuable as a T2 BPO this is unacceptable. Really, it's unacceptable for anything in EVE, regardless of value. If stations were destructible, on the other hand, I might not be complaining.
it is litteraly getting ridiculous now, why the hekk should it be against the "eve philosophy" that certain items dont get blown up that much. This would be a totally different discusion anyways, because it applies to any BPO, not just the few T2 BPO`s. Besides that any BPO can get destroyed when they get moved. Do you hate station containers aswell? Also rare ships totally dont have to be undocked, and nobody does it in reality (virtuality).
honestly, without repeating over and over again the same statements (or political campaign slogans in Friend Brewlar's case) please lock this thread, at least beacase there is another "I hate T2 BPO" thread up already. |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
77
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 13:03:00 -
[225] - Quote
Akita T wrote: Let me get this straight - you're saying you don't like the idea of blueprints in general, regardless of whether they are BPCs or BPOs, be it T2, T1, capital or T3 ? Only a handful of T2 BPOs are noticeably more valuable than, say, a titan BPO, so your "unacceptable" comment must almost certainly first extend to supercap BPOs and only then to the rest of the less valuable T2 BPOs, no ? You still don't need to advocate a removal of T2 BPOs for that, as it would only be a partial solution to what you claim you can identify as a problem.
IF you are truly serious about that (it's irrelevant whether I agree or disagree with your position), you would be better served in advocating a removal of allowed item types for NPC manufacture/research slots, making production in a POS for most items a must. I would say you would probably want to only allow T1 item and T2 component (not T2 item) manufacture in those NPC lines, with all T2 items, capital components and capital ships (freighters included) requiring a POS. Then you can further advocate that blueprints need to be at the EXACT location of the manufacture/research (as opposed to sitting safely in a station's corp hangar in the same system) so that they ARE being put "in harm's way".
I wonder what kind of support you'd be getting for that. I suspect it would be minimal.
Pretty much this, yes. POS mechanics would need a lot of changing to make something like that work. But this is off-topic for this thread, even if somewhat related.
My only real problem with T2 BPOs stems from the fact that they are both unique and unassailable. It's something that gives an advantage (whether the advantage is slight or significant is a matter of perspective and largely irrelevant,) and cannot be forced away from the owner. This is no good.
The underlying issue, though, lies at the heart of EVE's industry in general. It's too safe, and is by and large done almost entirely while AFK. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1075
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 14:06:00 -
[226] - Quote
Mechael wrote:My only real problem with T2 BPOs stems from the fact that they are both unique and unassailable. It's something that gives an advantage (whether the advantage is slight or significant is a matter of perspective and largely irrelevant,) and cannot be forced away from the owner. This is no good. But that's NOT a problem you have with T2 BPOs, it's one you have with ALL blueprints regardless of type. In an argument regarding the removal of T2 BPOs, that line of thought is ridiculous, because if you would agree to the solution of T2 BPO removal as a valid fix, continuing the same logic, you would need to remove ALL OTHER blueprints too.
Quote:The underlying issue, though, lies at the heart of EVE's industry in general. It's too safe, and is by and large done almost entirely while AFK. I fail to see why that has to be viewed as a bad thing. Do you have something against NOT needing to grind while still earning a living ? Safe and needs very little work, you say... if people would really feel that way, it would also pay only a pittance. Obviously, industrial characters aren't exactly poor, so there's an assumption that's not quite correct in there somewhere (or at least a missing one, one you haven't mentioned yet). I posit that the lost assumption is the one regarding RoI and minimal investment levels, and changes the whole dynamic enough to render it not really a problem anymore. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
74
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 15:18:00 -
[227] - Quote
Exactly I don't have a problem with unique ships. As unique ships are unable to completely upset gameplay. If CCP how ever did release a ship that had 100% resistances and let players use it destroy other peoples eve gameplay I would campaign to have it removed.
As such T2BPO does ruin inventors profit and before you come out with some crap about it not STFU everyone knows your talking crap. When 78% of T2 item are produced using a T2BPO and it's not just because that line is unprofitable. T2BPO needs removed it's bad for the game and should not coexist with invention. IF T2BPO is not a problem allow NPC sellers to market them at the same price as T1BPO's fairs, fair.
T2BPO is amongst CCP's biggest mistakes it's probably up there with incarna. T2BPO continues to dispell intrest in eve and deters subscriptions Remove T2BPO's make eve real. |
Tekota
The Freighter Factory
277
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 15:39:00 -
[228] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:As such T2BPO does ruin inventors profit and before you come out with some crap about it not STFU everyone knows your talking crap.
That "crap" you mention is called facts and figures. Facts and figures are not trumped by foot-stomping and shouting.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:When 78% of T2 item are produced using a T2BPO and it's not just because that line is unprofitable.
Selectively quoting figures and using them as proof of an entire theory is "talking crap".
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO needs removed it's bad for the game and should not coexist with invention.
You're stating an opinion as fact. This is also "talking crap".
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO is amongst CCP's biggest mistakes it's probably up there with incarna. T2BPO continues to dispell intrest in eve and deters subscriptions Remove T2BPO's make eve real.
It was undoubtedly a mistake, which is why they fixed it. That they fixed it in a way you disapprove is to overstate the relevance of your own opinion. You offer zero evidence that the continued existence of remaining T2 BPOs deters subscriptions beyond a personal second hand anecdote - your personal second hand anecdotes are not trumped by the year on year rise in subscription figures. I could equally argue that the year on year rise in subscriptions is precicesly because of the existance of remaining T2 BPOs and that would be an equally absurd argument.
Right at the very beginning of this thread, on the first page, where I ripped your theory that blueprint lockdowns were a T2 exclusive issue and proof of some evil conspiracy - a theory which 12 pages later you still seem to be stuck to - I stated that I did have *some* sympathy with the position that it might be time to wind down T2 BPOs. Well congratulations - over the last 12 pages you've pretty much succeeded in giving the overwhelming impression that anyone who is open to the removal of T2 BPOs must be some logic-immune temper tantrum toddler.
For the record, the only decent argument I have for the removal of T2 BPOs is pretty much the exact same argument that exists for keeping them - they're an irrelevance. I'd argue that irrelevant parts of the game likely need trimming purely to pare back bloat. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1075
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 15:43:00 -
[229] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:As such T2BPO does ruin inventors profit and before you come out with some crap about it not STFU everyone knows your talking crap. Actually, pretty much everybody with a fully functional brain knows that I don't "talk crap". All T2 BPOs do is reduce the market slice inventors compete in, and for some markets that slice gets reduced to zero. Wherever inventors compete, they compete primarily amongst themselves. INVENTORS ruin inventor profits for items where invention is profitable at all, and for items where invention is NOT profitable, even T2 BPO manufacture is barely profitable !!! There is only a very small set of items where you can make a decent profit with BPOs but you can't make any profit with invention.
Quote:When 78% of T2 item are produced using a T2BPO and it's not just because that line is unprofitable. Number of items is meaningless if you don't weight it for VALUE of items. You can't compare same count of T2 ammo or small weapons on one hand and command ships or ehxumers on the other then go "a-ha, I was right" when the total value pretty much completely reverts your point. And besides, last time I checked, something like 90% of Hulks are invented. Similar situation for many other high-demand items, maybe not quite as dramatic, but still, the point remains. In terms of TOTAL MARKET VALUE, invention generates the more sizeable portion of the T2 manufacturing pie, not T2 BPO manufacture.
Quote:T2BPO needs removed it's bad for the game and should not coexist with invention. HOW EXACTLY are they bad for the game ? You fail to PROVE that. And why should they not coexist with invention ? ACTUAL INVENTORS (you know, the guys doing it for PROFIT on a decent scale as opposed to a hobby or in very small batches) are not really complaining. Why the hell are you ? Let me guess - you DO NOT invent for profit, do you ?
Quote:IF T2BPO is not a problem allow NPC sellers to market them at the same price as T1BPO's fairs, fair. Sure thing, why not. I mean, who wants inventors anyway. And nobody needed that datacore income either. That's all sarcasm, by the way. However, if you want to make it so that fresh T2 BPOs are redeemable for a HUGE amount of datacores that are relevant to the blueprint in question (for a total market price of datacores averaged over the last year that would noticeably surpass that of recent corresponding T2 BPO trade value) then yeah, that makes SOME sense, in the short run. In the long run, you're only going to make the inventor profession vanish altogether, and the more T2 BPOs would exist, the cheaper they would get (because less and less people need datacores as the inventors occupy a shrinking market share), accelerating the process in some distant future. That joke solution is just that, a joke.
Quote:T2BPO is amongst CCP's biggest mistakes it's probably up there with incarna. T2BPO continues to dispell intrest in eve and deters subscriptions Remove T2BPO's make eve real. Actually, the DISTRIBUTION METHOD for T2 BPOs and the method for determining their total count was a joke. Big difference. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
74
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 16:03:00 -
[230] - Quote
If the lottery was a mistake (which it was) the rectification of removing those BPO's should have happened. No harm will be done in trading the BPO's for Research points as that is what the T2BPO was traded for in the first place. It's a simple easy fix. If the BPO was sold simply reverse the transaction yet again an extremely easy thing to do. It does not matter how many times it has been traded just simply trace the market transaction back applying negative wallets where needed.
Anyway If not let this thread always stay in the forum front page as a constant reminder about T2BPO and how inventors are forced to go through a click fest while some EVE players get to print ISK afk via T2BPO that they recived for research points and knowing CCP employee's ie T20 and corrupt lottery workings being revealed oh and 'Special events' that dropped them.
|
|
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 16:19:00 -
[231] - Quote
Since you are so willing to destroy players by making them have negitave wallets for buying things, I have set up a contract of 10mill for your pod, and have people more than willing to take the sec status hit for the isk, i will be sure to post the kill mail when you get podded. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1076
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 16:31:00 -
[232] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:If the lottery was a mistake (which it was) the rectification of removing those BPO's should have happened. Yeah, sure, because the mistake of having unprotected sex repeatedly and giving birth to 5 babies in 3 years should be solved by killing the already-born children.... riiiiiight. That's pretty much your logic applied to a real-life situation.
Quote:No harm will be done in trading the BPO's for Research points as that is what the T2BPO was traded for in the first place. IN THE FIRST PLACE. By whoever won the lottery. The next person DID NOT trade in RP, he traded ISK or other goods. And the next one the same. And so on and so forth for each hand the T2 BPO has been through.
Quote:It's a simple easy fix. If the BPO was sold simply reverse the transaction yet again an extremely easy thing to do. The hell it's easy. It's hard as a diamond. For many T2 BPOs, you'd need to track back through more than half a decade of hand-changing, some of it through contracts, some via direct trades, some via character transfers, some via corporation hangars. A few of those things would be easy to track, others would be nearly impossible. What if the T2 BPO was ever stolen in a corp heist ? What if it was picked up as loot from a careless transporter ? And so on and so forth.
Quote:It does not matter how many times it has been traded just simply trace the market transaction back applying negative wallets where needed. Sure, and in order to get this water from this glass after I poured it on the sand of the beach all one needs to do is simply make it flow backwards, RIGHT ? Geez, do you even listen to yourself ?!? And that negative wallets thing... so, again, if I stole a T2 BPO from a corp hangar then sold it for 40 bil ISK and all I have now is 1 bil ISK, I should get a -39 bil ISK wallet balance ? ARE YOU PERHAPS A TOTAL MORON OR A TROLL?!?
Quote:Anyway If not let this thread always stay in the forum front page as a constant reminder about T2BPO and how inventors are forced to go through a click fest while some EVE players get to print ISK afk via T2BPO that they recived for research points and knowing CCP employee's ie T20 and corrupt lottery workings being revealed oh and 'Special events' that dropped them. Hmm, it appears that you really are at least one of those things, if not both.
The solution to the clickfest is to make invention less clickfesty, not to kill T2 BPOs. The solution to the ISK revenue value of T2 BPOs is to make invention less wasteful, not to remove T2 BPOs. The solution to the rest is to get your head out of your posterior and remove the tinfoil hat. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 16:43:00 -
[233] - Quote
Reminds me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwy_fy5tmf0#t=3m20s
With Akita playing the role of Louis CK and Brewlar playing the role of his 3 year old daughter. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
74
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 16:45:00 -
[234] - Quote
Yeah good point just flat remove them. Like you say eve is an unfair game. Either that or smash down the ME on them into negative 99 so invention makes them worhtless. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1076
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 16:53:00 -
[235] - Quote
Suuuuuuure, why buff what needs buffing when you can totally screw everybody else instead ? [/sarcasm]
I give up. You're lacking the capacity to understand that you're wrong, let alone why. Good luck with your continued issues, because they'll never stop, since CCP will most likely never remove T2 BPOs.
If you ever want to stop being so clueless, feel free to re-read my previous posts, because I really said everything that needed to be said to convince a non-stupid person. Then maybe you can start championing for something that CCP might actually eventually do.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 17:20:00 -
[236] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Suuuuuuure, why buff what needs buffing when you can totally screw everybody else instead ? [/sarcasm]
I give up. You're lacking the capacity to understand that you're wrong, let alone why. Good luck with your continued issues, because they'll never stop, since CCP will most likely never remove T2 BPOs.
If you ever want to stop being so clueless, feel free to re-read my previous posts, because I really said everything that needed to be said to convince a non-stupid person. Then maybe you can start championing for something that CCP might actually eventually do.
Akita T I did read your previous post but they are full of errors. The first being that your opening regarding how new players have an equal opertunity to obtain a T2BPO which is not true. They do not have access to a corrupt lottery or T2BPO item drops. They may how ever have contacts at CCP willing to provide them as assets but most new players will not. |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 17:51:00 -
[237] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:NUH UH! THEY'RE PIG NEWTONS!
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 17:58:00 -
[238] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T I did read your previous post but they are full of errors. The first being that your opening regarding how new players have an equal opertunity to obtain a T2BPO which is not true. They do not have access to a corrupt lottery or T2BPO item drops. They may how ever have contacts at CCP willing to provide them as assets but most new players will not.
Oh great, now you hate time. Time is so unfair! I mean, loads of people got to pay van Gogh for a painting, or get Babe Ruth to sign a baseball, or stake a claim on the Klondike! It's unacceptable that I didn't have the same opportunity to make the same acquisitions when they were cheap! |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 17:59:00 -
[239] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Akita T I did read your previous post but they are full of errors..
hehe, said the Guy who called everyone stupid and showed that he has no idea what he is talking about (the ROI incident)
It`s not just that you dont read the post of the people your talking to, you dont evne read your own posts. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:02:00 -
[240] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Akita T I did read your previous post but they are full of errors..
hehe, said the Guy who called everyone stupid and showed that he has no idea what he is talking about (the ROI incident) It`s not just that you dont read the post of the people your talking to, you dont evne read your own posts.
Ehm no sorry I don't make personal attacks that's the T2BPO supporters side. Yet again I understand that it is hard to defend T2BPO and easier to troll while pointing out the fact that T2BPO needs removed/nerfed as their faults are so numerous and game damaging. In fact the only person who comes accros with any valid points on the benifits of T2 is Akita. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:04:00 -
[241] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T I did read your previous post but they are full of errors. The first being that your opening regarding how new players have an equal opertunity to obtain a T2BPO which is not true. They do not have access to a corrupt lottery or T2BPO item drops. They may how ever have contacts at CCP willing to provide them as assets but most new players will not. Oh great, now you hate time. Time is so unfair! I mean, loads of people got to pay van Gogh for a painting, or get Babe Ruth to sign a baseball, or stake a claim on the Klondike! It's unacceptable that I didn't have the same opportunity to make the same acquisitions when they were cheap!
You mean free because I knew a dev. Yeah I think getting handed T2BPO in the form of assets/drops/corrupt lottery is unfair, remove T2BPO they are unfair and were seeded unfairly.
|
Haulie Berry
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:07:00 -
[242] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
You mean free because I knew a dev. Yeah I think getting handed T2BPO in the form of assets/drops/corrupt lottery is unfair, remove T2BPO they are unfair and were seeded unfairly.
1. Which T2 BPOs presently in player hands were granted to a player through unsanctioned GM activity? 2. Which players presently hold those BPOs? 3. Which dev granted them? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:13:00 -
[243] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
You mean free because I knew a dev. Yeah I think getting handed T2BPO in the form of assets/drops/corrupt lottery is unfair, remove T2BPO they are unfair and were seeded unfairly.
1. Which T2 BPOs presently in player hands were granted to a player through unsanctioned GM activity? 2. Which players presently hold those BPOs? 3. Which dev granted them?
Good point CCP please reveal all facts figures and owners for T2BPO and how they were seeded lets do an audit make sure all T2BPO seeds can be accountated for. Nope ok? We can only speculate how many other gifted T2BPO's are in the wild, for sure it's more than T20's gifts and anyone who says otherwise is trolling. One reason CCP will not remove T2BPO is because it knows the backlash that will be caused by the way most of these BPO's were seeded.
BTW Vincent |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:22:00 -
[244] - Quote
Hey, hey, I know, YOU were gifted 20 valuable T2 BPOs, and you should have them removed and your account banned. I know that for a fact because I believe it to be so. No actual proof necessary. And I can't trust an audit by CCP nor any other audit because the data was doctored by CCP to hide it because they gave them to you in the first place. Oh, look how it all fits so nicely ! Yes, you're a cheater, and CCP helped you cheat, and I don't need to prove a damn thing, in fact, absence of proof is proof that you're at fault alongside CCP !
Ridiculous much ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:26:00 -
[245] - Quote
You remind me of a child crying because your tv show was canceled hoping that if you cry long and hard some one will undo ir |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:29:00 -
[246] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Hey, hey, I know, YOU were gifted 20 valuable T2 BPOs, and you should have them removed and your account banned. I know that for a fact because I believe it to be so. No actual proof necessary. And I can't trust an audit by CCP nor any other audit because the data was doctored by CCP to hide it because they gave them to you in the first place. Oh, look how it all fits so nicely ! Yes, you're a cheater, and CCP helped you cheat, and I don't need to prove a damn thing, in fact, absence of proof is proof that you're at fault alongside CCP !
Ridiculous much ?
Your actually denying T20 incident now? I can't really prove anything and if I did I'm sure I'd just get banned like those who revelared the original T2BPO corruptuion in fact this whole thread might get deleted.
Remove T2BPO fix eve correct CCP's darkest days or forever live with them as a bad advert for EVE online. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:32:00 -
[247] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Your actually denying T20 incident now? You do know that he was punished and all those BPOs removed, right ? RIGHT ? And it's not DENYING the incident, it's making fun of you claiming that there still are any extra "cheated" T2 BPOs "in the wild", and how one could go about convincing you that the number is ZERO (or better said, how trying to convince you of that would be futile because you would not accept any proof of it making excuse after excuse as to why you can't trust the data/process/people/whatnot).
...
IT DOES NO LONGER MATTER HOW T2 BPOs WERE SEEDED. Once the lottery ended and the initial post-lottery post-invention pricetag RoI made using them break even, it is wholly irrelevant where ANY of them came from anymore. Earned, stolen, cheated or any other source, it DOES NOT MATTER. At most, you can argue that some people don't deserve some of the ISK they have, but that's a futile grasp at straws too. The market sets the price, initial cost (ISK, RP, time, or whatnot) is meaningless, only current market value matters.
CCP WILL ALMOST SURELY NEVER REMOVE T2 BPOs. The removal is NOT ABSOLUTELY NEEDED and would create far more trouble than any benefits their removal might possibly bring. Any of the shortcomings you perceive regarding T2 BPOs can be fixed in different ways without touching anything regarding T2 BPOs.
Start preaching about the alternatives, because you're not getting rid of T2 BPOs. Complaining you want them removed is many times more futile than me trying to convince you as to why they need nor or will not be removed. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:33:00 -
[248] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Hey, hey, I know, YOU were gifted 20 valuable T2 BPOs, and you should have them removed and your account banned. I know that for a fact because I believe it to be so. No actual proof necessary. And I can't trust an audit by CCP nor any other audit because the data was doctored by CCP to hide it because they gave them to you in the first place. Oh, look how it all fits so nicely ! Yes, you're a cheater, and CCP helped you cheat, and I don't need to prove a damn thing, in fact, absence of proof is proof that you're at fault alongside CCP !
Ridiculous much ? Your actually denying T20 incident now? I can't really prove anything and if I did I'm sure I'd just get banned like those who revelared the original T2BPO corruptuion in fact this whole thread might get deleted. Remove T2BPO fix eve correct CCP's darkest days or forever live with them as a bad advert for EVE online. Who is denying it, we all know it happened, you are the one who keeps bringing it up as though it was the case for ALL T2BPOs. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:48:00 -
[249] - Quote
Let's call it for what it is : he's angry he wasn't one of the lucky guys and wants to make everybody else suffer instead of improving the situation while letting dead things rest, even if he's rationalizing this to himself (and to us) in different (logically flawed) ways using anecdotal evidence and wild speculations. Logically speaking, there is no other explanation that fits, since he can't really be THAT stupid (and still be able to type) for the other logical explanation to fit better. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:14:00 -
[250] - Quote
''Start preaching about the alternatives, because you're not getting rid of T2 BPOs. Complaining you want them removed is many times more futile than me trying to convince you as to why they need nor or will not be removed.''
Increascing invented BPC Material level, productivity level would be good if it made T2BPO's irrelevent in T2 production. This would allow T2BPO's to remain in game as collectors items and not allowing them to hamper invention. CCP is at the perfect time to implement this with the changes to data cores and invention. Invention should out perform T2BPO as it involves a lot more work.
The effort required to prodcue from T2 BPO should reflect it's output ie little effort little reward where as invention should do the same lots of effort lots of reward. |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:25:00 -
[251] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The effort required to prodcue from T2 BPO should reflect it's output ie little effort little reward where as invention should do the same lots of effort lots of reward. From a gameplay fairness perspective, effort is just ONE of the many factors that needs to be considered when determining an appropriate reward, and you want it to be the ONLY factor (or at least the overwhelmingly majoritary factor) ? WHY EXACTLY ? Should any other activities that require little effort also be very low reward without exception ? If not, why not ? How about slow trading ? It sure has hell of a lot of profit for minimal effort, why are you not crying about it being way too profitable ? Or what about supercap BPO copying ? That's certainly minimal effort, in fact, the effort required is FAR LESS than the effort needed for T2 manufacture (no need to haul anything in any direction, unlike T2 manufacture), but it still pays quite handsomely (at a RoI comparable to or even better than just about any T2 BPO). How come you have no problem with that ? Hey, how about T1 missions ? Don't they take quite a lot of time regardless of skills and fit but still pay a pittance compared to L4 missions ? How come you're not angry that they don't pay enough compared to the effort you need to put in ? And so on and so forth.
Could it possibly be that one needs to consider many other factors other than just effort ? Hmm... guess what, you do need to do that ! Now try to guess what other factors come into play when we're talking T2 BPOs. And again, the way the T2 BPO entered the game is IRRELEVANT for this portion of the discussion. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
262
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:25:00 -
[252] - Quote
But they don't hamper invention. That's the point everyone is trying to tell you.
They are irrelevant for most of the items in the game already, which is why there is no reason to remove them.
But seriously, in the time this thread has been going on, I have made 1 billion isk through invention. How much have you made? Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:29:00 -
[253] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The effort required to prodcue from T2 BPO should reflect it's output ie little effort little reward where as invention should do the same lots of effort lots of reward. From a gameplay fairness perspective, effort is just ONE of the many factors that needs to be considered when determining an appropriate reward, and you want it to be the ONLY factor (or at least the overwhelmingly majoritary factor) ? WHY EXACTLY ? Should any other activities that require little effort also be very low reward without exception ? If not, why not ? How about slow trading ? It sure has hell of a lot of profit for minimal effort, why are you not crying about it being way too profitable ? Or what about supercap BPO copying ? That's certainly minimal effort, in fact, the effort required is FAR LESS than the effort needed for T2 manufacture (no need to haul anything in any direction, unlike T2 manufacture), but it still pays quite handsomely (at a RoI comparable to or even better than just about any T2 BPO). How come you have no problem with that ? Hey, how about T1 missions ? Don't they take quite a lot of time regardless of skills and fit but still pay a pittance compared to L4 missions ? How come you're not angry that they don't pay enough compared to the effort you need to put in ? Besides, what the devil is so much effort in sticking something in a lab for copy, then invent, and then a manufacture slot anyway ? Why is that supposed to pay much more than, oh, say, PI ? And so on and so forth. Could it possibly be that one needs to consider many other factors other than just effort ? Hmm... guess what, you do need to do that ! Now try to guess what other factors come into play when we're talking T2 BPOs. And again, the way the T2 BPO entered the game is IRRELEVANT for this portion of the discussion.
Yet again the other factor of originaly owning a T2 BPO was knowing a dev, winning the lottery legit (very slim chance), winning the lottery via knowing the ticket numbers and BPO's numbers, getting a rat spawning a BPO T2 or knowing a dev.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:30:00 -
[254] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:But they don't hamper invention. That's the point everyone is trying to tell you.
They are irrelevant for most of the items in the game already, which is why there is no reason to remove them.
But seriously, in the time this thread has been going on, I have made 1 billion isk through invention. How much have you made?
That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:37:00 -
[255] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yet again the other factor of originaly owning a T2 BPO was 1) knowing a dev, 2) winning the lottery legit (very slim chance), 3) winning the lottery via knowing the ticket numbers and BPO's numbers, 4) getting a rat spawning a BPO T2 or 5) knowing a dev. Is this a nearly complete failpost I see before me ?
For 1 and 5, none of those BPOs remain, and it was a handful out of 10k+. 3 is actually almost the same as 2, and it would not have mattered much extra, if at all anyway, because it was bloody obvious the entire time which agents gave which blueprints and you could estimate how many people were working on them anyway by activity levels for appropriate agent systems. 4 was only there for a MINUSCULE period of time for ONE item type and was replaced with the lottery.
So, basically, nearly ALL of the current T2 BPOs were obtained through "method 2" which you claim was oh so highly unlikely. SURE, it was unlikely for any particular person that barely worked some agents to get one offer, because there were far more players than blueprints and the lottery ran for years, but PLENTY of blueprints were being won in perfectly legit ways on a daily basis !
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:40:00 -
[256] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention. No, the point is not moot. You're not hampering invention PROFITS, you're hampering invention VOLUMES. BPO owners will always sell at whatever price the competition between INVENTORS puts the pricetag at. INVENTORS determine the pricetag of an item singlehandedly for ANY items where BPO production is LESS THAN 100% of non-hobby production.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:51:00 -
[257] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention. No, the point is not moot. You're not hampering invention PROFITS, you're hampering invention VOLUMES. BPO owners will always sell at whatever price the competition between INVENTORS puts the pricetag at. INVENTORS determine the pricetag of an item singlehandedly for ANY items where BPO production is LESS THAN 100% of non-hobby production. If you want increased inventor VOLUME all you need to do is provide radically cheaper moongoo (by providing alternative methods to obtain advanced mats via player effort instead of territory ownership) AND by lowering invention costs (or at least lowering invention waste), which will result in radically cheaper T2 items, which will result in an explosion of demand, which will result in BPOs becoming a minority of production volume-wise. Answer me this, for a VERY CONCRETE EXAMPLE : how much do Hulk BPOs bother Hulk inventors ? Hint : 9 out of 10 Hulks are invented Hulks, and only 1 in 10 is BPO manufactured. The answer you're looking for is "not at all". Hulk inventors don't give a damn about Hulk BPOs. Because the freaking demand is freaking high compared to maximum BPO production capacity, that's why.
Inventors only determine price tag on goods with large buy orders for instance hulks, yes. On every other item that does not have massive flow the BPO owner is able to under cut all inventors, this is wrong and in need of correction either by sipmly removing T2BPO or by increacing invention ME and run levels so that inventors can undercut BPO owners. Decreascing the efficency of the T2BPO would also help placing it firmly below invention where it belongs. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 19:59:00 -
[258] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Inventors only determine price tag on goods with large buy orders for instance hulks, yes. On every other item that does not have massive flow the BPO owner is able to under cut all inventors this, this is wrong and in need of correction either by sipmly removing T2BPO or by increacing invention ME and run levels so that inventors can undercut BPO owners. Decreascing the efficency of the T2BPO would also help placing it firmly below invention where it belongs. For almost any item where invention is not profitable, even T2 BPO manufacture is barely profitable. For all those items where "T2 BPO owners" noticeably "undercut inventors" the traded volume at that pricetag of the item is so freaking low that NOT EVEN ALL BPO OWNERS can find buyers, dropping the price to derisory levels. So, yeah, sure, you can totally undercut an inventor for a crap item, and you will get JACK-CRAP PROFITS either way. If THOSE particular T2 BPOs would be removed, the market price of those items will indeed raise to make invention barely profitable, BUT THAT WOULD LOWER TRADED VOLUMES BECAUSE VERY FEW WOULD BOTHER INVENTING IT ANYWAY because the damn demand is THAT low.
Congratulations, removing THOSE particular T2 BPOs has lowered overall T2 BPO owner profit by exactly squat (since there was next to none there anyway), while at the same time practically removing those corresponding items from the market because almost nobody will use them anymore at invention breakeven prices. (slight exaggeration for emphasis) GOOD JOB ! (sarcasm)
Again, why do you persist in wanting to nerf whatever stuff is good instead of asking for a boost for the stuff that's bad ? Why can't you see that boosting the bad instead of nerfing the good is a MUCH better alternative ? Seriously, what is your problem with that ? Do you even know ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:03:00 -
[259] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Inventors only determine price tag on goods with large buy orders for instance hulks, yes. On every other item that does not have massive flow the BPO owner is able to under cut all inventors this, this is wrong and in need of correction either by sipmly removing T2BPO or by increacing invention ME and run levels so that inventors can undercut BPO owners. Decreascing the efficency of the T2BPO would also help placing it firmly below invention where it belongs. For almost any item where invention is not profitable, even T2 BPO manufacture is barely profitable. For all those items where "T2 BPO owners" noticeably "undercut inventors" the traded volume at that pricetag of the item is so freaking low that NOT EVEN ALL BPO OWNERS can find buyers, dropping the price to derisory levels. So, yeah, sure, you can totally undercut an inventor for a crap item, and you will get JACK-CRAP PROFITS either way. If THOSE particular T2 BPOs would be removed, the market price of those items will indeed raise to make invention barely profitable, BUT THAT WOULD LOWER TRADED VOLUMES SO MUCH THAT BARELY ANYBODY WOULD BOTHER INVENTING IT ANYWAY. Congratulations, removing THOSE particular T2 BPOs has lowered overall T2 BPO owner profit by exactly squat (since there was next to none there anyway), while at the same time practically removing those corresponding items from the market because almost nobody will use them anymore at invention breakeven prices. GOOD JOB ! (sarcasm) Again, why do you persist in wanting to nerf whatever stuff is good instead of asking for a boost for the stuff that's bad ? Why can't you see that boosting the bad instead of nerfing the good is a MUCH better alternative ? Seriously, what is your problem with that ? Do you even know ?
Buff Invention beyond effortless T2BPO's and I'd be happy. If T2BPO's were unable to undercut invention all would be grand. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:05:00 -
[260] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Buff Invention beyond effortless T2BPO's and I'd be happy. Then shut the frak up about removing T2 BPOs and start saying this ^^^ instead from now on all the freaking time. Because something like that at least has a slight chance of happening, unlike your original demands, which have none. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
|
Shoogie
Serious Pixels
33
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:14:00 -
[261] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Zifrian wrote:But they don't hamper invention. That's the point everyone is trying to tell you.
They are irrelevant for most of the items in the game already, which is why there is no reason to remove them.
But seriously, in the time this thread has been going on, I have made 1 billion isk through invention. How much have you made? That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention.
I have said this before. It gets ignored every time.
Inventors (like me) can build any T2 item they want, whether it has a T2 BPO or not. They usually choose to invent the items with the highest profits.
If an item is rarely invented, it only means that inventors do not WANT to invent that item.
If inventors do not want to invent a specific item, the reason is because profits are low!
Low invention volume is 100% due to low profits, not due to the existance of BPOs. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:15:00 -
[262] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Start preaching about the alternatives, because you're not getting rid of T2 BPOs. Complaining you want them removed is many times more futile than me trying to convince you as to why they need nor or will not be removed.''
Increascing invented BPC Material level, productivity level would be good if it made T2BPO's irrelevent in T2 production. This would allow T2BPO's to remain in game as collectors items and not allowing them to hamper invention. CCP is at the perfect time to implement this with the changes to data cores and invention. Invention should out perform T2BPO as it involves a lot more work.
The effort required to prodcue from T2 BPO should reflect it's output ie little effort little reward where as invention should do the same lots of effort lots of reward.
What's this? A post free of misinterpreted facts, paranoid delusions and hardly any spelling mistakes? Who the hell are you, and how did you get on Brewlar's account?
HALLELUJAH!
Why not? I'm am willing to listen to a proposal that a T2 BPC invented without a decryptor have a base ME and PE of 0/0. I'm honestly interested in what the ramifications of such a change would be.
Off the top of my head, the bulk of invented items would have their material requirements reduced to 73% or so of what they are today at -4/-4. Actually, that figure is too low since many of the components for T2 construction aren't affected by ME.
Whatever that number is, how does that translate into build costs? Demand for raw mats drops since less are needed to build the same number of T2 items. But if T2 items cost less to build, people are going to pass the savings onto the buyers in order to undercut the competition. As prices of T2 items drop, how much does demand increase as more items enter a usable price range? If T2 items use fewer raw materials a piece, but are being produced in larger numbers, does that actually increase the demand of raw mats? What's it do to the price of data cores? Most importantly, what's it do for my ISK / hour?
The answers are far from straight forward. I doubt anybody knows for sure, but that isn't to say it's impossible to make a soundly reasoned prediction. What I do know is that it's far from certain that inventors would be better off overall than they are now, or even better off than they are relative to BPO owners. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:23:00 -
[263] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Buff Invention beyond effortless T2BPO's and I'd be happy. Then shut the frak up about removing T2 BPOs and start saying this ^^^ instead from now on all the freaking time. Something like that at least has a slight chance of happening (maybe not "beyond T2 BPO", but at least close enough), unlike your original demands, which have no chance of happening.
I'd be happy with that compromise, CCP sends dev blog stating that invention will soon out perform T2BPO when the new data core changes happen. This would give T2BPO owners plenty of warning yet still alow them to produce effortless isk while no longer being able to cripple inventors who have to mange their T2BP creation. |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:24:00 -
[264] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Buff Invention beyond effortless T2BPO's and I'd be happy. Then shut the frak up about removing T2 BPOs and start saying this ^^^ instead from now on all the freaking time. Something like that at least has a slight chance of happening (maybe not "beyond T2 BPO", but at least close enough), unlike your original demands, which have no chance of happening.
That wouldn't actually change anything for this guy. This is just Dunning Kruger mixed with a gross delusion of entitlement.
He's obviously a really bad industrialist. You can plainly tell from the content of his posts that, to call this guy's grasp of game mechanics and basic economic principles "tenuous" would be an act of titanic generosity.
Here's what he "knows", in a nutshell: 1. Some people make absurd amounts of money from industry. 2. He makes very little from industry. 3. This could not possibly be because of some personal failing and so must surely be the result of some inherent unfairness in the game.
Simply changing the game mechanics that he doesn't understand to other, different mechanics that he still wouldn't understand will not alter his situation because people who do understand the game mechanics will still be beating him bloody at every turn. All of the above will still be true. Other people will still make absurd amounts of money from industry, he will still make extremely mediocre money from industry, and it will still be inconceivable (to him) that this is a personal failure |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:34:00 -
[265] - Quote
Prekaz wrote:
Here's what he "knows", in a nutshell: 1. Some people make absurd amounts of money from industry. 2. He makes very little from industry. 3. This could not possibly be because of some personal failing and so must surely be the result of some inherent unfairness in the game.
No CCP giving out BPO as Gift cause T20 is unfair and love with CCP dev , btw. Vincent. ... sniff sniff
EDIT: "Brewlar Kuvakei liked this post" poor little fella :D |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:34:00 -
[266] - Quote
Prekaz wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Buff Invention beyond effortless T2BPO's and I'd be happy. Then shut the frak up about removing T2 BPOs and start saying this ^^^ instead from now on all the freaking time. Something like that at least has a slight chance of happening (maybe not "beyond T2 BPO", but at least close enough), unlike your original demands, which have no chance of happening. That wouldn't actually change anything for this guy. This is just Dunning Kruger mixed with a gross delusion of entitlement. He's obviously a really bad industrialist. You can plainly tell from the content of his posts that, to call this guy's grasp of game mechanics and basic economic principles "tenuous" would be an act of titanic generosity. Here's what he "knows", in a nutshell: 1. Some people make absurd amounts of money from industry. 2. He makes very little from industry. 3. This could not possibly be because of some personal failing and so must surely be the result of some inherent unfairness in the game. Simply changing the game mechanics that he doesn't understand to other, different mechanics that he still wouldn't understand will not alter his situation because people who do understand the game mechanics will still be beating him bloody at every turn. All of the above will still be true. Other people will still make absurd amounts of money from industry, he will still make extremely mediocre money from industry, and it will still be inconceivable (to him) that this is a personal failing instead of some systemic problem with the game as a whole.
That's it troll and make personal attacks. Please let Akita do the T2BPO supporting as they are the only one on your side that makes any relevent posts regarding T2BPO other than. ''This guys a douche, just because he never got a free T2BPO, why should I give up my one, cry cry cry.''
As stated I have given plenty of reason why T2BPO suck the primary being the unfair way they were seeded/gifted and the fact that they out perform invention which makes zero sense. Invention requires a lot more effort than T2BPO's do and the reward should reflect this. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
262
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:41:00 -
[267] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Zifrian wrote:But they don't hamper invention. That's the point everyone is trying to tell you.
They are irrelevant for most of the items in the game already, which is why there is no reason to remove them.
But seriously, in the time this thread has been going on, I have made 1 billion isk through invention. How much have you made? That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention. The word is moot, not mute. But just because you say it's moot doesn't mean it is.
Secondly, care to share where you got 78% from? What item line? What about the lines that can only be made through invention? Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:46:00 -
[268] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
That's it troll and make personal attacks. Please let Akita do the T2BPO supporting as they are the only one on your side that makes any relevent posts regarding T2BPO other than. ''This guys a douche, just because he never got a free T2BPO, why should I give up my one, cry cry cry.''
As stated I have given plenty of reason why T2BPO suck the primary being the unfair way they were seeded/gifted and the fact that they out perform invention which makes zero sense. Invention requires a lot more effort than T2BPO's do and the reward should reflect this.
You do realize that most of the people who think you're an imbecile don't actually own T2 BPOs themselves... right?
I own zero. I owned one once for about 7 hours, because I saw it on contracts at what I concluded to be well below its fair market value. Seven hours later I resold it for a profit that would have been, at a minimum, 3 years worth of actually producing from the print.
I made over 2 billion from production last week, and by "last week" I mean "between Sunday and Wednesday", and I am a far cry from a titan of industry. That is vastly more than most T2 BPOs will produce in a month, and more than many will produce in a year.
Thus, the only conclusion I can possibly reach is that anyone would cry for so long and so hard about the "unfairness" of a such a comparatively dismal earner must simply be exceedingly bad at industry. I have yet to see any indication to the contrary. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
262
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:49:00 -
[269] - Quote
Prekaz wrote: You do realize that most of the people who think you're an imbecile don't actually own T2 BPOs themselves... right?
I own zero. I owned one once for about 7 hours, because I saw it on contracts at what I concluded to be well below its fair market value. Seven hours later I resold it for a profit that would have been, at a minimum, 3 years worth of actually producing from the print.
I made over 2 billion from production last week, and by "last week" I mean "between Sunday and Wednesday", and I am a far cry from a titan of industry. That is vastly more than most T2 BPOs will produce in a month, and more than many will produce in a year.
Thus, the only conclusion I can possibly reach is that anyone who would cry for so long and so hard about the "unfairness" of such a dismal earner like T2 BPOs must simply be exceedingly bad at industry. I have yet to see any indication to the contrary.
Quoting for truth. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:52:00 -
[270] - Quote
Prekaz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
That's it troll and make personal attacks. Please let Akita do the T2BPO supporting as they are the only one on your side that makes any relevent posts regarding T2BPO other than. ''This guys a douche, just because he never got a free T2BPO, why should I give up my one, cry cry cry.''
As stated I have given plenty of reason why T2BPO suck the primary being the unfair way they were seeded/gifted and the fact that they out perform invention which makes zero sense. Invention requires a lot more effort than T2BPO's do and the reward should reflect this.
You do realize that most of the people who think you're an imbecile don't actually own T2 BPOs themselves... right? I own zero. I owned one once for about 7 hours, because I saw it on contracts at what I concluded to be well below its fair market value. Seven hours later I resold it for a profit that would have been, at a minimum, 3 years worth of actually producing from the print. I made over 2 billion from production last week, and by "last week" I mean "between Sunday and Wednesday", and I am a far cry from a titan of industry. That is vastly more than most T2 BPOs will produce in a month, and more than many will produce in a year. Thus, the only conclusion I can possibly reach is that anyone would cry for so long and so hard about the "unfairness" of a such a comparatively dismal earner must simply be exceedingly bad at industry. I have yet to see any indication to the contrary.
Where da **** do you get dismal earner from? What is dismal about an item that earns 100bn isk instantly from base value of BPO alone and then continues to print upwards of 30bn isk per year afk? What is dismal about that. There was a reason they were given secretly out because they allow massive ammounts of ISK to be earned with zero effort.
Invention however takes effort and thus should far out perfom T2BPO's? If T2BPO's are a good thing then create more and more of them. Also why is there no T3BPO's surely we need a T3BPO lottery? OH wait confirming T2BPO's are terrible and in dire need of nerfing/removal or invention buffed so far beyond T2BPO as to relegate them to hanger collectables in memory of the days when EVE online was a crapfest of corruption ie Now.
|
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:56:00 -
[271] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: As stated I have given plenty of reason why T2BPO suck the primary being the unfair way they were seeded/gifted and the fact that they out perform invention which makes zero sense. Invention requires a lot more effort than T2BPO's do and the reward should reflect this.
Let's say I agree with you that invention ought to make more money ISK / hour / line relative to BPO's than they do now. It's still far from certain that if invention produced BPC's with competitive stats compared to well researched BPO's that invention would actually make any more money than it does now, or even more money compared to using a BPO than it does now. If CCP granted this wish it might actually do you more harm than good. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
262
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 20:57:00 -
[272] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention. No, the point is not moot. You're not hampering invention PROFITS, you're hampering invention VOLUMES. BPO owners will always sell at whatever price the competition between INVENTORS puts the pricetag at. INVENTORS determine the pricetag of an item singlehandedly for ANY items where BPO production is LESS THAN 100% of non-hobby production. If you want increased inventor VOLUME all you need to do is provide radically cheaper moongoo (by providing alternative methods to obtain advanced mats via player effort instead of territory ownership) AND by lowering invention costs (or at least lowering invention waste), which will result in radically cheaper T2 items, which will result in an explosion of demand, which will result in BPOs becoming a minority of production volume-wise. Answer me this, for a VERY CONCRETE EXAMPLE : how much do Hulk BPOs bother Hulk inventors ? Hint : 9 out of 10 Hulks are invented Hulks, and only 1 in 10 is BPO manufactured. The answer you're looking for is "not at all". Hulk inventors don't give a damn about Hulk BPOs. Because the freaking demand is freaking high compared to maximum BPO production capacity, that's why. Inventors only determine price tag on goods with large buy orders for instance hulks, yes. On every other item that does not have massive flow the BPO owner is able to under cut all inventors, this is wrong and in need of correction either by sipmly removing T2BPO or by increacing invention ME and run levels so that inventors can undercut BPO owners. Decreascing the efficency of the T2BPO would also help placing it firmly below invention where it belongs. And here is a perfect example of why your whole argument is flawed, seriously.
Question, what is the difference between two items that can both be produced by invention and T2 BPOs, one with low volume and one with high?
Answer, volume not the presence of T2 BPOs.
Open question, why are the marauders not profitable to invent for most players?
I'll let you answer that one. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:02:00 -
[273] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention. No, the point is not moot. You're not hampering invention PROFITS, you're hampering invention VOLUMES. BPO owners will always sell at whatever price the competition between INVENTORS puts the pricetag at. INVENTORS determine the pricetag of an item singlehandedly for ANY items where BPO production is LESS THAN 100% of non-hobby production. If you want increased inventor VOLUME all you need to do is provide radically cheaper moongoo (by providing alternative methods to obtain advanced mats via player effort instead of territory ownership) AND by lowering invention costs (or at least lowering invention waste), which will result in radically cheaper T2 items, which will result in an explosion of demand, which will result in BPOs becoming a minority of production volume-wise. Answer me this, for a VERY CONCRETE EXAMPLE : how much do Hulk BPOs bother Hulk inventors ? Hint : 9 out of 10 Hulks are invented Hulks, and only 1 in 10 is BPO manufactured. The answer you're looking for is "not at all". Hulk inventors don't give a damn about Hulk BPOs. Because the freaking demand is freaking high compared to maximum BPO production capacity, that's why. Inventors only determine price tag on goods with large buy orders for instance hulks, yes. On every other item that does not have massive flow the BPO owner is able to under cut all inventors, this is wrong and in need of correction either by sipmly removing T2BPO or by increacing invention ME and run levels so that inventors can undercut BPO owners. Decreascing the efficency of the T2BPO would also help placing it firmly below invention where it belongs. And here is a perfect example of why your whole argument is flawed, seriously. Question, what is the difference between two items that can both be produced by invention and T2 BPOs, one with low volume and one with high? Answer, volume not the presence of T2 BPOs. Open question, why are the marauders not profitable to invent for most players? I'll let you answer that one.
Because some one with a BPO undercuts them. If BPC's could undercut T2BPO then yeah they would be profitable but just sell really slowly. That's not a problem it's the inventors choince to invent that item if he wants to have his isk tied up in an expensive item that may sit on market for months. Out of principle they should not be cut out of a market because CCP decided to gift a BPO that out performs them. It should be the otherway round invention should make T2BPO useless in some fields and only allow T2BPO's to be profitable in items where volume dictates price. |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:03:00 -
[274] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Zifrian wrote:
Open question, why are the marauders not profitable to invent for most players?
I'll let you answer that one.
Because some one with a BPO undercuts them.
PIG NEWTONS! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:06:00 -
[275] - Quote
Troll, nothing to see. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
263
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:06:00 -
[276] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Zifrian wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That point is mute 78% of an item line is hampering invention. No, the point is not moot. You're not hampering invention PROFITS, you're hampering invention VOLUMES. BPO owners will always sell at whatever price the competition between INVENTORS puts the pricetag at. INVENTORS determine the pricetag of an item singlehandedly for ANY items where BPO production is LESS THAN 100% of non-hobby production. If you want increased inventor VOLUME all you need to do is provide radically cheaper moongoo (by providing alternative methods to obtain advanced mats via player effort instead of territory ownership) AND by lowering invention costs (or at least lowering invention waste), which will result in radically cheaper T2 items, which will result in an explosion of demand, which will result in BPOs becoming a minority of production volume-wise. Answer me this, for a VERY CONCRETE EXAMPLE : how much do Hulk BPOs bother Hulk inventors ? Hint : 9 out of 10 Hulks are invented Hulks, and only 1 in 10 is BPO manufactured. The answer you're looking for is "not at all". Hulk inventors don't give a damn about Hulk BPOs. Because the freaking demand is freaking high compared to maximum BPO production capacity, that's why. Inventors only determine price tag on goods with large buy orders for instance hulks, yes. On every other item that does not have massive flow the BPO owner is able to under cut all inventors, this is wrong and in need of correction either by sipmly removing T2BPO or by increacing invention ME and run levels so that inventors can undercut BPO owners. Decreascing the efficency of the T2BPO would also help placing it firmly below invention where it belongs. And here is a perfect example of why your whole argument is flawed, seriously. Question, what is the difference between two items that can both be produced by invention and T2 BPOs, one with low volume and one with high? Answer, volume not the presence of T2 BPOs. Open question, why are the marauders not profitable to invent for most players? I'll let you answer that one. Because some one with a BPO undercuts them. If BPC's could undercut T2BPO then yeah they would be profitable but just sell really slowly. That's not a problem it's the inventors choince to invent that item if he wants to have his isk tied up in an expensive item that may sit on market for months. Out of principle they should not be cut out of a market because CCP decided to gift a BPO that out performs them. It should be the otherway round invention should make T2BPO useless in some fields and only allow T2BPO's to be profitable in items where volume dictates price. Hook...
Line....
And sinker. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:06:00 -
[277] - Quote
There are no marauder BPOs. Marauders were introduced after the end of the T2 BPO lottery. Marauder BPOs do not exist. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Thus, inventors cannot be undercut by BPOs, as you assert.
Would you care to revise your stupid? |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:08:00 -
[278] - Quote
Oh dear. He was doing so well. Poor thing. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:09:00 -
[279] - Quote
Prekaz wrote:There are no marauder BPOs. Marauders were introduced after the end of the T2 BPO lottery. Marauder BPOs do not exist. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Thus, inventors cannot be undercut by BPOs, as you assert. Would you care to revise your stupid?
Well then orignal point is invalid Maurauders will be profitable to make for inventors but just sell very slowly at least people can produce mauraders on an equal footing and sell for profit. For sure like every item you will get some free miner syndrome but at least maurader inventors don't get crushingly undercut by a T2BPO.
Infact maurders are the perfect example of why T2BPO should be removed? Surely if T2BPO's are good for eve CCP should make some Maurader BPO's? Why not afterall T2BPO's are sweet? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1077
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:16:00 -
[280] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Well then orignal point is invalid Maurauders will be profitable to make for inventors. And this is what you keep failing to get : marauders are most of the time NOT profitable to invent IN SPITE of the fact that no marauder BPOs exist. Same story for JFs and a few other T2 items. This is a FACT. No T2 BPOs at all, yet still losing money if inventing and manufacturing then selling at market price. Now try to understand WHY that happens. Then you'll see why removing T2 BPOs serves nobody. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:25:00 -
[281] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Well then orignal point is invalid Maurauders will be profitable to make for inventors. And this is what you keep failing to get : marauders are most of the time NOT profitable to invent IN SPITE of the fact that no marauder BPOs exist. Same story for JFs and a few other T2 items. This is a FACT. No T2 BPOs at all, yet still losing money if inventing and manufacturing then selling at market price. Now try to understand WHY that happens. Then you'll see why removing T2 BPOs serves nobody.
Because of free mining/minerals I get it.
Now look at an item that has a T2BPO. Not only do you have idiot free miners undercutting you at a loss to yourself and them you also have a T2BPO undercutting you into financial loss while he still spins a profit.
Idiot free miners/industrialists I can take it's their porogative to lose ISK and eliminate me from an invention line but when CCP the game curator allows another player to win and undercut me through an item that I have no way of obtaining in a way he does ie Lottery/gift then something is broken. (CCP basically free mines its own game, selling invention a great game mechanic/crafting idea short of T2BPO an unimagitive game feature given to a select few.)
Invention should undercut T2BPO's not the other way round.
CCP has recognised this or we would have Maurader BPO's or T3 BPO's. We don't it was mistake/miscalculation that is still in dire need of repair/removal.
How CCP can admit that T2BPO was an error and allow it to exist at the same time is beyond me. ''Yeah we know it's broken but yeah we're not fixing it. Infact lets allow it to continue.'' Insane. |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:30:00 -
[282] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Now look at an item that has a T2BPO. Not only do you have idiot free miners undercutting you at a loss to yourself and them you also have a T2BPO undercutting you into financial loss while he still spins a profit.
What the...
It's sort of like you just said, "2+2 = popsicle" and someone else corrected you by saying, "No, see, 2+2 = 4. Here, look. || + || = ||||. Get it?"
But you didn't get it. Instead you replied, "No, see... those look kind of like popsicle sticks, therefor 2+2 = popsicle after all." And then someone points out that what something looks like has nothing to do with sums, and your basic response can be reduced to, "Well facts be damned, I'm still right because I say so, so there!"
It's a complete non sequitur. You argue that invention is unprofitable because of BPOs. Someone else points out that in some cases, invention is unprofitable without any BPOs.
You then go on to say, "Well, BPOs make it worse!" while completely ignoring the fact that other items that DO have BPOs are highly profitable to invent.
And, this comes hot on the heels of publicly demonstrating just how little you know about production in the first place. |
Prekaz
The Gentlemen's Corporation
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:33:00 -
[283] - Quote
nt |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:37:00 -
[284] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Because some one with a BPO undercuts them.
Prekaz wrote: there is no maruader BPO
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Well then orignal point is invalid Maurauders will be profitable
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1078
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:46:00 -
[285] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Because of free mining/minerals I get it. Not really. A very distant cousin of it, maybe, so to speak.
"Stuff I get myself is free therefore worthless" plays a certain role for sure (datacores self-harvested, T1 BPCs self-made, T2 components self-manufactured, etc) but that's not the full story, probably not even the main story either, at least not for ships (might be most of the story for smaller items, but not for ships, and certainly not larger ships).
The actual main problem - at least for higher ticket items - is the RANDOM CHANCE factor. Anybody who's a veteran inventor will tell you, if you're not going to do at least 100 runs, then you'd better just stay out of invention, because random chance is a pain in the posterior. For modules and small ships, costs per invention try is low and success chances are decently high, so getting hundreds of runs is quite feasible. However, things drastically change for expensive items like marauders and JFs. The cost for one invention try is high, success chances are low. Those who repeatedly fail more than usual will soon move on to a different item and just go "eh, this sucks", however the ones that succeed more than usual will have a lower than normal total cost, and they NEED to recoup as much of the investment as fast as possible, while not realizing just how costly the item is SUPPOSED to be to actually produce, only going by market price instead of rigorous calculations.
All in all this means it's ALMOST GUARANTEED to end up with people selling them below ACTUAL average production price (they're still selling them above THEIR production price so far though).
Quote:How CCP can admit that T2BPO was an error and allow it to exist at the same time is beyond me. ''Yeah we know it's broken but yeah we're not fixing it. Infact lets allow it to continue.'' Insane. Not that insane at all, really. Let me give you a RL example. Not the best one, but should probably give you a good idea.
Say you got shot in the chest repeatedly. You have a field medic near you, and he patches you up the best he can. However, he makes one big mistake - he doesn't get all the bullets and bullet fragments out. Sure, he saved your life, so obviously, you're better off compared to him not having been around and not having patched you up. Now, after a while, you DO discover that you still have a few bullets or bullet fragments inside you. The doctor however tells you that the internal wounds have healed nicely and the bullets and fragments still inside you pose no major risk for you. There's obviously still SOME risk, but it's quite small. You have the alternative to get a new surgery either way, to remove them anyway. But you also get warned that the surgery will be long, complicated and very risky due to the locations the bullets and fragments are in, and due to how your body managed to heal itself around them.
So, what do you do - do you continue on as if nothing happened, and live with a minimal risk of future complications (you might still manage to get that operation if a problem starts developing, so you might be saved either way), OR do you take the much larger risk right now to completely remove a much smaller risk later ? Most SANE persons will choose to NOT have the operation and just live with it.
In many ways, the lottery was the shooting incident followed by the emergency patch-up, and the T2 BPOs are the leftover bullets, while the patient is the EVE economy. Yes, it was a mistake to let those fragments in, but getting them out is more likely to do more harm than good now. It would also be a mistake to add even more fragments.
So, yes, "they are not good" and "removing them is bad" are compatible positions regarding T2 BPOs, as weird as that sounds to you at first.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 21:56:00 -
[286] - Quote
''The actual main problem - at least for higher ticket items - is the RANDOM CHANCE factor.''
This falls into the free mineral/industrialist bracket they are losing ISK it's their choice. What I can't stomach is being undercut by a T2BPO owner that I simply can not comptete against in any form. Someone who got given an item that endlessly prints isk at zero effort who is able to undercut the best inventor out there in certain T2 lines. The only area where inventors can compete with these guys is in fields where demand far out strips supply of the T2BPO, this is simply wrong and in dire need of fixing. The simple fix is to remove the T2BPO or buff invention/ nerf BPO so that the BPO becomes irrelevent and that inventors can undercut the BPO. This would allow BPO's to compete in areas where demand outstrips all invention. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1078
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 22:25:00 -
[287] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:This falls into the free mineral/industrialist bracket they are losing ISK it's their choice. But that's the thing - those that sell the stuff are NOT losing ISK !!! The ones losing ISK are those that had bad luck on invention streaks, and they're not selling any product - they have none to sell ! Those undercutting average prices are MAKING a profit based on their limited above-average success so far. Sure, they might later end up with a streak of bad luck and lose ISK eventually, but for now, they are profiting. They might shift to another item or evengive up invention altogether afterwards. The higher the pricetag of the item, the higher the chance of this happening.
Quote: What I can't stomach is being undercut by a T2BPO owner that I simply can not comptete against in any form. So DON'T compete with him directly. He has his share of the market cut out, don't go into markets what can't support inventors volume-wise. NOBODY IS FORCING YOU TO INVENT "ITEM X" - GO INVENT WHICHEVER ITEM IS THE MOST PROFITABLE INSTEAD. If you want "item x", use the damn invention profits to buy "item x" from the damn BPO holder ! The BPO owner has absolutely no REASON to undercut you heavily - he wants the best damn price he can get. Just let him sell his stuff first. The real competition will come from other inventors anyway.
Quote:Someone who got given an item that endlessly prints isk at zero effort who is able to undercut the best inventor The items were not GIVEN, they were either EARNED or PURCHASED. Sure, luck might have played some factor for some of the lottery winners, but most of the good stuff went to people that broke their backs working for it for a long time.
It doesn't endlessly print ISK either. It has a quite limited amount of ISK that can be made from it nowadays, and it is capped by the inventors. BEFORE INVENTION, a T2 cap recharger BPO sold for nearly 200 bil ISK and was making that amount of money back in 5 months. Now, it would only make that amount of money in 300 months (give or take a few years).
And it's not zero effort either. Just because he doesn't have to go through the invention clicking doesn't mean he doesn't have to ship in T2 components, manufacture stuff then ship out the T2 items to the sales location. He might need less effort overall, but saying it's zero effort is an outright lie.
Also, so what if they can undercut you ? They'd be stupid to undercut you by any significant amount of ISK anyway. Afterall, they need to recoup the huge initial investment soon, so undercutting you aggressively is not something they're likely to do. They're FAR more likely to keep the inventory at whatever price they KNOW it's worth, and only undercut if prices change too much in their disfavour and the inventory has not sold yet. Those that aggressively undercut you ARE FREAKING INVENTORS, NOT BPO OWNERS !!!
Quote:The only area where inventors can compete with these guys is in fields where demand far out strips supply of the T2BPO, this is simply wrong and in dire need of fixing. Not FAR outstrips. Even EVER SO SLIGHTLY outstrips. Sure, the volume up for grabs might be a small percentage at first, but IN THAT SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL VOLUME you are simply NOT competing directly with any BPO owner, only with other inventors.
Quote:The simple fix is to remove the T2BPO or buff invention/ nerf BPO so that the BPO becomes irrelevent and that inventors can undercut the BPO. This would allow BPO's to compete in areas where demand outstrips all invention. That makes absolutely no sense. If an inventor COULD undercut a BPO owner, then the BPO owner would have no reason to bother manufacturing from a BPO, instead resorting to invention. Also, nothing can outstrip invention, since it scales up with whatever demand you throw at it. BPO manufacture however, that it totally capped volume-wise. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1078
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 22:43:00 -
[288] - Quote
Just to be perfectly clear - in the overwhelming majority of cases when somebody significantly undercuts you (the inventor), it's NOT a T2 BPO owner that undercuts you - it's another inventor.
The inventors are sometimes unlucky, sometimes lucky. It's far less of an issue for inventors that stick with a single item for a long time, but it's a huge issue for "casuals" and for all inventors of very high ticket items. Those unlucky have nothing or very little to sell, and what little they have to sell they want to get rid of ASAP, because they're bailing out of the item, and since it was a loss already, a bit more loss to be gone much sooner and make cash on something else instead matters a lot less to them, so they undercut big time. Those lucky have an inaccurate appreciation of the actual production value of the item, and will sell slightly below the actual average if they are in even a bit of a hurry, because to them, in the short run, that's actually a win. They might undercut less aggressively than the former, but they'll still undercut often enough. So, both lucky and unlucky inventors have all the possible reasons to aggressively undercut you, the other inventor. Even long-term inventors on an item need to reroll their production lines (and most importantly, reroll the funds into the invention process too, not just the manufacture part), so even they have a reason to be in a hurry.
T2 BPO owners on the other hand just set a price and leave it sitting there most of the time. They're in no particular hurry. They KNOW how much their stuff is worth. They know for how much it sells eventually. They can afford to wait. Afterall, their production cycles are almost always 30 days long anyway. Once in a while, you might get undercut by a BPO owner, but that doesn't happen very often. Sure, the BPO owner COULD THEORETICALLY EASILY AND AGGRESSIVELY UNDERCUT YOU IF HE WANTED AND STILL EARN A PROFIT, but he has no interest to do so. So, no, you are not undercut by any BPO owners often.
To recap... T2 BPO owners WON'T undercut you. They'll simply wait you out. INVENTORS will undercut you. Almost always. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 23:35:00 -
[289] - Quote
STFU about this. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
124
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 00:08:00 -
[290] - Quote
Just want to point out, the most profitable Industrialists are all in lowsec/nulsec where the minerals are 20-50% cheeper then highsec, in other words, Inventors stand no chance while even the worst T2 BPO is outright lucrative which is killing inventors left and right.
How many people actually invent as a main source of income in eve? 5? 10? 1?
Indeed I do think 78% of all tech 2 items are created from BPO's this sounds about right to me.
edit: nulsec |
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 00:17:00 -
[291] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:STFU about this.
He's either the most brilliant troll or the biggest idiot I've seen in a decade. Either way, this thread is worth posting in. When you see a mountain like that, you damn well climb it. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 00:43:00 -
[292] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Just want to point out, the most profitable Industrialists are all in lowsec where the minerals are 20-50% cheeper then highsec, in other words, Inventors stand no chance while even the worst T2 BPO is outright lucrative which is killing inventors left and right.
Well, that's just The-Materials-I-Buy-Are-Cheap syndrome right there. It's not the BPO's fault if your competitors are making up for their manufacturing losses by playing buy-low-sell-high. You've got to be careful not to confuse where the profit is coming from. Moving goods from point A to B, moving goods from buy orders to sell orders, extraction, or actually turning goods from one thing into another. Each of those are entirely distinct sources of revenue but they tend to get lumped together in the excitement of min-maxing your debits and credits. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
124
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 00:49:00 -
[293] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Kara Books wrote:Just want to point out, the most profitable Industrialists are all in lowsec where the minerals are 20-50% cheeper then highsec, in other words, Inventors stand no chance while even the worst T2 BPO is outright lucrative which is killing inventors left and right. Well, that's just The-Materials-I-Buy-Are-Cheap syndrome right there. It's not the BPO's fault if your competitors are making up for their manufacturing losses by playing buy-low-sell-high. You've got to be careful not to confuse where the profit is coming from. Moving goods from point A to B, moving goods from buy orders to sell orders, extraction, or actually turning goods from one thing into another. Each of those are entirely distinct sources of revenue but they tend to get lumped together in the excitement of min-maxing your debits and credits.
Still couldn't compete unless I jumped into a covetor and got "free" minerals. |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
78
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 01:07:00 -
[294] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:[quote=Salo Aldeland]Still couldn't compete unless I jumped into a covetor and got "free" minerals.
Or just mined/purchased in a different region, where materials are actually worth less. Which region's prices are you going by? Stuff isn't the same price everywhere, after all. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Haulie Berry
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 01:27:00 -
[295] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Just want to point out, the most profitable Industrialists are all in lowsec/nulsec where the minerals are 20-50% cheeper then highsec, in other words, Inventors stand no chance while even the worst T2 BPO is outright lucrative which is killing inventors left and right.
I guess this would be relevant if minerals were a huge portion of T2 items...
...or even a portion that was particularly affected by ME in most T2 items....
...but they're not.
For most T2 items, the mineral cost is a relatively small fraction of the overall production cost, and is mostly or entirely wrapped up in the T1 item, which is unaffected by the ME of the T2 print. So this pretty much has nothing to do with anything.
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 01:28:00 -
[296] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: Still couldn't compete unless I jumped into a covetor and got "free" minerals.
Sure you can. Buy him out and re-list at a reasonable price. All of sudden he's not a competitor, he's an employee. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
264
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 01:35:00 -
[297] - Quote
The minerals I mine are free argument doesn't really go far with me honestly. If they are high volume, traders/reprocessors will buy them up. If they are low demand, someone will just undercut that price until someone hits a price point that people want to buy from. Either way, the market is self-correcting. Sure there are people that do not include the price of datacores or copies in their production but that assumes everyone is doing the same thing.
The MIMAF would be an issue if the market system were more like WoW's, but it's not. It's a supply and demand system so a lot of normal economic principles affect the price. In short, I see it as nothing other than a complaint for people not able or are unwilling to diversify their production. Or do their homework. Hell, I've been profiting off the same 3 items for 3 years now. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 02:00:00 -
[298] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Just want to point out, the most profitable Industrialists are all in lowsec/nulsec where the minerals are 20-50% cheeper then highsec.
hokay, so you want to point out, that of all indutrialists in this game, you know who are the most successfull ones? mind me asking wich statistics u basing this on? probably the same source that told you that the T2 Rig BPO`s are destroying the NPC drop BPC value, right? Also T2 ships/times prices arent rly based on mineral prices, more on T2 comps (wich are also not made of minerals)
Kara Books wrote: Indeed I do think 78% of all tech 2 items are created from BPO's this sounds about right to me.
if that sounds right to you, im not suprised that numbers are not your friend and you have to fight on the forum line.
simply check a well traded Ship in Jita, for example a Hulk, Sabre, HIC,s Logis, , see how often it is getting sold in avg. per day, and check how many ships a single T2 BPO actually can produce. (btw. there are around 20 of each ship BPO in the game, not more).
For example, 1x Hulk BPO wich is save to say, the best T2 BPO in the game, can manufacture 1 hulk per day, so even if all the ~20 hulk BPO`s are still activly producing Hulks, that is just 20 hulks of aorund 200-220 Hulks traded per day JUST in Jita. so less than 10% even...
Also 10b worth of mech. eng. Datacores are getting sold every day.gues for what.
but i am sure there are more accurate numbers about this on twitter. it got explained numerous times why there are certain items/ships that are exculsevly gettign build by T2 BPO`s because its just not getting sold that much.
good post... |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
264
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 02:10:00 -
[299] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Well then orignal point is invalid Maurauders will be profitable to make for inventors but just sell very slowly at least people can produce mauraders on an equal footing and sell for profit. For sure like every item you will get some free miner syndrome but at least maurader inventors don't get crushingly undercut by a T2BPO.
Infact maurders are the perfect example of why T2BPO should be removed? Surely if T2BPO's are good for eve CCP should make some Maurader BPO's? Why not afterall T2BPO's are sweet?
OK, not sure why I'm going to continue bothering but you still don't seem to understand simple economics 101 and your credibility of a knowledgeable or semi-serious industrialist is completely shot (if it ever existed). Furthermore, this entire thread is your argument - the task is for you to convince everyone else to switch their opinion of the topic. However, simply saying you are right does not make it so and you have yet to get one person to agree with you that did not in the first place.
But not to display my own hypocrisy, I will not only say your argument is flawed but I will show you in a simple way.
Here are three scenarios that show you are not understanding how the T2 market (or markets in general) works. For sake of argument, assume that it takes the same amount of time (1 week) to make 1 unit of X for all 10 players. Assume the profit from invention is 1mil isk and for the T2BPO holder, 5mil isk. These are simple scenarios but mirror the market pretty closely from my experience.
Scenario 1 - Item X is sold in a market with 9 inventors and 1 T2BPO holder. If the market demand is satisfied by selling 10 units per week, all industrialists have the same chance to make a profit. The T2 BPO holder makes 5mil of his sale and the other 9 make 1 mil.
Scenario 2 - Item X demand on the market is for 100 units per week. Now the industrialists cannot supply the market with the required demand, so the price increases. Additionally, this draws in more industrialists to supply the market due to the profit incentive. Because there are far more inventors than T2 BPO owners, supply from invention will determine the price point, not T2 BPOs. However, at no point would the T2 BPO owner undercut the invention set price if they are a rational actor. If they did, with high demand the incentive to buy low and sell at the higher price point exists and is exactly what happens.
Scenario 3 - Item X demand drops to 5 units per week. Now the market is in over supply and the price will drop. Normally this is where the price will drop below the cost to build the item and industrialists will leave the market due to a lack of profit incentive and will likely drop prices of the stock they have on hand to move to another item or market. The T2 BPO holder has a larger cushion to his price margin however, also runs into a point where he may no longer supply the market if the demand is so low.
In the above three scenarios we find the following re-occurring themes:
- The T2 BPO owner can make more profit than an inventor under my simplified assumptions
- The market price self-corrects based on supply and demand
- A T2 BPO owner can find a point where they still have an expensive asset (even if they got it for free it has a substantial value) that does not earn them a profit
- The presence of a T2 BPO owner for a market item is unknown to other industrialists and this knowledge alone does not affect the price of goods sold when rational actors are involved. See #2.
Now your argument is that the T2 BPO owner can "severely undercut" the inventor. So it sounds to me that your argument is not that you can't make a profit, or that you cannot compete. The T2 BPO owner can make more of a profit. This is true but you can easily compete with them.
Does this give enough of a reason to remove T2 BPOs? They are not harming the market nor are they hampering invention in any way - they are another way to supply the market with items. If you have a T2 BPO for the same market item I have, my decision to make that same item does not rest on the fact you have a T2 BPO - it rests on whether I can sell the item at a profit and within a time period that fits my business plan. Your ability to undercut me has no bearing on my decision at all because if you were to do this (market pvp) I will just buy you out. Since you are limited by the amount you can produce (I have three characters that can produce items whereas you have 1), there is no way for you to compete with me. So as a rational actor, you will NOT undercut me to a level that endangers your profits.
Leaving T2 BPOs in the game does very little overall if anything to the market or the future of T2 production through invention. In the end, the only valid argument that you have is that they can make more profit than an inventor. Under my assumptions above, that is true. Does it matter? Not if you know what game you are playing. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
qDoctor Strangelove
Beware of the Red Fox
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 04:47:00 -
[300] - Quote
I have now tried some invention. I can run 9 slots. When inventing 'modules', it takes just under 2 hours to complete. After this, I have to start clicking again.
Invention is just as click-intensive as PI, and that is just stupid.
How about CCP changing the Invention interface so you can tell for how many rounds you want the module-invention process to run, and make that count as 1 job?
INVENT T2 Target Painter -> 25 runs -> Use this stack of T1 mods -> use BPC's from this hangar -> use MATS from this hangar..
now, about 2 days later, click button, get some prints.
|
|
Haulie Berry
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 05:23:00 -
[301] - Quote
qDoctor Strangelove wrote:I have now tried some invention. I can run 9 slots. When inventing 'modules', it takes just under 2 hours to complete. After this, I have to start clicking again.
Invention is just as click-intensive as PI, and that is just stupid.
How about CCP changing the Invention interface so you can tell for how many rounds you want the module-invention process to run, and make that count as 1 job?
INVENT T2 Target Painter -> 25 runs -> Use this stack of T1 mods -> use BPC's from this hangar -> use MATS from this hangar..
now, about 2 days later, click button, get some prints.
Yes, this is probably the only complaint about invention I really agree with. Module invention is a clicky nightmare. Would love to see this improved. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
124
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 03:34:00 -
[302] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Well then orignal point is invalid Maurauders will be profitable to make for inventors but just sell very slowly at least people can produce mauraders on an equal footing and sell for profit. For sure like every item you will get some free miner syndrome but at least maurader inventors don't get crushingly undercut by a T2BPO.
Infact maurders are the perfect example of why T2BPO should be removed? Surely if T2BPO's are good for eve CCP should make some Maurader BPO's? Why not afterall T2BPO's are sweet?
OK, not sure why I'm going to continue bothering but you still don't seem to understand simple economics 101 and your credibility of a knowledgeable or semi-serious industrialist is completely shot (if it ever existed). Furthermore, this entire thread is your argument - the task is for you to convince everyone else to switch their opinion of the topic. However, simply saying you are right does not make it so and you have yet to get one person to agree with you that did not in the first place. But not to display my own hypocrisy, I will not only say your argument is flawed but I will show you in a simple way. Here are three scenarios that show you are not understanding how the T2 market (or markets in general) works. For sake of argument, assume that it takes the same amount of time (1 week) to make 1 unit of X. Assume the profit from invention is 1mil isk and for the T2BPO holder, 5mil isk. These are simple scenarios but mirror the market pretty closely from my experience. Scenario 1 - Item X is sold in a market with 9 inventors and 1 T2BPO holder. If the market demand is satisfied by selling 10 units per week, all industrialists have the same chance to make a profit. The T2 BPO holder makes 5mil of his sale and the other 9 make 1 mil. Scenario 2 - Item X demand on the market in scenario 1 is now for 100 units per week. Now the industrialists cannot supply the market with the required demand, so the price increases. Additionally, this draws in more industrialists to supply the market due to the profit incentive. Because there are far more inventors than T2 BPO owners, supply from invention will determine the price point, not T2 BPOs. However, at no point would the T2 BPO owner undercut the invention set price if they are a rational actor. If they did, with high demand the incentive to buy low and sell at the higher price point exists and is exactly what happens. If the T2 BPO owner lowers the price too low, the are only reducing their profit since the movement is high. Scenario 3 - Item X demand drops to 5 units per week. Now the market is in over supply and the price will drop. Normally this is where the price will drop below the cost to build the item and industrialists will leave the market due to a lack of profit incentive and will likely drop prices of the stock they have on hand to move to another item or market. The T2 BPO holder has a larger cushion to his price margin however, also runs into a point where he may no longer supply the market if the demand is so low. In the above three scenarios we find the following re-occurring themes:
- The T2 BPO owner can make more profit than an inventor under my simplified assumptions
- The market price self-corrects based on supply and demand
- A T2 BPO owner can find a point where they still have an expensive asset (even if they got it for free it has a substantial value) that does not earn them a profit
- The presence of a T2 BPO owner for a market item is unknown to other industrialists and this knowledge alone does not affect the price of goods sold when rational actors are involved. See #2.
Now your argument is that the T2 BPO owner can "severely undercut" the inventor. So it sounds to me that your argument is that you can't make a profit, or that you cannot compete. The T2 BPO owner can make more of a profit. This is true but you can make a profit too and you can easily compete with them where items meet or exceed demand. Does this give enough of a reason to remove T2 BPOs? In my opinion, no. They are not harming the market nor are they hampering invention in any way - they are another way to supply the market with items. If you have a T2 BPO for the same market item I have, my decision to make that same item does not rest on the fact you have a T2 BPO - it rests on whether I can sell the item at a profit and within a time period that fits my business plan. Your ability to undercut me has no bearing on my decision at all because if you were to do this (market pvp) I will just buy you out. Since you are limited by the amount you can produce (I have three characters that can produce items whereas you have 1), there is no way for you to compete with me. So as a rational actor, you will NOT undercut me to a level that endangers your profits, which will be larger than mine. Leaving T2 BPOs in the game does very little overall, if anything, to the larger market or the future of T2 production through invention. In the end, the only valid argument that you have is that they can make more profit than an inventor. Under my assumptions above, that is true. Does it matter? Not if you know what game you are playing.
This could have bin the first valid argument, if you hadn't turned it into a Piarr for the OP Curious, how would you react if Invention was buffed up enough to be of competition to BPO's How would you react if T2 BPO's where introduced into the open market, maybe as ultra rare drops, or NPC seeded. |
Haulie Berry
33
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 04:07:00 -
[303] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:
Curious, how would you react if Invention was buffed up enough to be of competition to BPO's
What does this even mean? How is it not "of competition", exactly? Let's replace Zifrian's T2 Widget with a real item, like... hm. The Adaptive Invulnerability Field II.
A T2 BPO can produce about 420 of these a month. There are, at most, 20 of those BPOs.
The daily market consumption of these ranges from 500 to over 2000....
...in DOMAIN! Yes. Surprise twist, every BPO in the game cannot even meet the demand of a single secondary market.
So if every T2 BPO that ever existed for Adaptive Invulns were producing and delivering to Amarr, Invention would be left to supply:
-44% of the Amarr market (assuming 500 units daily consumption - it's actually higher). -100% of the Jita market -100% of the Dodixie market -100% of the Hek Market -100% of every other market in the game, too.
Yeah... invention is clearly not competitive with BPOs.
Quote: How would you react if T2 BPO's where introduced into the open market, maybe as ultra rare drops, or NPC seeded.
How would that be good for the game, exactly? How would that be good for producers? As an inventor, why would I want that?
All that would do is increase the supply side of the equation, but with no increased demand the end result is that, barring a sudden population surge, inventors would make a diminishing amount of money as time progressed. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
665
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 06:19:00 -
[304] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Just want to point out, the most profitable Industrialists are all in lowsec/nulsec where the minerals are 20-50% cheeper then highsec, in other words, Inventors stand no chance while even the worst T2 BPO is outright lucrative which is killing inventors left and right.
How many people actually invent as a main source of income in eve? 5? 10? 1?
Indeed I do think 78% of all tech 2 items are created from BPO's this sounds about right to me.
edit: nulsec I have many tens of billions of ISK as an inventor. I don't own any T2 BPO. I don't want to own any T2 BPO.
I'm a hisec dweller. When I lived in w-space for 2.5 years I had hisec alts doing invention.
My corpmate Proton Power is also a serious inventor. He just got 100 billion ISK loan from MD to support his ever growing invention. He doesn't own any T2 BPO either, though he has rented them in the past.
In fact, I think everyone in my corp is currently doing invention, though not all on such a large scale.
I like that T2 BPO keeps prices low on the junk inventors don't want to make because the trade volume is so low. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
34
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 10:14:00 -
[305] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: Curious, how would you react if Invention was buffed up enough to be of competition to BPO's
You might aswell want to ask a Titan owner how he would react if rookie-ships could fit DD and capital guns, since inventions cost you litteraly nothing in ISK/Skills while T2 BPO`s cost tens of biilions and some more lvl 5 skills.
Cant you understand that something that cost you 10 million should and will never make as much profit as something that cost 100 billion?
Quote:This could have bin the first valid argument, if you hadn't turned it into a Piarr for the OP
sorry to say that, but of all these either proven wrong or over the top speculative arguments, the only valid argument you and Friend brewlar ever brought up was, that these BPO`s have been given out to players as gifts. And even that kindoff lacks on evidences and plausibility (besides the CCP T20 how got fired centuries ago) |
Morgan Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 13:31:00 -
[306] - Quote
Only thing I can see in these threats are the BPO owners whining that their profit will be cut if something happens and Invention people saying they cant compete with BPO owners.
And while looking how many threats there are bout the this and this same thing alone I do think that something needs to be done.
What that is... I have no idea but something needs to be done.
Personaly I would love to see new Tech 2 bpos in the game but as CCP most likely wants to keep the invention in the game that most likely will not happen. So to think back when invention came and some CCP dev posted that the invented prints could behaps in future be made reserchable so mayby that time has come now.
This kinda kill everything. CCP would be happy they can keep the invention system. Inventers would get a better margin and more to do and the BPO owners would get competition. And tough luck if you where stupid enough to pay 100bil from your print. It's a game so boohoo.
I see that there would be more happy players if something like this would be implemented that tehre would be anoyed players.
So ccp do something so we can have something else to talk about in the forums.
And please give me more Tech 2 originals. Thank you |
Haulie Berry
33
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 14:31:00 -
[307] - Quote
Morgan Dinn wrote:Only thing I can see in these threats are the BPO owners whining that their profit will be cut if something happens and Invention people saying they cant compete with BPO owners.
Which posters in these threads own BPOs, then? Can you name them? I don't own any. Akita doesn't - I'm not sure if he even does production, or just trade. Pretty sure Zifrian doesn't.
Quote:And while looking how many threats there are bout the this and this same thing alone I do think that something needs to be done.
That's like saying, "Well, based on the number of funerals the Westboro Baptist Church has protested, something clearly needs to be done about this homosexuality problem." It's a logical non sequitur. People with an agenda tend to make a lot of noise. That has absolutely no bearing on the validity of that agenda. Repeating something fallacious doesn't magically impart truth.
Quote: What that is... I have no idea but something needs to be done.
We're all very grateful for your valuable contribution.
Quote:
Personaly I would love to see new Tech 2 bpos in the game but as CCP most likely wants to keep the invention in the game that most likely will not happen. So to think back when invention came and some CCP dev posted that the invented prints could behaps in future be made reserchable so mayby that time has come now.
This kinda kill everything. CCP would be happy they can keep the invention system. Inventers would get a better margin and more to do and the BPO owners would get competition. And tough luck if you where stupid enough to pay 100bil from your print. It's a game so boohoo.
Inventors would NOT get a better margin. We would get the SAME margin, by percentage, but at a lower price point. If I can make T2 Widgets for 2 million and mark them up 10%, I make 200K per widget.
If I can make T2 widgets for 1.5 million and mark them up 10%, I make 150K per widget. How the does that benefit me, exactly? Why would I want that?
Furthermore, let's say the copy time for widgets is 1 hour, the invent time is 1 hour, and the manufacturing time is 1 hour.
On average, I will need 2 copies and 2 invent jobs per production job, so that's 2+2+1 = 5 slot-hours of production time, or 40K per slot-hour for a 200K profit margin item.
With this make-the-BPC-researchable-stupidity, I now have copy time + invent time + research time + production time. Even if one point of ME took only one hour to get, and all I needed was the one point, I've gone from making 200K over 5 slothours to making 150K over 6 slot hours. While the slot-hour cost is defrayed some by multi-run prints, the end result is still that I have to spend more time making less money.
Yeah, thanks a lot. You've done sooooooo much for invention.
Some sort of carryover from the T1's ME might be feasible, but even then, who REALLY gains from that? The margins WILL NOT improve. Moongoo prices (mostly tech) will decrease. The base production costs will decrease. The price will decrease to match. The demand for most ships and modules is relatively inelastic with respect to price, so it's not like reducing the overall price 25% will mean moving 25% more units (and I can already sell everything I can produce, anyway), so the only people who REALLY benefit from that are consumers. It hurts moongoo producers (but **** them anyway) and is somewhere between neutral and bad for inventors, at best. |
Vigilant
Vigilant's Vigilante's
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:35:00 -
[308] - Quote
There is only two solutions that will work right now in EVE.
1) Give everyone access to all bpo's thru the market 2) make invention better, thus more competitive to T2 bpo's (read between the lines, easier and better ME/PE)
And yes I own a couple t2 bpos, cheesy rocket ones, but i own them. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:52:00 -
[309] - Quote
Vigilant wrote:There is only two solutions that will work right now in EVE.
1) Give everyone access to all bpo's thru the market 2) make invention better, thus more competitive to T2 bpo's (read between the lines, easier and better ME/PE)
And yes I own a couple t2 bpos, cheesy rocket ones, but i own them.
Number 2 is a good idea number 1 is terrible. EVE online has a great crafting system particuallry in respect to T2 items ie invention it is however completely undermined by T2BPO's which remove all complexity from T2 production. CCP has sold eve short by introducing T2BPO's it's pretty much 'free mining' the whole invention system.
Hey lets introduce this cool crafting system and then make it completely pointless in the majority of items by also giving T2BPO's to our mates and 'randomly' chosen subscribers. |
OllieNorth
Recidivists Incorporated
178
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 16:59:00 -
[310] - Quote
How many times does it have to be covered? Even if every T2 BPO in the game is constantly producing at full capacity (which they aren't, I promise) they can't touch the demand for the goods. The number of players flying and losing t2 modules and ships is geometrically higher than when the T2bpos were introduced. THEY JUST DON"T MAKE THAT BIG OF A DEAL!!!!
The reason you don't make money with T2 is that your supply chain is crap and you are making a product people don't want. Stop blaming it on the BPOs.
And no, I don't have any T2 BPOs, hell, I don't even do production and I still know better. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:14:00 -
[311] - Quote
OllieNorth wrote:How many times does it have to be covered? Even if every T2 BPO in the game is constantly producing at full capacity (which they aren't, I promise) they can't touch the demand for the goods. The number of players flying and losing t2 modules and ships is geometrically higher than when the T2bpos were introduced. THEY JUST DON"T MAKE THAT BIG OF A DEAL!!!!
The reason you don't make money with T2 is that your supply chain is crap and you are making a product people don't want. Stop blaming it on the BPOs.
And no, I don't have any T2 BPOs, hell, I don't even do production and I still know better.
Clearly you don't as 70% + of T2 production being completed by T2BPO's in some lines is not irrelevant. Invention should be more efficient than T2BPO and lets see the BPO owners whine when they are locked out of most T2 items due to being undercut by invention. Oh but wait they can invent too so why the hell did CCP ever think it was good idea to let them skip this stage in the first place?
''As the game population grows the impact of T2 BPO's on EVE's economy shrinks.''
As the impact of T2 BPO's on EVE's economy grows the game population shrinks. |
Haulie Berry
39
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:19:00 -
[312] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: As the impact of T2 BPO's on EVE's economy grows the game population shrinks.
Oh, hey, you're making things up again. How novel.
|
Empidonax
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:23:00 -
[313] - Quote
Impressive. 3 unlocked forum posts on the same subject, with over 450 replies and over 11,000 views. Who are the people making us 11,000 views? We are watchers, being entertained as if we were watching Jerry Springer.
About 1/4 of the posts are by one person, and I can't decide whether he is incredibly dense and unable to understand the concept being presented to him or is a fantastically successful troll! (11,000 views and counting!) He doesn't respond to meaningful posts, he makes jumps in logic that make absolutely no sense, he presents obviously made-up facts, and repeats this process ad nauseum.
If I wanted to make an argument that t2 bpo's should be removed, I probably would have STARTED with answers to questions like the ones Akita presented:
Quote:The relevant questions are: 1) Would the game improve by ONLY removing T2 BPOs and changing nothing else ? *1b) For whom ? *1c) And for how long ? 2) How exactly do you plan to compensate current T2 BPO owners for the loss of the BPO in case of a removal ? *2b) If you say no reimbursement, how would you feel if a large portion of your NAV was wiped out just because somebody else felt it's not ok for you to have it ? *2c) Would you differentiate between lottery winners and current owners that purchased them (and how) ? *2d) How would that reimbursement affect the rest of the economy (domino effect) ? 3) What else (other than touching anything regarding T2 BPOs) can be done to improve the game in the areas people seem to be complaining about when they ask for a removal of T2 BPOs ? *3b) Would improvements in the output of invention (runs, ME/PE levels) in certain conditions not be more appropriate instead ? *3c) How about an uncapping of all moongoo production from the fixed max level we're currently living with ? Also, this : http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1360780
I'm going to keep his posts in mind if I ever want to see if I can start a hugely popular troll thread.
I am confused, though, about why there are now THREE threads on the same subject, I can't even figure out which one to post in. They're all the same discussion. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:25:00 -
[314] - Quote
84% of interceptors are produced using BPO's WTF? OK here we have a common item yet BPO's still dominate, Why is this? |
Empidonax
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:30:00 -
[315] - Quote
And here is a perfect example of "doesn't respond to meaningful posts". He had the perfect chance to answer some really good questions from Akita T, AGAIN, and instead we get more rhetoric. |
Haulie Berry
40
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:32:00 -
[316] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:84% of interceptors are produced using BPO's WTF? OK here we have a common item yet BPO's still dominate, Why is this?
The problem with cherry picking out-of-context statistics from publicly available documents is that they're.. well... public.
The conclusion of that particular document:
Quote:SUMMARY
In conclusion, invention has taken over a large portion of the Tech II market, especially in areas where the supply from the BPOs failed to keep pace with the high demand for these much sought-after items. There are exceptions for some items like interceptors, which have relatively fast build times, and are thus mostly produced by BPO owners since they can fill the demand. , But without question, invention has had a great effect on the market as a whole.
Since the introduction of the invention system, price for many of the most sought after Tech II items have dropped down to much more affordable levels in the past two and a half years. With the barrier of entry into Tech II production effectively removed, the supply for high demand items in addition to items with long build times has increased greatly, which in turn has created market competition and made it all but impossible for cartels to monopolize certain products.
The most intriguing and unexpected revelation we had while looking through Tech II production was the relatively large amount of production done in lowsec space, beating out nullsec space by a fair margin. As outlined earlier, most lowsec Tech II production done is performed in 0.4 systems. Therefore, we can assume that this is largely attributed to its proximity to hisec space, where finished products are transported for sale on the market. There are other benefits as well, most notably the higher availability of production and invention slots in lowsec space. Between these and the generally higher availability of contracts (binding transaction agreements between parties that can include the transportation of goods) with high security space, there is decreased downtime between production jobsGÇöa good thing, considering that time is money.
As the player base for EVE continues to grow, the demand for Tech II products will only increase, creating new opportunities for aspiring industrialists to break into the Tech II market through invention. Proportionally, we can expect BPCs to account for an increasingly larger portion of the Tech II market in the coming months and years, as the limited supply of BPOs does not have the capacity to meet the demand.
TL;DR version: There are some outliers, but on the whole, invention is working as intended. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:35:00 -
[317] - Quote
Ah cool but surely this is a prime example why Interceptor invention is in dire need of buffing? |
Haulie Berry
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 22:57:00 -
[318] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Ah cool but surely this is a prime example why Interceptor invention is in dire need of buffing?
Is it, though? Have you actually looked at Interceptor production numbers? Not even invention - just BPO production.
A perfect print will build an interceptor every 3.5 hours (and change) and, at present Jita prices, that comes out to about 1.85m profit per unit.
I can't invent them at a profit... but I CAN invent things that will exceed the ~380 million a month per slot profit of a Crusader BPO, and I can do that without tens of billions in upfront investment. Hell, I could just build one line of Hurricanes and beat that number, so why should I be upset about it, again? Even if I COULD get BPO-profits on interceptors, I still wouldn't make them because the beauty of invention is that I can build whatever will make the most money, and that's definitely not interceptors - not even at BPO production values.
The monthly return on a good BPO is about 3%. Except for very large sums of isk, it is not hard to get 5-10 times that return for your money, thus, that BPO only becomes an attractive option when you reach a state of I-have-so-much-isk-I-don't-know-what-to-do-with-it-anymore-and-I'm-just-letting-it-sit-idle-in-my-wallet.
Oh, and I forgot to add: That profit number is only if you build all of the components yourself, which results in a really dismal profit-per-slothour (a fact which many people like to ignore). You are, at that point, simply using the ship as a means of selling T2 components in bulk with little-to-no added value coming from the ship itself.
Eveeye actually shows a perfect crusader BPO culminating in a 3B a year loss if you're buying components. Up-to-the-minute sell order pricing puts them at a 280K profit per unit. That's 80K per slot-hour. |
Ore Bunny
Kuh Schubs Clan
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 23:18:00 -
[319] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: T2BPO's in some lines is not irrelevant. Invention should be more efficient than T2BPO .
And why? because T2 BPOs cost 100 times more than an Invention with similar effort?... I dont get it
Also, could you please link the source if this 84% information, just curious. |
Haulie Berry
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 23:30:00 -
[320] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: T2BPO's in some lines is not irrelevant. Invention should be more efficient than T2BPO . And why? because T2 BPOs cost 100 times more than an Invention with similar effort?... I dont get it Also, could you please link the source if this 84% information, just curious.
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf |
|
Al Thorr
The Wheel
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 23:35:00 -
[321] - Quote
To the players who whinge , who were not involved in the initial release of the lottery tough *****.
To the others - Guess what ....the odd mega buck or two can be be made off T2......... Not ships. thats down to a broken nanotransistor mechanic. .
Serious hint ... think modules not ships.
Why modules? learn to play the game.
If your cannot make isk from T2 invention then you should give up,
Hells teeth even buying/ reselling said modules can earn a bucket....( sod invention altogether)
Al Thorr
|
Salarc
Non Offensive
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.04 23:56:00 -
[322] - Quote
Why do we need 16 pages of troll feed?
Can we just get this locked? there's no content, just some whiny kid who doesn't understand eve |
Empidonax
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 00:03:00 -
[323] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: T2BPO's in some lines is not irrelevant. Invention should be more efficient than T2BPO . And why? because T2 BPOs cost 100 times more than an Invention with similar effort?... I dont get it Also, could you please link the source if this 84% information, just curious. http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf
I'm pretty sure it's from the early April posts on https://twitter.com/#!/CCP_Diagoras |
Ore Bunny
Kuh Schubs Clan
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 00:20:00 -
[324] - Quote
yea ok, Inties probably compete with faction hulls a lot, but why are you so selective with your examples and ignore that Hulk, Cap.Recharger II or cov ops cloak.
so... 92% of Covert Ops cloaking Device II produced using BPC`S WTF OMG, Boost BPO`s nerf Invention!
thx for the link btw. |
Haulie Berry
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 00:20:00 -
[325] - Quote
Empidonax wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: T2BPO's in some lines is not irrelevant. Invention should be more efficient than T2BPO . And why? because T2 BPOs cost 100 times more than an Invention with similar effort?... I dont get it Also, could you please link the source if this 84% information, just curious. http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q2-2009.pdf I'm pretty sure it's from the early April posts on https://twitter.com/#!/CCP_Diagoras
Nope. It's from my link, the Q2 2009 QEN. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1088
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 00:29:00 -
[326] - Quote
For items where demand is low, T2 BPOs dominate, but PROFITS are minimal due to a combination of pathetic volumes and rock-bottom prices. Most T2 items by count of types are actually in this category. Inventors can't compete, true, but without T2 BPOs, demand would go even lower, so inventors still would have no reason to bother with the items much. T2 BPOs are not a problem here - they actually are a blessing, since they help keep prices of those items within barely acceptable levels so the items are still used at least occasionally. If invention was the only source, some might even stop being used altogether, while others will seldom be seen.
For item where demand is average, PROFITS are minimal for inventors (regardless of whether any BPOs exist or not, some med-demand items actually have no BPOs) and decent for BPO owners. T2 BPOs could begin to be considered a nuisance here, but not a serious problem. The pool of items that are in this category is very small, so the impact T2 BPOs might have is still minimal overall.
For items where demand is high, invention dominates T2 BPOs, PROFITS are decent for inventors and good for BPO owners. T2 BPOs are not a concern at all here. If considering total ISK value of trades, the overwhelming vast majority of value comes from THIS category of items (which has less individual item types than those in the first category).
Overall, for the inventors, T2 BPOs are not a real concern. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
313
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 01:24:00 -
[327] - Quote
Akita T wrote:For items where demand is low compared to what T2 BPOs can provide, T2 BPOs dominate, but PROFITS are minimal due to a combination of pathetic volumes and rock-bottom prices. Most T2 items by count of types are actually in this category. Inventors can't compete, true, but without T2 BPOs, demand would go even lower, so inventors still would have no reason to bother with the items much anyway. T2 BPOs are not a problem here - they actually are a blessing, since they help keep prices of those items within barely acceptable levels so the items are still used at least occasionally. If invention was the only source, some might even stop being used altogether, while others will seldom be seen.
For items where demand could conceivably be called "average", PROFITS are minimal for inventors (regardless of whether any BPOs exist or not, some so-called "medium demand" items actually have no BPOs) and decent for BPO owners (if any BPO owners exist at all for the item, that is). T2 BPOs could begin to be considered a nuisance here (again, where they exist), but not a serious problem. The pool of items that are in this category is very small (and quite a few have no T2 BPOs at all), so the impact T2 BPOs might have is still minimal overall.
For items where demand is high compared to what T2 BPOs can provide, invention dominates T2 BPOs, PROFITS are decent for inventors and good for BPO owners. T2 BPOs pretty much don't really matter at all here. If considering total ISK value of trades, the overwhelming vast majority of value comes from THIS category of items (which has less individual item types than those in the first category).
Overall, for the inventors, T2 BPOs are not a REAL concern, no matter how you look at it. Sure, there's some envy every now and then (not from any serious inventors anyway, IMO), but that's about it.
...
P.S. Here's a challenge : find me a person whose main income in EVE comes from invention that honestly says (for an item where T2 BPOs exist) "I really wanted to get this T2 BPO but could not find any no matter how much I tried" or something else with similar meaning. Some concrete proof would be nice (old WTB threads, for instance). Personal opinion : you will have significant trouble in finding any serious inventor that says he really wants a specific T2 BPO (most would never bother), for starters, and if you somehow do manage to find one (miraculously), it's nearly impossible he hasn't been able to purchase one eventually (unless he mistakenly picked an item where BPOs don't actually exist, or maybe he just wasn't willing to pay the going price).
OP, you have just been owned.
Next!
(Necro-kitteh is necro'in' ur traed!!11!!oneone!!) Braaaaaaaiiin... |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 12:29:00 -
[328] - Quote
What if CCP announced that it was stopping super capital production and not allowing any more to be generated, that would be fair right? Because if you want a Super Cap you can buy one of another player. Exact same issue with T2BPO's it gave a massive advantage to those who were around at the time and saying you can buy one of them is plain ********. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1090
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 13:12:00 -
[329] - Quote
You mean, what if CCP announced NPCs would no longer sell super-capital ship BPOs and you had to buy from specific LP shops something that leads to super-capital BPCs, but left the super-capital BPOs that exist in place, don't you ? :P Super-caps could still be generated by any player without access to a supercap BPO, but it would be quite a bit more expensive than what super-cap BPO owners would be making them for. Also, super-capital BPOs will most likely go up in price quite a bit on the free market after that removal, since, hey, limited edition, and offering benefits over the only other alternative. It's almost as if you want CCP to remove everything that was once seeded by NPCs but no longer is... like, oh, say, some particular skillbooks ? I mean, those are also insanely expensive nowadays, but people still got them dirt-cheap back when NPCs sold them. Or how about space mine BPOs ? Granted, you can't use the items themselves anymore, but the BPOs still exist (and AFAIK you can still copy them and make items from them if you want, I might be mistaken though).
Also, you say it gave them a massive advantage. Well, it would be inappropriate to say that it gave a MASSIVE advantage, since it actually gave them a MONOPOLY. Again, I give you the concrete case of Cap Recharger II BPOs, which sold for as much as 200 bil ISK a piece before invention, and you could make that money back in pure profits in about 5 MONTHS OF PRODUCTION then keep on going until bored... That monopoly no longer exists. It imploded the split second invention was introduced. T2 item prices have experienced a massive freefall in a matter of days after invention came around, stabilizing to prices radically lower for a long time.
You are correct about one thing though... it GAVE them an advantage. Emphasis on the past tense.
Let's say there are 2 people, person A and person B. Person A has 100 bil ISK. Person B has a T2 BPO that makes 20 bil ISK per year profit, a BPO of a type that was recently transacted for about 100 bil ISK.
FIRST QUESTION for you - which person is richer RIGHT NOW, person A or person B ?
The correct answer is that they're equally wealthy, but their wealth resides in different types of items. How person B got to have that specific T2 BPO does not matter. He might have earned it himself in the lottery. He might have bought if from somebody else using ISK. He could have won it in a game of poker. He could have stolen it from an unsecured corp hangar. He could have looted it from a wreck. He could have scammed it away from somebody. He might have received it as a gift. It really DOES NOT MATTER how he got the T2 BPO. Either way, it's worth 100 bil ISK.
SECOND QUESTION for you (actually, a set of questions) - should person A buy the BPO ? should person B sell the BPO ? why ? or why not ?
The answer is simple, actually. The flat (non-capitalized) RoI is ~1.66% per month. The rolling (re-capitalized monthly) RoI is ~1.16%. If any of the two can invest 100 bil ISK into something that brings them more than 1.66 bil per month OR more than 1.16 bil per month with the possibility to reinvest with perfect scaling up of profit, then they should NOT buy the BPO, or if they have it, they should sell it. Conversely, if they can't do that, they SHOULD buy the BPO, or if they already have it, not sell it. Do you notice how the actual price of the blueprint and what exactly does the blueprint manufacture is of a distant secondary importance ? Also, just a hint : even 3% is a pretty crappy RoI for almost nothing done. 1.66% is beyond crappy for something you actually have to put any effort in, and for T2 BPOs, as much as you like to call them effortless, they certainly are NOT.
LAST QUESTION for you - since in the end, a T2 BPO is pretty much interchangeable with their market ISK value, from a purely economic perspective, how exactly would you feel about CCP arbitrarily removing a huge amount of ISK from your wallet ?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.05 14:13:00 -
[330] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:What if CCP announced that it was stopping super capital production and not allowing any more to be generated, that would be fair right? Because if you want a Super Cap you can buy one of another player. Exact same issue with T2BPO's it gave a massive advantage to those who were around at the time and saying you can buy one of them is plain ********.
Enough with the one-liners and cherry-picked statistics and wild accusations. SHOW US YOU'VE DONE SOME HOMEWORK ON THIS SUBJECT. OK, fine, there's things you don't like. I think we all have read those things dozens of times now. It seems like a trivial matter. Convince us otherwise with a WELL THOUGHT-OUT ARGUMENT. Do your ******* homework! |
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
314
|
Posted - 2012.05.06 04:44:00 -
[331] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Enough with the one-liners and cherry-picked statistics and wild accusations. SHOW US YOU'VE DONE SOME HOMEWORK ON THIS SUBJECT. OK, fine, there's things you don't like. I think we all have read those things dozens of times now. It seems like a trivial matter. Convince us otherwise with a WELL THOUGHT-OUT ARGUMENT. Do your ******* homework!
Can't we just report him for spamming and trolling instead?
Braaaaaaaiiin... |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.06 23:26:00 -
[332] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Enough with the one-liners and cherry-picked statistics and wild accusations. SHOW US YOU'VE DONE SOME HOMEWORK ON THIS SUBJECT. OK, fine, there's things you don't like. I think we all have read those things dozens of times now. It seems like a trivial matter. Convince us otherwise with a WELL THOUGHT-OUT ARGUMENT. Do your ******* homework!
Can't we just report him for spamming and trolling instead?
Thread was locked once allready and then unlocked but seeing as there are multiple threads on T2BPO I think the devs should read through each one and pick one to stay at the top of the forum instead of 3 to 4. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
277
|
Posted - 2012.05.06 23:29:00 -
[333] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Enough with the one-liners and cherry-picked statistics and wild accusations. SHOW US YOU'VE DONE SOME HOMEWORK ON THIS SUBJECT. OK, fine, there's things you don't like. I think we all have read those things dozens of times now. It seems like a trivial matter. Convince us otherwise with a WELL THOUGHT-OUT ARGUMENT. Do your ******* homework!
Can't we just report him for spamming and trolling instead? Just ignore him and stop posting in his threads. He'll go away.
I wish I had taken my own advice earlier. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2012.05.06 23:31:00 -
[334] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Thread was locked once allready and then unlocked but seeing as there are multiple threads .
yea multiple threads that got created by you and your alts, dev-¦s can see that aswell
|
Zelda Wei
New Horizon Trade Exchange
107
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 06:01:00 -
[335] - Quote
This level of stupidity is criminal so it should moved to COAD. |
Morgan Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 06:06:00 -
[336] - Quote
I have problems deciding on in which threat i should type :P |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 11:42:00 -
[337] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Thread was locked once allready and then unlocked but seeing as there are multiple threads .
yea multiple threads that got created by you and your alts, dev-¦s can see that aswell
Good point Devs can see that and yet none of the posts are even locked or deleted it's as if there are many people unhappy with T2BPO and are posting on the forum, your Tinfoil hat needs adjusting.
Actually reading defendents of T2BPO particularly Akita's posts I'm more and more convinced that the right thing to do would be to leave T2BPO but allow invention copies to inheret their T1BPO's ME levels. That way invention would be on par with T2BPO but owners of T2BPO's would still not ahve to invent. |
Morgan Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 12:19:00 -
[338] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Thread was locked once allready and then unlocked but seeing as there are multiple threads .
yea multiple threads that got created by you and your alts, dev-¦s can see that aswell Good point Devs can see that and yet none of the posts are even locked or deleted it's as if there are many people unhappy with T2BPO and are posting on the forum, your Tinfoil hat needs adjusting. Actually reading defendents of T2BPO particularly Akita's posts I'm more and more convinced that the right thing to do would be to leave T2BPO but allow invention copies to inheret their T1BPO's ME levels. That way invention would be on par with T2BPO but owners of T2BPO's would still not ahve to invent.
I would allow the research of the copies. Giving the same ME level than original t1 print had would just be silly. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 13:25:00 -
[339] - Quote
Do either of those proposals actually result in more or less money for inventors than the status quo? I'm not convinced either way, but I'm leaning towards less. The situation is far from straight forward and anybody who claims to have an answer will need to provide more than anecdotes and hunches to make their point. |
Morgan Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 13:39:00 -
[340] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Do either of those proposals actually result in more or less money for inventors than the status quo? I'm not convinced either way, but I'm leaning towards less. The situation is far from straight forward and anybody who claims to have an answer will need to provide more than anecdotes and hunches to make their point.
Well I would say thet if you could research the invented bpos that would rise the ME which would give the inventors more profit and one the other hand the BPO owners bpos would loose some value cause the invented prits could have the same ME levels.
Also when you research T2 prints it costs to you so... there would be a rise in the manufacturing of the print it self but you would get more profit from the end product and that profit would be actualy alot and in the end if you research enough you would get the same prints to the same level as the originals. Tough is this vise for a 10 run print. I do not know but it would almost put the inventors and BPO owners to the same level. And the BPO owners would still have a upperhand cause they can just do the prints. They do not need to invent before they start manufacturing. |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
40
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 14:05:00 -
[341] - Quote
improving the ME will just reduce the price of the products but on a long term it will just give you more competition and same, if not even lower margins than we have now.
imho, if you want to boost Invention, I would simply try to give manufactures some more power. Make it harder to produce T2 Ships/items, add more skills for the build them, increase the build time (orignals and copies). That way "beeing an Inventor" would be a more specialised role, and casual Industrialists would stop ruining prices and become customers. |
Haulie Berry
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 14:38:00 -
[342] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Do either of those proposals actually result in more or less money for inventors than the status quo? I'm not convinced either way, but I'm leaning towards less. The situation is far from straight forward and anybody who claims to have an answer will need to provide more than anecdotes and hunches to make their point.
The let-us-research-the-copies! idea is always extremely stupid. You go from Copytime + invent time + production time to copytime + invent time + research time + production time. The only positive benefit this could have on margins is if it caused a number of people to give up invention because it's just too ******* annoying to bother with anymore, when the system already needs to be made less obnoxious. Even in that unlikely scenario, any increase in margin would be more than consumed by the additional time required, resulting in less profit per slot-hour.
Scrapyard Bob's Sqrt(BPOME)-5 = BPCME idea is... okay. It would effectively remove hobbyist inventors from the equation because the "pros" will be using BPCs with ME that they won't be able to compete with and, unlike BPOs, they will actually be able to fill demand via invention, which isn't a bad thing, unless you're a casual. It basically would require you to do a LOT of ME research to get just a few points of ME in return. 100 ME on your T1 BPO would translate into 5ME on your BPC. I sort of like it out of sheer spite, as the same people who cry about BPOs would almost certainly be locked out of the invention system by such a change. |
qDoctor Strangelove
Beware of the Red Fox
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 14:43:00 -
[343] - Quote
Improve the damn interface for invention. When making small mods, the ME/PE of the BPC is of no importance since it will use the same amount of minerals. The issue are that my producer can have 9 invention jobs going, and they take 1 hour each.
The only people I can see doing massive invention would be bots. First I have to RIGHT CLICK the BPC. SELECT INVENTION SELECT LAB SELECT THE T1 MOD PRESS OK PRESS ACCEPT
then repeat.... 9 times, every 1h 15 min...
:CCP:
The BPO owners can just right click, manufacture 1000 units, 3-4 more clicks, wait 30 days.
THAT is the problem, the interface... not the existence of the BPO. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 14:44:00 -
[344] - Quote
Here's an idea. If we really want to increase our income as inventors we should lobby for changes to the way insurance is calculated, so that T2 hulls pay out for their full replacement price. All of a sudden a lot more people are willing to undock in one of our fancy products and risk blowing it up. Demand for T2 hulls goes through the roof. Filthy lucre for everybody! The only losers are NPC underwriters, and who gives a **** about them anyway? |
qDoctor Strangelove
Beware of the Red Fox
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 17:02:00 -
[345] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Here's an idea. If we really want to increase our income as inventors we should lobby for changes to the way insurance is calculated, so that T2 hulls pay out for their full replacement price. All of a sudden a lot more people are willing to undock in one of our fancy products and risk blowing it up. Demand for T2 hulls goes through the roof. Filthy lucre for everybody! The only losers are NPC underwriters, and who gives a **** about them anyway?
There are a lot more to T2 than hulls. Besides, had it not been for OTEC, T2 frigs would be 5 mill isk again. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 17:38:00 -
[346] - Quote
qDoctor Strangelove wrote:There are a lot more to T2 than hulls. Besides, had it not been for OTEC, T2 frigs would be 5 mill isk again.
Right, but people seem to have no problem writing off T2 modules as a cost of doing PvP and it shows in what modules are money makers and what aren't. A few T2 frigates are cheap enough that eating their replacement cost doesn't seem to hurt their popularity, but my hunch is that if insurance covered more of a T2 hull's actual cost they'd be more attractive as ships that you know ahead of time are going to end in a ball of fire with your pod in the middle of it. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
294
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 18:25:00 -
[347] - Quote
T2 BPO's are fine.... You might have had a case for removing them many, many years ago, but at this point, most people that have them worked for them (by thieving, killing, or buying them). Removing them now is just wrong on many levels, primarily because you're destroying years of efforts of many players just because you think you can't compete.... which is typically wrong...
Instead, look at how you can improve the invention process, such that you don't destroy the utility of t2 BPOs, but you allow invention to compete...
I didn't read all 18 pages of this thread, so this might have been proposed earlier, but a simple change to decryptors would solve much of your whining, bitching, and moaning...
Make it so decryptors impart a fraction of the T1 BPC's ME & PE levels into invented T2 BPC. i.e., instead of having them impart +1 or +2 ME levels to the -4/-4 Invented BPC, have them impart 5% or 10% instead...
The downside to this, is it makes it very hard on the new builder... Currently, a new builder coming into the t2 production market primarily doesn't have to compete with highly researched T2 BPC/BPOs (except in a few cases). Their invented BPC's are just as researched as everyone elses.... I can't decide if this is a good thing, or a bad thing, as I believe in rewarding investement (i.e. time spent researching ME/PE Levels).
The other option I've always heard, allow the BPC's to be researched...
|
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.07 21:16:00 -
[348] - Quote
The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).
The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.
As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei
The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Morgan Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.08 06:09:00 -
[349] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).
The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.
As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei
The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi
You and your **** card again :D go away. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.08 09:45:00 -
[350] - Quote
Morgan Dinn wrote:You and your **** card again :D go away.
An inconvenient truth ? ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.08 10:21:00 -
[351] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).
The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.
As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei
The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi
Relating the deaths of millions to our little irrelevant computer game hobby, you represent T2BPO well . Please continue hopefully in the next few posts you will earn yourself a ban.
|
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.08 10:34:00 -
[352] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Lara Dantreb wrote:The speech Brewlar Kuvakei, with its lack of argument with his accusations that are not based on anything concrete, with the generalization from a single case, with all its bad faith, with the stigma of a class of players according to their properties and how they have acquired, is a National Socialist speech (na-zi).
The Na-zi have installed this hate speech for years in Germany 30 years to prepare raffles and looting of Jewish property.
As a holder of T2 BPOs I am proud to be a Jew for Brewlar Kuvakei
The character "Brewlar Kuvakei" behaves like a Na-zi Relating the deaths of millions to our little irrelevant computer game hobby, you represent T2BPO well . Please continue hopefully in the next few posts you will earn yourself a ban.
The comparison ends at your speech and your smear method of course, I do not emphasis things like you are used to do.
"Why they should be removed and how", "easy solution to T2bpo issue", I am somewhat surprised that this type of semantics is still used to describe a community, even in a video computer game ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.08 10:56:00 -
[353] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Relating the deaths of millions to our little irrelevant computer game hobby, you represent T2BPO well . Please continue hopefully in the next few posts you will earn yourself a ban.
considering that you got 2 pages of this thread deleted because you started posts like "STFU you stup** cun**" over losing an argument, you should not play the moral card. just saying.
|
Jajas Helper
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.08 11:50:00 -
[354] - Quote
I'll drop this in:
Played this game for 3-4 years, gathered 30bil -> bought a T2 bpo and will recover that amount in 5-7 years + (Or more if ccp changes ship, modules or a general - that module is now useless and nobody buys it....)
I dont know why you think T2bpos are "unfair" if it takes that amount of investment other then you been jelly about hard work paying off for someone else.
That said: Yes i like it that i now have to do 30less inventions a day and have reduced some clickfest.... but i am broke on liquid isk ( considering my wallet before)....
Never forget T2BPO owners risk losing the value of their bpo on every ccp nerf / change in module performance.
But most of all, if you find them so unfair.. why the hell are you not taking advantage of them? Because if they are so OP, why dont you isk in on them? There are enough T2bpos sold on the forum and contracts to get yourself some nice advantage...
anyway, jelly haters gonne hate...
add: shameless copy paste of my post in the other hater thread... hate me for it |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
934
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 14:05:00 -
[355] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: Make it so decryptors impart a fraction of the T1 BPC's ME & PE levels into invented T2 BPC. i.e., instead of having them impart +1 or +2 ME levels to the -4/-4 Invented BPC, have them impart 5% or 10% instead...
The downside to this, is it makes it very hard on the new builder... Currently, a new builder coming into the t2 production market primarily doesn't have to compete with highly researched T2 BPC/BPOs (except in a few cases). Their invented BPC's are just as researched as everyone elses.... I can't decide if this is a good thing, or a bad thing, as I believe in rewarding investement (i.e. time spent researching ME/PE Levels).
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. |
Stella SGP
200
|
Posted - 2012.05.10 21:50:00 -
[356] - 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. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
937
|
Posted - 2012.05.11 12:23:00 -
[357] - Quote
Stella SGP wrote: 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 lowers the gap between the profit margin that a T2 BPO owner gets and what a T2 inventor gets on the same item. This levels the playing field and narrows the advantage that T2 BPO owners have.
Since T2 BPOs will never be removed, I'm in favor of things that:
- Make datacores cheaper (through increased supply such as selling datacores in the NPC R&D corp LP stores). That directly impacts how much the invention step costs.
- Increases the supply of decryptors (or changes them to work like RAM with % damage).
- Lower the monthly fuel cost of a POS tower (cheaper copies). This also directly impacts the cost of invention.
- Streamline the invention process to be less of a click-fest.
- Makes the decryptors that penalize ME, more interesting and desired. They would then have more demand and be useful in more situations. Or possibly rebalance the decryptors.
- Lowers the "waste" amount which BPO owners can get rid of, but invention owners have to put up with. For many things the -4 ME isn't a big deal, for other things, the -4 ME is bad enough that it erases the profit margin.
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.11 12:45:00 -
[358] - Quote
From my point of view the square root method adds a mountain of ME and PE lab time to my queue just to keep my income from dropping through the floor. |
Javajunky
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 05:24:00 -
[359] - Quote
Instead of campaigning endlessly for the removal of T2 BPO's from the game, why not go in the opposite direction and campaign for some mechanism that would allow the creation of T2 BPO's back into the game.
A Research Discovery Processs, requires some mad research skills, 500 or so datacores with a chance based increased with decryptors blah blah blah to score a T2 BPO.
just sayin.. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 08:42:00 -
[360] - Quote
Javajunky wrote:Instead of campaigning endlessly for the removal of T2 BPO's from the game, why not go in the opposite direction and campaign for some mechanism that would allow the creation of T2 BPO's back into the game.
A Research Discovery Processs, requires some mad research skills, 500 or so datacores with a chance based increased with decryptors blah blah blah to score a T2 BPO.
just sayin..
that would kill invention entirely over some time and would make it impossible for newer players to get into T2 manufaction, there for I`d call this a quite bad idea.
people just have to start focusing on improving their own business, rather on damaging business of others. |
|
Daxine Myth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 14:58:00 -
[361] - Quote
Well at least T2BPO's are being removed from high sec which is a small nerf. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 15:04:00 -
[362] - Quote
Daxine Myth wrote:Well at least T2BPO's are being removed from high sec which is a small nerf.
wich is also not true...lol...so many brewlar alts these days...
btw....have you noticed that Datacores did spike in price? How does it feel to see T2 BPO`s rather getting more and more profitable even after all your efforts and tears against them? |
RonPaul Rox
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.16 00:55:00 -
[363] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Daxine Myth wrote:Well at least T2BPO's are being removed from high sec which is a small nerf. wich is also not true...lol...so many brewlar alts these days... btw....have you noticed that Datacores did spike in price? How does it feel to see T2 BPO`s rather getting more and more profitable even after all your efforts and tears against them?
I dont like it
|
Stella SGP
209
|
Posted - 2012.05.16 03:03:00 -
[364] - 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. |
0Lona 0ltor
Red Sky Morning BricK sQuAD.
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.20 12:46:00 -
[365] - Quote
Moving T2 production into null sec only is a great idea. It will allow T2BPO's to be lost via station capture/fire-sale, POS destruction and just general ship ganking. Currently T2BPO's are OP and they have zero risk of destruction while sitting in high/low sec stations, they are in long need of a nerf. Move t2BPO to null sec CCP Soundwave please!
Don't worry about Bears emo quitting once you nerf T2BPO as new invention accounts will spring up in there place. I shall contact my local CSM member and ask him to view this point. |
India99
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.20 14:18:00 -
[366] - Quote
look, this guy knows a CSM |
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2012.05.20 15:27:00 -
[367] - Quote
0Lona 0ltor wrote: Don't worry about Bears emo quitting once you nerf T2BPO as new invention accounts will spring up in there place. I shall contact my local CSM member and ask him to view this point.
This really is true. When I really found out about T2 BPOs in about my 2nd month in eve I really thought about quitting. I even let my account lapse for awhile. Finally I decided I loved eve more than I hated T2 BPOs even if they were a very nasty and public black mark on CCP/Eve Online. I came back. Two of my real life friends went the other road. When they found out they could never compete with a giant chunk of the older T2 producers they let their accounts lapse and did not come back. |
Annolyn Thoth
Rust Cabal
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 02:08:00 -
[368] - Quote
Lucy Ferrr wrote: This really is true. When I really found out about T2 BPOs in about my 2nd month in eve I really thought about quitting. I even let my account lapse for awhile. Finally I decided I loved eve more than I hated T2 BPOs even if they were a very nasty and public black mark on CCP/Eve Online. I came back. Two of my real life friends went the other road. When they found out they could never compete with a giant chunk of the older T2 producers they let their accounts lapse and did not come back.
So you played eve for 2 months before almost emoragequitting over crap you apparently still don't understand. |
Wingmate
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 19:16:00 -
[369] - Quote
Annolyn Thoth wrote:Lucy Ferrr wrote: This really is true. When I really found out about T2 BPOs in about my 2nd month in eve I really thought about quitting. I even let my account lapse for awhile. Finally I decided I loved eve more than I hated T2 BPOs even if they were a very nasty and public black mark on CCP/Eve Online. I came back. Two of my real life friends went the other road. When they found out they could never compete with a giant chunk of the older T2 producers they let their accounts lapse and did not come back. So you played eve for 2 months before almost emoragequitting over crap you apparently still don't understand.
another brewlar alt! =) |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 19:16:00 -
[370] - Quote
Wingmate wrote:Annolyn Thoth wrote:Lucy Ferrr wrote: This really is true. When I really found out about T2 BPOs in about my 2nd month in eve I really thought about quitting. I even let my account lapse for awhile. Finally I decided I loved eve more than I hated T2 BPOs even if they were a very nasty and public black mark on CCP/Eve Online. I came back. Two of my real life friends went the other road. When they found out they could never compete with a giant chunk of the older T2 producers they let their accounts lapse and did not come back. So you played eve for 2 months before almost emoragequitting over crap you apparently still don't understand. another brewlar alt! =)
Apparently any char who complains about how bad the T2BPO system is my alt. As it stands I have at least 10 accounts :) I'm glad I am the champion of the make EVE real campaign.
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1100
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 20:42:00 -
[371] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'm glad I am the champion of the make EVE real campaign. Ok then, call T2 BPOs franchises, make inventing and selling invented T2 items give you -10 sec status because you're a dirty counterfeiter
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 22:49:00 -
[372] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'm glad I am the champion of the make EVE real campaign. Ok then, call T2 BPOs franchises, make inventing and selling invented T2 items give you -10 sec status because you're a dirty counterfeiter
Naw, I call T2BPO's easy buttons which make EVE no more complex than your average MMO. Hey by the way when is CCP starting the lottery for the new T2 item BPO's? Oh they are not because T2BPO is the worst thing in EVE to date.
Remove T2BPO |
Jajas Helper
85
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:13:00 -
[373] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'm glad I am the champion of the make EVE real campaign. Ok then, call T2 BPOs franchises, make inventing and selling invented T2 items give you -10 sec status because you're a dirty counterfeiter Naw, I call T2BPO's easy buttons which make EVE no more complex than your average MMO. Hey by the way when is CCP starting the lottery for the new T2 item BPO's? Oh they are not because T2BPO is the worst thing in EVE to date. Remove T2BPO
I think you got your wish... all my 32 T2 bpos are not showing up due to this new inventory.... you can pack your bags, my T2 bpos have been nerfed :( Inferno do stuff with stuff to imitate the stuff you could do faster with the old stuff
-stuff- |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1100
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:14:00 -
[374] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO is the worst thing in EVE to date. Remove T2BPO You may sway some weak opinions by endlessly repeating something inaccurate, but that doesn't change the facts. Facts are, the worst thing you can say about T2 BPOs is that they reduce the numbers of inventors that can simultaneously operate (by having T2 BPO owners always sell their stuff first), but at the same time, granting advantages to end users (cheaper unpopular stuff, and slightly cheaper stuff overall, compared to an invention-only landscape) and offering something that people with ludicrous amounts of ISK can invest in. All in all, that doesn't even sound like a bad thing, let alone the worst thing in EVE to date.
Try to explain again what exactly is so bad about T2 BPOs (and NOT the lottery that distributed them), but this time, make a compelling argument. And no, "guy who holds something worth 5 years of profit instead of selling it can make stuff cheaper than I can" is not a compelling argument for your case... if anything, it's a compelling argument for the reverse. Also "but they got it unfairly" is not a compelling argument either, since most people DID get them fairly (by purchasing them from others that won them). I can agree that THE LOTTERY was one of the worst things that could have happened to EVE, indeed, but THAT has been discontinued. And THAT genie is out of the bottle with no way of realistically managing to put it back.
Removing T2BPOs does not reverse the "evils" of the lottery. It only AMPLIFIES them. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
713
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:30:00 -
[375] - Quote
Lucy Ferrr wrote:This really is true. When I really found out about T2 BPOs in about my 2nd month in eve I really thought about quitting. I even let my account lapse for awhile. Finally I decided I loved eve more than I hated T2 BPOs even if they were a very nasty and public black mark on CCP/Eve Online. I came back. Two of my real life friends went the other road. When they found out they could never compete with a giant chunk of the older T2 producers they let their accounts lapse and did not come back. Why can I and others compete and earn billions doing invention and you and your friends can' t compete? Do you refuse to make profitable items people want? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1100
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:32:00 -
[376] - Quote
An odd variation of the sour grapes syndrome would be my guess. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Haulie Berry
113
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:41:00 -
[377] - Quote
Between datacores being available for 25lp and 25K isk and the fix to decryptors, invention just got a sizeable buff*, anyway.
*Relative to BPOs, that is. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:23:00 -
[378] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Apparently any char who complains about how bad the T2BPO system is my alt. As it stands I have at least 10 accounts :) I'm glad I am the champion of the make EVE real campaign.
nope, but lets face it, there are not too many ppl that agree with you here in this thread, on that topic, and the fact that all your "fellow campaigners" had their posting premiere in this thread, do not use any punctuation marks ever, only spam and never rly discuss anything makes it kindoff obvious, doesn't it?
To hear twice the same extremly reasonable and sad story about two real life friends who quit playing the game, JUST because they thought that 1 of 120 diffrent ways to make money in this game, might be a bit unfair (it is not, but even if it would still be hilarious) proved me right at the end.
buff T2 BPO`s |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:03:00 -
[379] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Lucy Ferrr wrote:This really is true. When I really found out about T2 BPOs in about my 2nd month in eve I really thought about quitting. I even let my account lapse for awhile. Finally I decided I loved eve more than I hated T2 BPOs even if they were a very nasty and public black mark on CCP/Eve Online. I came back. Two of my real life friends went the other road. When they found out they could never compete with a giant chunk of the older T2 producers they let their accounts lapse and did not come back. Why can I and others compete and earn billions doing invention and you and your friends can' t compete? Do you refuse to make profitable items people want? How could you have made billions using invention, Brewlar said it was impossible, and Tau`s friends quit after 2 whole months because T2BPO's are just so profitable, so how did you make billions with invention? You must have a T2BPO hidden away that you are not telling us about. |
Jajas Helper
91
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:25:00 -
[380] - Quote
every day i see some remove T2 bpo" crap post, i'm making 100mil on inventing, producing and selling T2 items with a single toon.
Someone should stop posting and actually invent things before posting crap.... though your crap makes me smile ^^ Inferno do stuff with stuff to imitate the stuff you could do faster with the old stuff
-stuff- |
|
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:51:00 -
[381] - Quote
Hi guys,
I want to advertise this auction :
T2 BPO E.A.N.M. II - a quite good print
1) buy the print 2) produce items 3) ??? 4) make Brewlar unhappy ! ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Jajas Helper
102
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 09:47:00 -
[382] - Quote
already have one... but i'll see what i can do Inferno do stuff with stuff to imitate the stuff you could do faster with the old stuff
-stuff- |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:32:00 -
[383] - Quote
Can I not try, 1) buy T1 print 2) invent T2 3) ??? 4) make Brewlar unhappy! |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:37:00 -
[384] - Quote
lol fourm troll wrote:Can I not try, 1) buy T1 print 2) invent T2 3) ??? 4) make Brewlar unhappy!
Try that with T2 ships you'll be unhappy, say a popular line of T2 ships like umm interceptors where the T2BPO crushes inventors ROI.
|
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:40:00 -
[385] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:lol fourm troll wrote:Can I not try, 1) buy T1 print 2) invent T2 3) ??? 4) make Brewlar unhappy! Try that with T2 ships you'll be unhappy, say a popular line of T2 ships like umm interceptors where the T2BPO crushes inventors ROI. This is just crazy but, well I can't tell if it is a troll or a suggestion, it really won't work with your mind set but here goes, DO NOT INVENT INTERCEPTORS Glad I managed to say that. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:46:00 -
[386] - Quote
So you think it's fair that players are ruled out of entire inventions due to the fact that CCP has created and gifted out T2BPO's which are far to efficent at creating those line of T2 items?
If T2BPO is so great please seed a bunch more, oh wait CCP understands the error of T2BPO and no longer seeds them. If only they got off their ass and nerfed/removed the ones still in game to have lower stats than invented items. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:59:00 -
[387] - Quote
Try this then, wine to have interceptors nerfed so that more of them blow up and it increases the market for them. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:07:00 -
[388] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:....
If T2BPO is so great please seed a bunch more
, oh wait CCP understands the error of T2BPO and no longer seeds them. If only they got off their ass and nerfed/removed the ones still in game to have lower stats than invented BPC's.
I believe it's your entire point : as you are too lazy or unimaginative to be able to afford one, or you want another seeding or you prefer they not exist.
I said unimaginative because you are still after interceptors which are not profitable to invent at this moment, which were profitable in the past, which are NOT popular hence the UNPROFITABILITY to invent them
T2 Bpos are still seeded, in the sell order forum. Watch there.
----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:15:00 -
[389] - Quote
Another nice deal I wanted to show (another bpo seed in the sell order forum)
Cyclone BPO the best command ship
One day or another Cyclones may receive a buff to support the comparison with T3 counter parts
Cyclones gang bonuses are the most wanted : speed, disruptor,scramblers and webber range, and signature radius bonus
Quite a cheap deal imo ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:18:00 -
[390] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:Another nice deal I wanted to show (another bpo seed in the sell order forum) Cyclone BPO the best command shipOne day or another Cyclones may receive a buff to support the comparison with T3 counter parts Cyclones gang bonuses are the most wanted : speed, disruptor,scramblers and webber range, and signature radius bonus Quite a cheap deal imo
Cool can I purchase it using research points? Oh wait no I can't then I'm not intrested. Oh wait can I get one from a dropped rat, eh no? OK, How about a dev just give me one you know just because?
Naw if I'm not going to be able to get these items through corrupt means or just plain gifted then I'm not really happy. |
|
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:50:00 -
[391] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Cool can I purchase it using research points? Oh wait no I can't then I'm not intrested. Oh wait can I get one from a dropped rat, eh no? OK, How about a dev just give me one you know just because?
Naw if I'm not going to be able to get these items through corrupt means or just plain gifted then I'm not really happy.
Otherwise you can follow the rules and purchase it with the isks you collected playing the game. (you pretend to be a trader, you should be able to)
There were at least 8000 T2 bpos seeded. (I don't know the exact number, if someones knows, please tell us)
What you speak of is a tiny minority. (let's say 50 bpos including Miner II bpos)
99,37% were acquired following the rules.
What you want is to change the rules using a fallacious argument and flawed cases.
Adeptio Gloriae ? lol pathetic puppet yeah.
----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1101
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:39:00 -
[392] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:popular line of T2 ships like umm interceptors I think you have an odd definition of "popular". Interceptors stopped being really popular a good while back. And when they used to be really popular, inventing them was quite profitable. So, you were saying, again, what exactly ?
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:So you think it's fair that players are ruled out of entire inventions It's about as fair as many other things in EVE which are intentionally unfair to some degree. T2 BPOs are intentionally slightly unfair, and what makes them more fair rather than unfair is the fact people can trade the BPOs freely between themselves. If anything, the current situation is far, far fairer than back in the day the lottery was still active.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Cool can I purchase it using research points? Yes, you can. Indirectly. Buy datacores with RP, sell datacores, use ISK to buy BPO. Problem solved ! If you want more of a lottery feel, be my guest and use that ISK to enter player-organized lotteries to multiply it to the levels you'd need to purchase a T2 BPO. Or maybe even enter a player-organized lottery that offers T2 BPOs as prizes !
P.S. I even figured with back-of-envelope guesstimations that it is quite probable that the total value of RPs that were used up post-lottery on datacores already exceeds the sum of RP that were spent acquiring T2 BPOs back in the days of the lottery (and will keep going up), so in a twisted sense, you're better off doing research today than you were back in the day when the lottery was still active, and it's only getting better. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Katja Faith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
118
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:23:00 -
[393] - Quote
AkitaT, you realize you're being trolled, yeah? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:07:00 -
[394] - Quote
AkitaT I considered the invention buff ie allowing invented T2BPC's to inherit their t1bpo stats but that idea is flawed as it would generate a problem akin to T2BPO but on an even larger scale. Allowing inventions to inherent stats would close margins and prevent newbie inventors from competing with inventors who have a highly researched t1bpo.
Buffing invention run levels and success chance is an option yes also reducing material needs to insure that it falls equal to T2BPO or slightly less is an option too.
The easiest and fairest method that I feel CCP should implement would be to insure that a T2BPO falls shortly behind a T2BPC on material efficiency taking into account invention chance. This would allow T2BPO's to retain value and continue to be an attractive item in fields that have demand while still allowing inventors to produce items. The T2BPO would be attractive in the fact that it is afk isk slowly churning out items 23/7 but in a sligtly less efficient manner while t2bpc's require a click fest of operations.
Another option would be to allow invention not to create T2 items alone but have a chance at creating a new set of faction called 'inventions' that have higher stats than T2 items. |
Haulie Berry
117
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:09:00 -
[395] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Buffing invention run levels
This already happened in the last patch. Most people have chosen to ignore it in favor of crying about one thing or another because they're incompetent lackwits who don't know how to capitalize on opportunities.
Coupled with the rapidly-falling decryptor prices, invention got a whole lot cheaper and faster in the last patch. |
IgnatiusReilly esq
The Adams Group LLC
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:41:00 -
[396] - Quote
I like bacon |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1101
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:07:00 -
[397] - Quote
Katja Faith wrote:AkitaT, you realize you're being trolled, yeah? I only mind the quality of the trolling As long as it's self-consistent, from the exterior, there's no noteworthy difference between arguing with somebody with an inaccurate view or arguing with a decent intentional troller, and there's no reason to treat either differently when your actual target is the lurking audience, not the person you argue with. I would argue a whole lot more if I would have more spare time, as it is right now I'm actually arguing while taking brief breaks from work. Arguing about something very familiar which I have spent a lot of time examining in the past is quite relaxing to me, since it temporarily clears my mind of stuff I was thinking too much about that don't quite fit right yet, allowing me to start over with a slightly different and possibly more useful perspective if I'm lucky. But I digress.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The easiest and fairest method that I feel CCP should implement would be to insure that a T2BPO falls shortly behind a T2BPC on material efficiency taking into account invention chance. This would allow T2BPO's to retain value Hogwash. How exactly would that allow T2 BPOs to retain any non-negligible ECONOMIC value ? Their collector item status would have their value so far outstrip any feasible ROIs into the ground even at material parity, but at even a slight material disadvantage almost nobody would ever have a reason to bother with BPO manufacture anymore ever again, instead buying from inventors from the market being the almost always much better alternative. And how exactly do you propose to make that "accounting for invention chance" adjustment anyway when prices of datacores, decryptors and even T1 BPCs is never constant ? It would periodically flip from slight advantage to slight disadvantage if fixed, and would run a very significant risk of actually amplifying the fluctuations if done dynamically with a delay or averaging. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:46:00 -
[398] - Quote
I'm still confused as to why everything has to be completely fair, all the time, and how that would somehow make EVE more 'real'. |
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
138
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:48:00 -
[399] - Quote
I think CCP should tweak T2 BPO manufacturing times so that they cant supply more than 20% of the long term demand for any product.
No drama about compensation as profits still there, but not enouhg to saturate market, would make some T2 BPO's more valuable and some less i expect. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:07:00 -
[400] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Buffing invention run levels
This already happened in the last patch. Most people have chosen to ignore it in favor of crying about one thing or another because they're incompetent lackwits who don't know how to capitalize on opportunities. Coupled with the rapidly-falling decryptor prices, invention got a whole lot cheaper and faster in the last patch.
I missed something, what has changed exactly about invention mechanics with the last patch ? more runs ? cheaper datacores ? More decryptor drops ? I don't get it, please someone tell me. ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:14:00 -
[401] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:
I missed something, what has changed exactly about invention mechanics with the last patch ? more runs ? cheaper datacores ? More decryptor drops ? I don't get it, please someone tell me.
you dont need max run copies to use decryptors anymore, 1 run copies will allow usage of dycrptors already. Datacores dropped in price aswell, but hard to say how its gona be on long a long term. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1601
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 00:44:00 -
[402] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:So you think it's fair that players are ruled out of entire inventions due to the fact that CCP has created and gifted out T2BPO's which are far to efficent at creating those line of T2 items?
If T2BPO is so great please seed a bunch more, oh wait CCP understands the error of T2BPO and no longer seeds them. If only they got off their ass and nerfed/removed the ones still in game to have lower stats than invented BPC's.
The invention process is identical no matter what you are inventing, so this is no different from being priced out of the T1 BS market because they're produced by highly researched T1 BPOs.
What current problem do T2BPOs cause? And unless ALL inventions are unprofitable, invention profitability isn't a problem. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Diemos Hiaraki
VC Academy
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 03:47:00 -
[403] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:What current problem do T2BPOs cause? And unless ALL inventions are unprofitable, invention profitability isn't a problem.
I've just invented my first T2 BPC; I've not enjoyed any aspect of the invention process (research BPO, copy BPO, jump here for datacores, jump there for more data cores, data interface and maybe a decrypter, faff around training skills totally irrelevant to anything else in game then pray to the RNG God that I'll get a ****** T2 BPC that cannot compete in quality to any T2 BPO I've ever seen.) I'm at the stage where I don't give a flying f**k about profit or the math, but I am sick of jumping through hoops just to compete with bitter vet T2 BPO owners.
A good T2 BPO will fetch more than a beta character which as far as I'm concerned is indefensible; either T2 BPOs should be available for all players or none at all. The only solution I could think of would be to allow T2 BPOs to be invented (if chosen instead of inventing a BPC,) but with a huge negative M.E./P.E. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1601
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 03:52:00 -
[404] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:RubyPorto wrote:What current problem do T2BPOs cause? And unless ALL inventions are unprofitable, invention profitability isn't a problem. I've just invented my first T2 BPC; I've not enjoyed any aspect of the invention process (research BPO, copy BPO, jump here for datacores, jump there for more data cores, data interface and maybe a decrypter, faff around training skills totally irrelevant to anything else in game then pray to the RNG God that I'll get a ****** T2 BPC that cannot compete in quality to any T2 BPO I've ever seen.) I'm at the stage where I don't give a flying f**k about profit or the math, but I am sick of jumping through hoops just to compete with bitter vet T2 BPO owners. A good T2 BPO will fetch more than a beta character which as far as I'm concerned is indefensible; either T2 BPOs should be available for all players or none at all. The only solution I could think of would be to allow T2 BPOs to be invented (if chosen instead of inventing a BPC,) but with a huge negative M.E./P.E.
T2 BPOs are available for all players. They're not much more expensive than Titans, either. You saying you want a free Titan too?
If you're not willing to jump through hoops for profit, invention is not the income source for you. Have fun doing something else.
Regardless, the pain of invention is not a problem caused by T2BPO's existence. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1104
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 04:33:00 -
[405] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:I've not enjoyed any aspect of the invention process (research BPO, copy BPO, jump here for datacores, jump there for more data cores, data interface and maybe a decrypter, faff around training skills totally irrelevant to anything else in game then pray to the RNG God that I'll get a ****** T2 BPC Neither of those things have anything to do with any T2 BPOs existing, even if all T2 BPOs would be gone, you'd still have to do exactly the same thing to invent stuff.
Quote:T2 BPC that cannot compete in quality to any T2 BPO I've ever seen. The item your BPC makes is identical to the item a BPO makes. The price at which the item sells (if it's a popular item) is almost exactly the same price it would sell for without any T2 BPOs existing for that item.
Quote:sick of jumping through hoops just to compete with bitter vet T2 BPO owners. The bad news is that you'd still be jumping through the same hoops regardless of T2 BPOs existing. The worse news is that you're NOT competing with T2 BPO owners anyway - you're competing with other inventors.
Quote:A good T2 BPO will fetch more than a beta character which as far as I'm concerned is indefensible And why exactly is that ?
Quote:T2 BPOs should be available for all players or none at all. They are available to all players, but not at the same time. Offer enough ISK and one can be yours.
To summarize : the things you dislike are that invention is annoying (which won't be fixed by removing T2 BPOs) and that T2 BPOs cost too much for your taste (and their price is determined by the PLAYERS that trade them). Basically, nothing about why T2 BPOs should be removed, just you being frustrated by an annoying system and the fact other people are richer than you. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 04:51:00 -
[406] - Quote
i would love to see a democratic vote on this issue - altho the outcome would be fairlly presumable... who else but the owners would support the BPOs further existance? and since they represent at best like 3-4%...
speaking as both bpos owner and 11 slots inventor / manufacturer my oppinion is bpos have to go the debate shouldnt even go deeper into eco aspects as long as the entire bpos existance was biassed right from the start (including debatable seeding process - but even the "legit" winners gain the ownershp because of "luck"... and of course, last but not least, the most impotant argument IMO, the lottery removal has pushed the unfairness even deeper)
as for a decent and fair for everyone way of removal (of the bpos), i'd say a combination of the following 2 "tweaks" would do the job: 1st: the bpos should be replaced with some sort of "Alibaba lamp" which would soawn 1 single run bpc every (insert interval here) with "interval" determined by bpo type... 2nd: seeding some new decryptor types ment to improve the invented bpcs ME would greatly help the process...
or... for someone really interested to get rid of the problem, someone with virtually unlimited isk resources (someone who could actually "type" a few "0" more to a new created char's wallet), it would always exist the "buyout solution"...
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1602
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 05:09:00 -
[407] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:i would love to see a democratic vote on this issue - altho the outcome would be fairlly presumable... who else but the owners would support the BPOs further existance? and since they represent at best like 3-4%...
speaking as both bpos owner and 11 slots inventor / manufacturer my oppinion is bpos have to go the debate shouldnt even go deeper into eco aspects as long as the entire bpos existance was biassed right from the start (including debatable seeding process - but even the "legit" winners gain the ownershp because of "luck"... and of course, last but not least, the most impotant argument IMO, the lottery removal has pushed the unfairness even deeper)
as for a decent and fair for everyone way of removal (of the bpos), i'd say a combination of the following 2 "tweaks" would do the job: 1st: the bpos should be replaced with some sort of "Alibaba lamp" which would soawn 1 single run bpc every (insert interval here) with "interval" determined by bpo type... 2nd: seeding some new decryptor types ment to improve the invented bpcs ME would greatly help the process...
or... for someone really interested to get rid of the problem, someone with virtually unlimited isk resources (someone who could actually "type" a few "0" more to a new created char's wallet), it would always exist the "buyout solution"...
So, you gonna get rid of faction/officer drops? Invention? Wormholes? All of those grant riches based on "Luck." Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 05:19:00 -
[408] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: So, you gonna get rid of faction/officer drops? Invention? Wormholes? All of those grant riches based on "Luck."
looks like you missed / ignored the meaning of those ""... read again: its "luck" not luck... looks like you also missed all the other things written there - but that would be understandable if you would have added the "prowd owner of a (several) xxx bpo" before or after your name / signature... so? care to edit your reply?
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1602
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 05:29:00 -
[409] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:RubyPorto wrote: So, you gonna get rid of faction/officer drops? Invention? Wormholes? All of those grant riches based on "Luck."
looks like you missed / ignored the meaning of those ""... read again: its "luck" not luck... looks like you also missed all the other things written there - but that would be understandable if you would have added the "prowd owner of a (several) xxx bpo" before or after your name / signature... so? care to edit your reply?
If you have evidence that the T2 BPOs seeded by the lottery* were tainted by developer malfeasance, Internal Affairs would like to talk to you.
I don't own any T2BPOs. Trying to poison the well of discourse would tend to suggest that you are unsure of your argument's strength.
Do T2 BPOs prevent Inventors from making profits through invention? No they don't**. Do they significantly impact the market? Only in low demand markets where they can fill most of the supply themselves. Do they have a good ROI? No, they're spectacularly overpriced for the income they can generate (3 year ROI o.0)
Ok, I covered the 3 places where they can actually cause unbalanced results. Got any others?
*besides the ones that were tainted and pulled, ofc **unless you're doing something silly like RPing to pick your market then complaining that your RP isn't profitable Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Diemos Hiaraki
VC Academy
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 05:50:00 -
[410] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:T2 BPOs are available for all players. They're not much more expensive than Titans, either. You saying you want a free Titan too?
If you're not willing to jump through hoops for profit, invention is not the income source for you. Have fun doing something else.
Regardless, the pain of invention is not a problem caused by T2BPO's existence.
Where did I say I wanted a Titan? Nice strawman, really very nice.
I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess. While one player with T2BPOs can outfit an entire corp with T2 kit in the same space of time it would take many players without T2BPOs just to invent the BPCs I'll be against T2BPOs being in game.
You're right about the pain of invention not being a problem caused by T2BPOs existence. I was just bitching about how convenient is is for a T2BPO owner to manufacture something compared to what I'd have to do just for a BPC (nevermind making it.) My issue with T2BPOs is that they're perpetual motion for their owners, and as such I refuse to buy T2 kit from anyone (and wanted to make my own so I'm not lining the pockets of folks who don't need my isk - chances are I'd have bought that T2 kit from the very same people who I'd end up fighting against.) What I fail to see is any reason why I shouldn't be able to invent a T2BPO for ships at least.
|
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1603
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 05:59:00 -
[411] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:RubyPorto wrote:T2 BPOs are available for all players. They're not much more expensive than Titans, either. You saying you want a free Titan too?
If you're not willing to jump through hoops for profit, invention is not the income source for you. Have fun doing something else.
Regardless, the pain of invention is not a problem caused by T2BPO's existence. Where did I say I wanted a Titan? Nice strawman, really very nice. I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess. While one player with T2BPOs can outfit an entire corp with T2 kit in the same space of time it would take many players without T2BPOs just to invent the BPCs I'll be against T2BPOs being in game. You're right about the pain of invention not being a problem caused by T2BPOs existence. I was just bitching about how convenient is is for a T2BPO owner to manufacture something compared to what I'd have to do just for a BPC (nevermind making it.) My issue with T2BPOs is that they're perpetual motion for their owners, and as such I refuse to buy T2 kit from anyone (and wanted to make my own so I'm not lining the pockets of folks who don't need my isk - chances are I'd have bought that T2 kit from the very same people who I'd end up fighting against.) What I fail to see is any reason why I shouldn't be able to invent a T2BPO for ships at least.
The current 24hr max is 40,000 people, and the long term trend is showing the server population recovering from the Incarna crash last summer/fall. Stats. In case of Stupid, read graph right to left.
Outfitting a Corp... what are you talking about? These are economic instruments.
Yes, a T2BPO is convenience. That convenience costs maybe 100 billion ISK to acquire (or has a 100b ISK opportunity cost for not selling).
Not buying a T2BPO is smart. There are much better returns on your ISK then T2BPOs; Invention, for one.
You shouldn't be able to invent a T2BPO because that would be spectacularly broken. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1104
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 07:13:00 -
[412] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:What I fail to see is any reason why I shouldn't be able to invent a T2BPO for ships at least. Because then inventing ship BPCs eventually becomes completely pointless as the number of T2 ship BPOs and their production capacity far outstrips demand for each and every one of the ships. Also, even inventing T2 BPOs becomes counter-productive, because the profits for using them become minimal, so their value becomes minimal (not even the collector value remains). Basically, because it would completely kill the SHIP INVENTOR profession and restrict the items where invention remains profitable to just non-ship items, thus making invention in general weaker. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 08:32:00 -
[413] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:i would love to see a democratic vote on this issue - altho the outcome would be fairlly presumable... who else but the owners would support the BPOs further existance?
Those who understand that the BPO`s are NOT the reason for their failing?... just read the posts in this T2-BPO-Hate thread, I dont think even in this thread its the overwhelming majority who thinks that the BPO`s are an issue.
Diemos Hiaraki wrote: I've just invented my first T2 BPC; I've not enjoyed any aspect of the invention process
if you dont like it, simply dont do it. But why bother to convince others that they dotn like it either?
Tadeo Musashy wrote: but that would be understandable if you would have added the "prowd owner of a (several) xxx bpo" before or after your name / signature... so? care to edit your reply?
yea... its not only vets beeing bitter here it seems, you are sooo jelly. |
India99
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 09:04:00 -
[414] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess.
T2 BPO`s exist at least since 2006, how can T2 BPO`s be the reason for the player drop this year when between 2006 and 2011 the number of Players has just been going up? explain.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1604
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 09:24:00 -
[415] - Quote
India99 wrote:Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess.
T2 BPO`s exist at least since 2006, how can T2 BPO`s be the reason for the player drop this year when between 2006 and 2011 the number of Players has just been going up? explain.
Because in 2012, Our Savior Brewlar Kuvakei told us the Good News that our efforts are meaningless in the face of the great Shaitan, the Hulk BPO. When Our Savior went to the asteroid belt to contemplate the nature of His sacrifice, the Hulk BPO offered him riches beyond measure to tempt Him away from His holy task. He then returned to create another of His sublime writings, exposing more of the depravity of the Shaitan and his minions, the Covert Ops BPOs. As He explained in the parable of the Inventor, the Shaitan leads the inventor away from the paths of righteousness and into scarce markets where he cannot profit, but Lo, Our Savior, Brewlar Kuvakei was there to roust the Shaitan and save the inventor from his clutches.
Alas, this paradise cannot be, for one day, Our Savior will be betrayed. One day His turn will come, as the masses before him Unsub before the face of the Shaitan, He will be tortured and put to display before He is reunited with the Doomheim Corporation of his father.
Hallelujah Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 13:36:00 -
[416] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting
OMG Eve is dying ! 8 years I read that EVE is dying in these forums ! It's a quite long agony...
Now who is really bitter ? vets or newcomers ?
This is the most pathetic argument to defend a thesis that can be imagined. Also this is only based on your perception and it is unfair to present this argument as objective ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 13:45:00 -
[417] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:i would love to see a democratic vote on this issue - altho the outcome would be fairlly presumable... who else but the owners would support the BPOs further existance? and since they represent at best like 3-4%...
speaking as both bpos owner and 11 slots inventor / manufacturer my oppinion is bpos have to go the debate shouldnt even go deeper into eco aspects as long as the entire bpos existance was biassed right from the start (including debatable seeding process - but even the "legit" winners gain the ownershp because of "luck"... and of course, last but not least, the most impotant argument IMO, the lottery removal has pushed the unfairness even deeper)
as for a decent and fair for everyone way of removal (of the bpos), i'd say a combination of the following 2 "tweaks" would do the job: 1st: the bpos should be replaced with some sort of "Alibaba lamp" which would soawn 1 single run bpc every (insert interval here) with "interval" determined by bpo type... 2nd: seeding some new decryptor types ment to improve the invented bpcs ME would greatly help the process...
or... for someone really interested to get rid of the problem, someone with virtually unlimited isk resources (someone who could actually "type" a few "0" more to a new created char's wallet), it would always exist the "buyout solution"...
bpo holders are the scapegoats of a minority of squeaky inventors. (those who are unable...)
The problem is the market competition. And for a manufacturer from T2 BPOS, there are 25 inventors.
If you are not able to understand it, waives any industrial project activity and any market, you ought to just kill npc in 0.0 ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á WTB Occator Bpo, 110+ Bil-á-á-á-á-á --- |
India99
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 14:45:00 -
[418] - Quote
for those who still feel crying about this dead topic... http://k162space.com/2012/03/08/t2-bpo-returns/ |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
85
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 16:08:00 -
[419] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:[
I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess. While one player with T2BPOs can outfit an entire corp with T2 kit in the same space of time it would take many players without T2BPOs just to invent the BPCs I'll be against T2BPOs being in game.
This is a good point as T2BPO actually kills the game reducing players the problem only compounds itself. The less players the less demand for T2 meaning that the fields open to inventors gets smaller each passing day. T2BPO's dire effects on the game will only get exponentially worse as time goes on. |
Alea
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 17:07:00 -
[420] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Diemos Hiaraki wrote:[
I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess. While one player with T2BPOs can outfit an entire corp with T2 kit in the same space of time it would take many players without T2BPOs just to invent the BPCs I'll be against T2BPOs being in game.
This is a good point as T2BPO actually kills the game reducing players the problem only compounds itself. The less players the less demand for T2 meaning that the fields open to inventors gets smaller each passing day. T2BPO's dire effects on the game will only get exponentially worse as time goes on.
Your alts post is bad and U should feel bad for posting in your own forum with said alt.
Why do you have to spread this worn out topic over more than one game forum..?? (< Steam) It's bad enough griefers with no real pvp skills go after low SP pilots and make them rage quit, U come along spreading your nonsense about not having T2 BPOs available to the average pilot will completely ruin there game play experience, obviously others less biased than yourself responded to set the record straight.
I've been playing since 2003 (never won a T2 BPO) and not owning one hasn't hurt my T2 production income.. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1612
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:01:00 -
[421] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Diemos Hiaraki wrote:[
I quit over this issue last year - 52,000 people logged in at the time. The last time I checked there were 26,000 people logged in now; the game is dying and T2BPOs are one of the reasons why people are quitting. I'll probably check in next year to see if CCP have addressed this problem when there'll only be 13,000 people logging I'd guess. While one player with T2BPOs can outfit an entire corp with T2 kit in the same space of time it would take many players without T2BPOs just to invent the BPCs I'll be against T2BPOs being in game.
This is a good point as T2BPO actually kills the game reducing players the problem only compounds itself. The less players the less demand for T2 meaning that the fields open to inventors gets smaller each passing day. T2BPO's dire effects on the game will only get exponentially worse as time goes on.
You've tried to make that point before. Pretending that your alt just brought it to your attention makes you look silly (well, sillier than this whole thing does, anyway). Good job outing an alt.
Besides that, just because your alt quit at week/day max and posted at week/day mean doesn't mean he get's to play the EvE is dying card. Like I posted above, look at the metrics and you'll see that EvE is healthier than it's been in ~9 months. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Diemos Hiaraki
VC Academy
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:53:00 -
[422] - Quote
For the record - I have one alt, but he's ever been on these forums and probably never will since his account runs out in two days. Since the accusation has been voiced it makes me see you folks for the sham you are. I am simply an old man pissed of that a problem has existed in a game for many years and nothing has been done to address it. I'm certainly not going to get all upset over a game I'm not going to continue playing while there are such persistent balance issues though, even if the inhabitants of these fora think it fine to pay to win.
I freely admit that I'm no expert of Eve's industry, but if I perceive that the game is unbalanced to the point where I don't want to renew my subscription because of T2BPOs - whether my perception about the problem is true or not, I can easily envisage other young players feeling the same. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1613
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:59:00 -
[423] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:For the record - I have one alt, but he's ever been on these forums and probably never will since his account runs out in two days. Since the accusation has been voiced it makes me see you folks for the sham you are. I am simply an old man pissed of that a problem has existed in a game for many years and nothing has been done to address it. I'm certainly not going to get all upset over a game I'm not going to continue playing while there are such persistent balance issues though, even if the inhabitants of these fora think it fine to pay to win.
I freely admit that I'm no expert of Eve's industry, but if I perceive that the game is unbalanced to the point where I don't want to renew my subscription because of T2BPOs - whether my perception about the problem is true or not, I can easily envisage other young players feeling the same.
So you're quitting because T2BPO's "feel" unfair to your activities in a market that you don't enjoy participating in.
Wow, a game where your "feelings" might get hurt, so tewwible. Enjoy your Little League participation medal this year. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Diemos Hiaraki
VC Academy
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:25:00 -
[424] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Diemos Hiaraki wrote:For the record - I have one alt, but he's ever been on these forums and probably never will since his account runs out in two days. Since the accusation has been voiced it makes me see you folks for the sham you are. I am simply an old man pissed of that a problem has existed in a game for many years and nothing has been done to address it. I'm certainly not going to get all upset over a game I'm not going to continue playing while there are such persistent balance issues though, even if the inhabitants of these fora think it fine to pay to win.
I freely admit that I'm no expert of Eve's industry, but if I perceive that the game is unbalanced to the point where I don't want to renew my subscription because of T2BPOs - whether my perception about the problem is true or not, I can easily envisage other young players feeling the same. So you're quitting because T2BPO's "feel" unfair to your activities in a market that you don't enjoy participating in. Wow, a game where your "feelings" might get hurt, so tewwible. Enjoy your Little League participation medal this year.
That's three insults in three posts; I'm honoured you'd go to such lengths to offend a noob. Aside from the insult, what point are you trying to make here?
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1614
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:39:00 -
[425] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Diemos Hiaraki wrote:For the record - I have one alt, but he's ever been on these forums and probably never will since his account runs out in two days. Since the accusation has been voiced it makes me see you folks for the sham you are. I am simply an old man pissed of that a problem has existed in a game for many years and nothing has been done to address it. I'm certainly not going to get all upset over a game I'm not going to continue playing while there are such persistent balance issues though, even if the inhabitants of these fora think it fine to pay to win.
I freely admit that I'm no expert of Eve's industry, but if I perceive that the game is unbalanced to the point where I don't want to renew my subscription because of T2BPOs - whether my perception about the problem is true or not, I can easily envisage other young players feeling the same. So you're quitting because T2BPO's "feel" unfair to your activities in a market that you don't enjoy participating in. Wow, a game where your "feelings" might get hurt, so tewwible. Enjoy your Little League participation medal this year. That's three insults in three posts; I'm honoured you'd go to such lengths to offend a noob. Aside from the insult, what point are you trying to make here?
I'm simply pointing out that your argument has quickly collapsed from "T2BPOs are broken" to "I feel that T2BPOs are unfair to me and my participation in an activity that I don't enjoy." Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1104
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:57:00 -
[426] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote: I am simply an old man pissed of that a problem has existed in a game for many years and nothing has been done to address it. And we simply tried to explain to you that there is no real significant problem, just a minor issue PERCEIVED as a problem, mainly by people with little personal experience.
Quote:I freely admit that I'm no expert of Eve's industry, but if I perceive that the game is unbalanced to the point where I don't want to renew my subscription because of T2BPOs - whether my perception about the problem is true or not, I can easily envisage other young players feeling the same. Your perception is not true, but let's say that, indeed, others might have the same misperception. The problem here seems to be that you are unwilling to alter your perception even in face of sufficiently clear evidence.
The percentage of people that really dabble in manufacture in EVE is usually in the low single digits. Out of those plus some others that think about it but don't engage, very few are really annoyed enough by the self-misperceived T2 BPO issue to constitute enough reason to quit, or significantly alter quit percentages just because of it. If you really and genuinely believe that your friends left mainly because of T2 BPOs, they are a highly unlucky minority that REALLY do that just because of that one reason.
Removing T2 BPOs altogether could potentially affect a lot more people negatively (that would be much more likely to have this be "the last straw" and quit) than people that would remain around just due to the fact T2 BPOs no longer exist.
And anyway, CCP *is* doing something about it. Have been, repeatedly, even.
They did something huge about it when they introduced invention. Profits of T2 BPOs were cut by one order of magnitude on average even with the crappy initial invention rollout. They did something big about it when they buffed invention the first time, shortly after its introduction. The changes to datacore harvesting prices have further reduced T2 BPO profits. They also did something significant about it when they changed decryptors for the first time, moving them from static sites to exploration, and rebalancing their bonuses. T2 BPO profits have fallen even further because of that. And they did something noteworthy about it even this last patch, two noteworthy things actually - they added a new method of obtaining datacores (which will most likely lead to cheaper datacore prices overall in the long run, and much cheaper mecheng datacores which are very important for most of the high-ISK-volume invention jobs) and they buffed decryptor effects (ok, they call it fixing a bug, but the end effect is the same, it was a noticeable buff). T2 BPO profits are likely to soon fall even further. And they're soon going to do something else about it too, with the introduction of alternative ways to extract more moongoo than the current upper-capped amounts, which would make moongoos cheaper (in particular the bottleneck ones), which would reduce the profitability of T2 BPOs even more.
So don't say they're doing nothing about it, because they certainly have, are and will be doing something. Ok, it might not be what you CLAIM you want, and you want that because you can't or don't want to see the entire big picture, but that's a different story, and not their failing. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:18:00 -
[427] - Quote
Akita T wrote:
P.S. You already completely ignored 2 of my direct replies. This would be the 3rd one.
Sorry, my gleaming white shirt caused his poasting to gravitate towards me, leaving you out. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:28:00 -
[428] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: If you have evidence that the T2 BPOs seeded by the lottery* were tainted by developer malfeasance, Internal Affairs would like to talk to you.
if that is the approach to address the concerns that vast majority of players have towards the bpos seeding... if that is the argument supporting the "its fair"side... nothing more to say and i'd rest my case...
and while we step the path of the police department (half spoken words, that is), best answer (similar approach) to your above iquiry... IF that would be the case, would your "Internal Affairs" (be able to) provide imunity?
not at all... i am suggesting, actually i am SAYING loud and clear, that the only suporters of the "bpos should stay" ideea are the bpos owners... which i find to be normal and understand'able... and even if they are indeed a minority, i'm absolutely positive that any further solution should consider their interes aswell, despite some, more or less justified grudge - envy is a common sin and some may say sense of (too much) fairness is too... ofc exceptions are possible, you for example who declare you dont own a bpo...
RubyPorto wrote:Do T2 BPOs prevent Inventors from making profits through invention? No they don't**. Do they significantly impact the market? Only in low demand markets where they can fill most of the supply themselves. Do they have a good ROI? No, they're spectacularly overpriced for the income they can generate (3 year ROI o.0)
agree, agree and agree... altho those may be aswell arguments for their removal... upon, a lets say equitable, solution... i'm sure game-features-design-team could easily come up with a nice result within a mere 1/2 hour if there would be a real interess to solve it... thats why the "?" marks keep rising with every new VU that doesnt address the issue...
RubyPorto wrote:Ok, I covered the 3 places where they can actually cause unbalanced results. Got any others? how about just for shuting down all those voices who keep reviving the dead horse? dont try to foul yourself (or others): the simple fact that voices "against" are rather not as many and not as lowd like the "pro" ones doesnt prove they do not exist in overwgealming number... it only proves that bpo owners, given their interes, are way more acrive and vocal on forums... if a vote or a poll would ever be organized* covering the active playerbase, we would learn that 90-95% are for the bpos removal... this would be a good enough reason? ........................................................................... * i wonder what was / is / would be ccp's policy about organizing one? (maybe an official one would be the best option) |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1616
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:01:00 -
[429] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: if that is the approach to address the concerns that vast majority of players have towards the bpos seeding... if that is the argument supporting the "its fair"side... nothing more to say and i'd rest my case...
and while we step the path of the police department (half spoken words, that is), best answer (similar approach) to your above iquiry... IF that would be the case, would your "Internal Affairs" (be able to) provide imunity?
Internal Affairs is an actual CCP department. Their job is to investigate Dev misconduct. Never said T2BPOs are fair. EvE isn't fair. Life isn't fair. Just said that the lottery was conducted in a fair manner. (With exceptions that have already been removed from the game.
Quote: not at all... i am suggesting, actually i am SAYING loud and clear, that the only suporters of the "bpos should stay" ideea are the bpos owners... which i find to be normal and understand'able... and even if they are indeed a minority, i'm absolutely positive that any further solution should consider their interes aswell, despite some, more or less justified grudge - envy is a common sin and some may say sense of (too much) fairness is too... ofc exceptions are possible, you for example who declare you dont own a bpo...
The Italics imply that you think I'm lying. Implying that the only reason to defend T2BPOs is due to an economic interest is poisoning the well.
Quote: agree, agree and agree... altho those may be aswell arguments for their removal... upon, a lets say equitable, solution... i'm sure game-features-design-team could easily come up with a nice result within a mere 1/2 hour if there would be a real interess to solve it... thats why the "?" marks keep rising with every new VU that doesnt address the issue...
There's no interest in "solving" it because there's no problem to solve. You just agreed that T2BPOs don't produce any problems except jealousy from people who can't do math.
Quote: how about just for shuting down all those voices who keep reviving the dead horse? dont try to foul yourself (or others): the simple fact that voices "against" are rather not as many and not as lowd like the "pro" ones doesnt prove they do not exist in overwgealming number... it only proves that bpo owners, given their interes, are way more acrive and vocal on forums... if a vote or a poll would ever be organized* covering the active playerbase, we would learn that 90-95% are for the bpos removal... this would be a good enough reason? ........................................................................... * i wonder what was / is / would be ccp's policy about organizing one? (maybe an official one would be the best option)
They'll just find something else to complain about. Officer Spawns, maybe?
You're making an argument based on the results of a poll that you're proposing? DAFAQ?
I can make the exact counterargument with the same amount of evidence, but I won't, since my argument is that people who don't post on the forums against T2BPOs don't actually give a crap about them (Only about 5% of EvE actually manufacture anything for profit. Only a small portion of that invent anything).
Anyway, got any evidence that the ratio of pro v con is slanted due to T2BPO owners being, on average, more active on the forums than T2BPO opponants? Cause the opposite explanation or a neutral explanation must be considered equally likely in the face of absolutely no evidence.
Finally, I remember reading somewhere that CCP considers polls Spam for the most part (at least if you mean email/evemailing everyone and not just a forum poll). Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:13:00 -
[430] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: and while we step the path of the police department (half spoken words, that is), best answer (similar approach) to your above iquiry... IF that would be the case, would your "Internal Affairs" (be able to) provide imunity?
yes, you can send an evemail to evesecurity@cc... or something like that if you think a petition is not save enough. I would be supprised if you would know anything that they dont, but there is your address...
Tadeo Musashy wrote: i am suggesting, actually i am SAYING loud and clear, that the only suporters of the "bpos should stay" ideea are the bpos owners... which i find to be normal and understand'able... amazing... so you dont want to hear opinions of rather neutral/objective ppl because of? and your opinion is more valuable because ur against them,because??? explain please.
Tadeo Musashy wrote: i'm sure game-features-design-team could easily come up with a nice result within a mere 1/2 hour if there would be a real interess to solve it... thats why the "?" marks keep rising with every new VU that doesnt address the issue...
No you dont get it, they dont think there is an issue to solve, all their latest comments on that topic on twitter are like "the impact of T2 BPO`s is overestimated" or that they are just fine with it as it is. If they would think there is an issue they would have done anything against it in the last 8 years where T2 bpo-¦s exist, dont you think?
Tadeo Musashy wrote:if a vote or a poll would ever be organized* covering the active playerbase, we would learn that 90-95% are for the bpos removal... this would be a good enough reason?
what kind of an argument is that? you simply dont have any numbers you can base this on. 100% speculation and absolutly pointless. |
|
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:05:00 -
[431] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:The Italics imply that you think I'm lying .... actually the Italics are just suggesting you might be lying... that there's a fair possibility... that i'm not a trool looking for unpolite debates... no personal harm ment...
RubyPorto wrote:There's no interest in "solving" it because there's no problem to solve. You just agreed that T2BPOs don't produce any problems except jealousy from people who can't do math. ... They'll just find something else to complain about. Officer Spawns, maybe? i have to disagree here... surfing the forums (both old and new ones) anyone would be able to see / count the no of "views" and "replies" on threads with this particular subject ... every time this old dead horse is revived it raise audience in excess of 10k... sometimes even substantiale more (a "regular" decent thread gathers some 10-20 times less)... that clearly shows theres a huge (and i'd say legit) interes on the subject... calling it a "no problem to be solve" its poor... denying the existance doesnt solve anything...
RubyPorto wrote:You're making an argument based on the results of a poll that you're proposing? DAFAQ? ... Anyway, got any evidence that the ratio of pro v con is slanted due to T2BPO owners being, on average, more active on the forums than T2BPO opponants? Cause the opposite explanation or a neutral explanation must be considered equally likely in the face of absolutely no evidence. the poll i'm proposing would actually solve the mistery - in all its aspects i may say...
RubyPorto wrote:Finally, I remember reading somewhere that CCP considers polls Spam for the most part (at least if you mean email/evemailing everyone and not just a forum poll). and i didnt mean a "personal" (and therefore arguable) poll - i'd say an "official", a forum or even an "ingame" one would be the best solution... maybe some kind of "survey" would be even better as i'd say this isnt the only "burning" issue...
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1628
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 09:14:00 -
[432] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:RubyPorto wrote:The Italics imply that you think I'm lying .... actually the Italics are just suggesting you might be lying... that there's a fair possibility... that i'm not a trool looking for unpolite debates... no personal harm ment... Ok, then these italics will suggest you might be a Brewlar Kuvakei alt. If you're gonna continue trying to poison the well, I'll join right in. Soon we'll just be flinging poop (which is fine by me, I eat a high fiber diet).
Quote: i have to disagree here... surfing the forums (both old and new ones) anyone would be able to see / count the no of "views" and "replies" on threads with this particular subject ... every time this old dead horse is revived it raise audience in excess of 10k... sometimes even substantiale more (a "regular" decent thread gathers some 10-20 times less)... that clearly shows theres a huge (and i'd say legit) interes on the subject... calling it a "no problem to be solve" its poor... denying the existance doesnt solve anything...
Interest != Problem. Our Hero Turbefield posted stats showing that popular ships and mods are dominated by invention and unpopular ones are provided by BPOs.
Quote: the poll i'm proposing would actually solve the mistery - in all its aspects i may say...
and i didnt mean a "personal" (and therefore arguable) poll - i'd say an "official", a forum or even an "ingame" one would be the best solution... maybe some kind of "survey" would be even better as i'd say this isnt the only "burning" issue...
I meant that CCP considers polls that it sends out to be Spam and thus doesn't do it.
There is no mystery to solve since there isn't an actual problem. The people who are whining now will simply pick a new topic to whine about. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
85
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:45:00 -
[433] - Quote
That's right my alts are everywhere muwwahwhwahwahwabut for realz I only ever post with this char about t2BPO, my other char is null sec who I never use to post.
So please stop accusing everyone of being my alt who complains about the shite state of affairs with regards toT2BPO running alongside invention. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1630
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 11:50:00 -
[434] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That's right my alts are everywhere muwwahwhwahwahwabut for realz I only ever post with this char about t2BPO, my other char is null sec who I never use to post.
So please stop accusing everyone of being my alt who complains about the shite state of affairs with regards toT2BPO running alongside invention.
1) I only did that after he accused me of lying. 2) Quite a few of your alts have the same arguments in the same writing style with similarly bad grammar/spelling as you. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
317
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:08:00 -
[435] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That's right my alts are everywhere muwwahwhwahwahwabut for realz I only ever post with this char about t2BPO, my other char is null sec who I never use to post.
So please stop accusing everyone of being my alt who complains about the shite state of affairs with regards toT2BPO running alongside invention. Didn't you say you have multiple accounts? Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 12:38:00 -
[436] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That's right my alts are everywhere muwwahwhwahwahwabut for realz .
so cool.
b2 off-topic: I only picked 3 examples...Marrco Polio, Daxine Myth, sitar seaton
ALL of them had the very first post ITT or posting a hate post against T2 BPO`s and never posted again since then. All posts had the same aggresive/ignorant style similar to yours...
Also wat is this? http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2718170
So because you didnt get the right response in this forum, your created a new acount on steam to tell everyone on other forums to not play eve because of the mean T2 BPO owners? what a smart move of you... |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 15:00:00 -
[437] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: 1) I only did that after he accused me of lying. 2) Quite a few of your alts have the same arguments in the same writing style with similarly bad grammar/spelling as you.
0. my appologies for anyone bothered by this offtopic post 1. i NEVER act mean or unpolite towards a person who doesnt provoque or challange me unfairly - i consider personal attacks to be the way rednecks 'tards are using when their thin stack of arguments are gone, therefore i'd never disqualify myself using that shty approach... if any of my words looks otherwise to you (or anyone else) please reff to below no3. 3. english isnt my 1st language so please bear with me - altho i always try really hard to make my point very clear (and thats a reason my posts may look / seem rather complicated and / or bushy) i may have failures now and then due to the unfortunate condition when thinking and writing are not done in the same language... 4. i've never ment to accuse you of lying - if that would have been my intention i'd have done it useing a straight but decent approach to say my mind adding a reason for my words...
that being said i would also want to clarify: i own / use only 1 account with 2 chars so i'm the alt only for my main (which btw was born on 2003.08.03 13:15:00 and the few posts he ever made on forums were exclusivelly in the "timecode bazar" section)
ontopic now: if "CCP considers polls that it sends out to be Spam and thus doesn't do it." what about a forum poll? (maybe a dev could make some light here) - does the forum "engine" alows polls to be created / managed / administrated? - the "What about the T2BPO" could be a suitable subject for the ccp administrated forums?
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1631
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 15:32:00 -
[438] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: 0. my appologies for anyone bothered by this offtopic post 1. i NEVER act mean or unpolite towards a person who doesnt provoque or challange me unfairly - i consider personal attacks to be the way rednecks 'tards are using when their thin stack of arguments are gone, therefore i'd never disqualify myself using that shty approach... if any of my words looks otherwise to you (or anyone else) please reff to below no3.
Tadeo Musashy wrote: looks like you also missed all the other things written there - but that would be understandable if you would have added the "prowd owner of a (several) xxx bpo" before or after your name / signature... so? care to edit your reply?
Whoopsie.
Quote: 3. english isnt my 1st language so please bear with me - altho i always try really hard to make my point very clear (and thats a reason my posts may look / seem rather complicated and / or bushy) i may have failures now and then due to the unfortunate condition when thinking and writing are not done in the same language... 4. i've never ment to accuse you of lying - if that would have been my intention i'd have done it useing a straight but decent approach to say my mind adding a reason for my words...
Tadeo Musashy wrote: not at all... i am suggesting, actually i am SAYING loud and clear, that the only suporters of the "bpos should stay" ideea are the bpos owners... which i find to be normal and understand'able... and even if they are indeed a minority, i'm absolutely positive that any further solution should consider their interes aswell, despite some, more or less justified grudge - envy is a common sin and some may say sense of (too much) fairness is too... ofc exceptions are possible, you for example who declare you dont own a bpo...
Whoopsie number 2.
As for the ESL thing, don't worry about it. You're better than a lot of native speakers around here. My point was that there are several posters who appear suspiciously like Brewlar Kuvekai in mannerism and pattern who are recent creations and have only posted about T2 BPOs.
Quote: ontopic now: if "CCP considers polls that it sends out to be Spam and thus doesn't do it." what about a forum poll? (maybe a dev could make some light here) - does the forum "engine" alows polls to be created / managed / administrated? - the "What about the T2BPO" could be a suitable subject for the ccp administrated forums?
Start a Poll in the proper forum, i.e. Jita Park Speakers, home of the CSM. Or contact the CSM delegates directly. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 21:31:00 -
[439] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:That's right my alts are everywhere muwwahwhwahwahwabut for realz . so cool. b2 off-topic: I only picked 3 examples...Marrco Polio, Daxine Myth, sitar seaton ALL of them had the very first post ITT or posting a hate post against T2 BPO`s and never posted again since then. All posts had the same aggresive/ignorant style similar to yours... Also wat is this? http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2718170So because you didnt get the right response in this forum, your created a new acount on steam to tell everyone on other forums to not play eve because of the mean T2 BPO owners? what a smart move of you... LOL....... ROTFLOL....... LMFAO, The posts on that forum are harsher than on this one |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:12:00 -
[440] - Quote
Whoopsie. & Whoopsie number 2:
i have revised my words carefully and havent saw anything really "over the bridge"... pls notice i've never said i'm not going to (decently) argue for my belifs, neither that my tongue is made of wood... its possible ofc we may have different measurements for "mean and unpolite"... and for "argue" aswell
again: my "italics" were more like pointing the fact that it might be possible... and nothing like (or close to) a shty direct and personal attack in "shutup you lying bietch" style...
RubyPorto wrote:Start a Poll in the proper forum, i.e. Jita Park Speakers, home of the CSM. Or contact the CSM delegates directly. i will take your advice ofc... that if noone would do that before me - for example ppl with far more aggresive attitude... lol |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:20:00 -
[441] - Quote
Any reasonable poll on the topic would have to be a multi-question one, and it should include at a minimum the following questions and at a minimum the following choices:
- what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for T2 item prices (cheaper, no change, more expensive) - what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for inventor profit (more, same, less) - what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for inventor numbers (more, same, less) - do you support removing T2 BPOs from the game (for removal, against removal, don't care) - would you quit the game if T2 BPOs were not removed (yes, no, maybe, don't care) - would you quit the game if T2 BPOs were removed (yes, no, maybe, don't care) - how should be T2 BPO owners be compensated for the removal of T2 BPOs (not at all, huge run BPC, market price ISK, other-specify) - what would be the consequence to the EVE economy of that compensation (memo field) http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:42:00 -
[442] - Quote
yea and none of these polls could actually be answered by any players honestly since we simply dont have the backround information like CCP does. gues thats the reason why we never see any polls.
If you would ask all players if they actually like the act of ratting, mining etc. what sense would such a poll make? you need the saltyparts to enjoy the fun sweet parts even tho 99% would vote for the sweet.
Therefor the poll is just a really bad idea at all
There are plenty of source for information that explain the whole story about T2 BPO`s and why they arent an issue but some people just want to see them removed no matter what. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 00:48:00 -
[443] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:yea and none of these polls could actually be answered by any players honestly since we simply dont have the backround information like CCP does Actually, those exact questions can already be answered quite easily in accordance to reality by anybody with more than a passing acquaintance with invention or with a halfway decent knowledge of the EVE economy. Besides, most of them should be interpreted as phrased regarding opinions, not questions regarding facts (we already know the facts, we want to see where the misperceptions originate from, which inaccurate opinions).
Quote:There are plenty of source for information that explain the whole story about T2 BPO`s and why they arent an issue but some people just want to see them removed no matter what. And that's precisely how such a poll would help, see what's the main reason for the disconnect between reality and public opinion, or even if the predominant public opinion really diverges from reality as much as claimed by T2 BPO opponents. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 01:13:00 -
[444] - Quote
for example
Quote:- what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for inventor profit (more, same, less) - what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for inventor numbers (more, same, less)
these are the most important questions I would say, and I think we know what answers each party would give, no matter if the reason for the decision is honest or not.
And still, how can a player answer these questions? they are so speculative and it would need a lot of behavioural research, numbers about active/quitting subscriptions, petitions etc.that ccp (I would guess) would never publish. A normal player that only plays the game cant know these things, he can only guess, wich CCP can just do much better with their backround knowledge.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 01:16:00 -
[445] - Quote
There you go: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 Also rephrased to be more clear that it's about opinions :) http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 01:33:00 -
[446] - Quote
No doubt its about opinons, but these opinions should rather be about what people like (do you like the colour green, do you like doing that etc)or just something that doesnt require deeper knowledge of somthing.But asking about consequences of a change that simply cant be foreseen can only provide a rather rough estimation that polls are normaly not used for.
personnly I have the feeling the questions are rather aiming at the controversial weak spots of the T2 BPOs lead to answer them prejudiced. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 01:50:00 -
[447] - Quote
Whoever wants T2 BPOs gone is probably going to want them gone either way, but at least this way they would expose what exactly they consider to be their main failing and what their opinion of the consequences would be. The consequences of a complete T2 BPO removal are crystal-clear to foresee, unless a whole lot of other changes are also made. If one would only remove T2 BPOs without changing anything else, some T2 items would become much more expensive, while all T2 items would become a bit more expensive, and there would be a bit more inventors around, but they generally would not end up earning a significantly different profit. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
137
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:07:00 -
[448] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Whoever wants T2 BPOs gone is probably going to want them gone either way, but at least this way they would expose what exactly they consider to be their main failing and what their opinion of the consequences would be. The consequences of a complete T2 BPO removal are crystal-clear to foresee, unless a whole lot of other changes are also made. If one would only remove T2 BPOs without changing anything else, some T2 items would become much more expensive, while all T2 items would become a bit more expensive, and there would be a bit more inventors around, but they generally would not end up earning a significantly different profit.
Simply up and removing them on a perfect Saturday afternoon will cause havoc on the markets as soon as the servers go up, cant just go and remove a major feature of the game like it never existed.
would be a pretty big undertaking if it ever happens. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:07:00 -
[449] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Any reasonable poll on the topic would have to be a multi-question one, and it should include at a minimum the following questions and at a minimum the following choices:
- what is your personal experience with invention (none, lost ISK and quit inventing, made ISK and quit inventing, keep making ISK) - what is better to invent for profit, an item with a T2 BPO or an item without T2 BPO (with, without, depends on item) - what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for T2 item prices (cheaper, no change, more expensive) - what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for inventor profit (more, same, less) - what would be the consequence of removing all T2 BPOs from the game for inventor numbers (more, same, less) - what is your opinion about T2 BPO market prices (too expensive, too cheap, reasonably priced) - what is your opinion about efforts made by current T2 BPO owners to own any one, on average (too easy, too hard, fair effort) - what is your opinion about efforts made by current T2 BPO owners to own a valuable one, on average (too easy, too hard, fair effort) - do you support removing T2 BPOs from the game (for removal, against removal, don't care) - would you quit the game if T2 BPOs were not removed (yes, no, maybe, don't care) - would you quit the game if T2 BPOs were removed (yes, no, maybe, don't care) - how should be T2 BPO owners be compensated for the removal of T2 BPOs (not at all, huge run BPC, market price ISK, other-specify) - what would be the consequence to the EVE economy of that compensation (memo field)
all these questions are actually nothing more then a starting over for the debate allready made in countless threads / posts on the subject...
the only question that really matters is:
What about the T2BPOs? (should stay / should go / dont care)
depending on the poll outcome further steps could follow... - if the no of votes would be meaningless (few ks representing an unsignificant fraction of the community) that would be a fail and the whole debate should have its end... - if enough votes to count would be casted then: * further survey(s) may be launched in order to determine the details... * ccp would eventually take notice and look deeper into the matter...
as for the
Akita T wrote: You know, so you can separate the wheat from the chaff...
unfortunatelly (bold is very "on purpose") , just like IRL, the "democracy" mean 1 vote per person, no matter wheat or chaff... in eve should be even worse with every account worth the same 15$/month... |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:11:00 -
[450] - Quote
The good bit about EVE in this issue is that it's not a democracy. The "dictator" (CCP) could certainly be swayed by the council (CSM) to some degree, if the council would have the majority backing of the public (the poll), but ultimately, the decision is only in CCP's hands. The best bit is that I doubt the public really is THAT much against it, and the council doesn't really give much of a damn about the issue either, while the dictator considers it a non-issue to begin with. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:15:00 -
[451] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: all these questions are actually nothing more then a starting over for the debate allready made in countless threads / posts on the subject...
By one person. Just because one guy spams the forums with threads about his pet whine doesn't mean that a lot of people care. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1108
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:16:00 -
[452] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 So just go answer the "poll" and prove him insignificant :P http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:24:00 -
[453] - Quote
Akita T wrote:The good bit about EVE in this issue is that it's not a democracy. The "dictator" (CCP) could certainly be swayed by the council (CSM) to some degree, if the council would have the majority backing of the public (the poll), but ultimately, the decision is only in CCP's hands. The best bit is that I doubt the public really is THAT much against it, and the council doesn't really give much of a damn about the issue either, while the dictator considers it a non-issue to begin with.
thats exactlly why i said a more comprehensive "survey" would be useless...
and thats exactlly why i ended my above reply with "* ccp would eventually take notice and look deeper into the matter..." |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1636
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 02:39:00 -
[454] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote:The good bit about EVE in this issue is that it's not a democracy. The "dictator" (CCP) could certainly be swayed by the council (CSM) to some degree, if the council would have the majority backing of the public (the poll), but ultimately, the decision is only in CCP's hands. The best bit is that I doubt the public really is THAT much against it, and the council doesn't really give much of a damn about the issue either, while the dictator considers it a non-issue to begin with. thats exactlly why i said a more comprehensive "survey" would be useless... and thats exactlly why i ended my above reply with "* ccp would eventually take notice and look deeper into the matter..."
John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras @swearte @HLIBIndustry The only markets where T2 BPOs have a significant impact are where there is little demand for item.
John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras 1,071 characters installed a manufacturing job with a T2 BPO in March, and 12,005 installed a T2 BPC. #tweetfleet
John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras The answer? There are 3,186 different owners of T2 BPOs.
So 2/3 T2 BPO owners don't bother using them.
John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras Excl. drones/charges, the most produced T2 items from BPOs in March were: Exp. Cargohold (19%), Rocket Launcher (94%), Cap Recharger (22%).
The most commonly used T2 BPOs only produce 20% of their markets (Rocket Launcher IIs have a tiny demand).
CCP has looked deeper into the matter and they came up with a big bowl of not-a-problem. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Nomad I
University of Caille Gallente Federation
68
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:25:00 -
[455] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras @swearte @HLIBIndustry The only markets where T2 BPOs have a significant impact are where there is little demand for item.
The same result has got a german player. He made an analysis on the markeds data and posted it here
https://www.eveger.de/forum/showthread.php?38090-T2-BPOs-und-Invention-eine-Stichprobenanalyse
T2-BPOs generating a relative low output, so the impact is little to none. Because of the low output the profit in relation to the marketsvalue is to low. A T2-BPO is usually a bad investment. |
Jajas Helper
131
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:54:00 -
[456] - Quote
Nomad I wrote:RubyPorto wrote: John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras @swearte @HLIBIndustry The only markets where T2 BPOs have a significant impact are where there is little demand for item.
The same result has got a german player. He made an analysis on the markeds data and posted it here https://www.eveger.de/forum/showthread.php?38090-T2-BPOs-und-Invention-eine-StichprobenanalyseT2-BPOs generating a relative low output, so the impact is little to none. Because of the low output the profit in relation to the marketsvalue is to low. A T2-BPO is usually a bad investment.
I own T2 bpos, and have for invented years aswell... I have more nightmares about my bpos then inventing.... but yes- not having to deal with the clickfest that is inventioning is awesome- but thats hardly a reason to go after T2 bpos... it should more so show that the workflow for inventioning is just annoying!
Anyway, T2 inventioning is easy to do and has a very low investement , gathering billions of isk and then invest them into one T2 bpo is not as easy ;)
Inferno do stuff with stuff to imitate the stuff you could do faster with the old stuff
-stuff- |
Diemos Hiaraki
VC Academy
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:49:00 -
[457] - Quote
Akita T wrote:
So don't say they're doing nothing about it, because they certainly have, are and will be doing something. Ok, it might not be what you CLAIM you want, and you want that because you can't or don't want to see the entire big picture, but that's a different story, and not their failing.
P.S. You already completely ignored 2 of my direct replies. This would be the 3rd one.
I ignored your replies for good reason, yet that reason isn't something I'm going to commit to writing; for now I ask you to accept that instinct told me not to reply until now. Your replies didn't fall on deaf ears, but my viewpoint is unchanged even though I don't disagree with the points you make. I was hoping I had the logs from my old PC in the noob help channel where a guy from a major alliance was advertising T2BPOs, because those logs would have demonstrated my position a little better. I've still two hard drives to check yet though.
Anyway - as a noob, isk is meaningless. With isk I can buy stuff I can't fit, buy ships I can't fly or trade for even more isk that I have no use for. If I'm desperate for isk, I can even buy it from CCP - isk is not an issue. "Industry types" appear to think that the problem that noobs like me have with T2BPOs is the profit made from said T2BPO is more than possible than done with invented T2BPCs - that isn't the problem. The issue is that T2BPOs have a guaranteed result, unlike officer drops or any other aspect of the game that has the most valuable result - a T2BPO delivers on time, every time, ad infinitum. Yes, CCP have attempted to address the balance, but it still appears to be really unbalanced. Skewed by the outlook of a noob: war with an alliance with access to T2BPOs is pointless because they have infinite supply at less than material cost (with experience I know this not to be exactly true, yet the perception of many noob players is that it is.) From that perspective, T2BPOs are perpetual motion, pay to win item that serve no good purpose in an MMO whilst restricted to only those with the real life or in game money to purchase them (and as time goes by, I expect they'll end up in the same alliance's posession which I believe was the reason they were stopped from being seeded in the first place.) What T2BPOs earn is insignificant and not even remotely important in comparison.
Bare in mind, when I started playing EVE I chose to be an Caldari Achura inventor - I have looked into the issue before more than I'd like to (I thought inventing would be a noble profession.) No matter the evidence though, it still doesn't change the fact that I think I can never compete with a guy with more than one T2BPO unless I specialise in one thing, and won't know for sure until I've trained the appropriate skills (and there's no way in hell I'm waiting a year to find out.) I can't trust your opinions because you're posting in the industry forum - the forum where everyone tries to get everyone else out of their market by any means; it's Mos Eisley in here.
As you say though, CCP are going to do something with invention - that much is clear; I can only hope that that means invention will at least appear more balanced and viable to noobs in future because if a player quits because of a perceived imbalance issue they're unlikely they'll return (I only came back because it didn't cost me anything to do so.) It doesn't matter what we say here though because the vast majority of EVE players don't do this forum.
There may be those who think I'm being a drama queen about this issue, but I've seen enough people leave this game because of T2BPOs limited availability. My experience of EVE is that the game IS dying too - there are less people playing than when I quit last year, there are people still playing from last year with a lot more alts; statistics are not going to change my experience (or my experience of statistics being a load of bull.)
Poll won't work because the guys I know with T2BPOs have a lot of alts; I can only assume that all T2BPO owners are the same.
Anyway, fly safe. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:52:00 -
[458] - Quote
Akita T wrote:So just go answer the "poll" and prove him insignificant :P
i've gave your "poll" a look and considering your resonable request quoted below
Akita T wrote:"...PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS THE ISSUE OF T2 BPOs IN THE POLL's THREAD. If you wish to discuss the issue, feel free to discuss it in the Science&Industry thread located here : ... This is a poll-only thread. Please keep it to poll answers only. Thank you...."
i've decided to post here, so here we are:
that is not a public poll... here are some reasons:
1. technicaly: that is not what most of us know to be a real POLL = a thread explaining the question / problem folowed by a serie of options / answers one has to choose from with a simple mouse click[ - done!!!... the rather complicated fill-in procedure in your "poll" would discourage many to take part in that kind of survey, because of that the results would be at least arguable due to low audience... 2. consistency: that is a try, your try to summarize and organize the T2BPO debate, upon your personal prioritization, which might be (no personal harm ment), more or less affected by your personal oppinion - therefore calling it a "public" and a "poll" is to much -a thread-name should be "Akita T's survey on T2BPOS"
as said before the one and only question that really matters for ALL of us is (as simple as this):
What about the T2BPOs? followed by 3 click'able options to choose from
- should stay
- should go
- i dont care
all ther rest would depend entirely on the poll's audience... and any further steps and / or actions, (if any) would be solely ccp's will, decision and responsability...
PS: i havent found a way to proper set a real poll type thread in the "...speakers corner" section on forums... its either - not possible at all because the forum itself hasnt that feature builded / included - we could (through CSM or "Features & Ideas sections) try to ask for this feature to be added or - i myself was not capable to find the way to set the poll up - in which care maybe someone with better skills could do it...
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1112
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 00:31:00 -
[459] - Quote
Mostly not really disagree with you that much either, but want to clarify some points, for posterity's sake...
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:Anyway - as a noob, isk is meaningless. With isk I can buy stuff I can't fit, buy ships I can't fly or trade for even more isk that I have no use for. If I'm desperate for isk, I can even buy it from CCP - isk is not an issue. ISK can also buy a character that can fly and fit just about anything you like. Also, technically, you never buy ISK directly from CCP - you buy GTC/PLEX from CCP and exchange it for ISK to another player.
Quote:The issue is that T2BPOs have a guaranteed result If invention was not chance-based at all, so always a guaranteed result (with result based on inputs and skills), that would in your opinion minimize the perceived problem or not ?
Quote:What T2BPOs earn is insignificant and not even remotely important in comparison. Yet in the grand scheme of things, the only things that really matter are politics (social connections) and NAV (in ISK), I hope you can agree with that now that you're not a completely new player anymore. From that perspective, any other factors except raw ISK profitability of T2 BPOs are what's really insignificant.
Quote:I think I can never compete with a guy with more than one T2BPO unless I specialise in one thing[...] can't trust your opinions because you're posting in the industry forum - the forum where everyone tries to get everyone else out of their market by any means Other than testing out invention on SiSi and breaking it down mathematically back when it was introduced, I haven't had much to do with invention. Been playing for over 6 years now, and in the past 3 years, I have made almost all of my ISK (estimated current NAV ~450 bil ISK, from less than 1/10 of that 3 years ago) through loans, investments, forecasting and subsequent trades - no direct hand in either manufacture nor invention, but enough knowledge to determine what's worth buying and what's worth selling - and MINIMAL ingame time spent clicking stuff (I'd often not even touch my market orders for days, even weeks). So, yeah, sure, you CAN'T beat a T2 BPO owner at manufacturing the items he has T2 BPOs for, but you certainly can beat him (quite drastically too) in terms of earned ISK (from an even lower starting point), and with even less INGAME effort than his. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 00:44:00 -
[460] - Quote
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
I ignored your replies for good reason, yet that reason isn't something I'm going to commit to writing; for now I ask you to accept that instinct told me not to reply until now. .
in a discussion you ignore these parts where the opponent is mathematicly proving that your wrong, and as a reaction your just ingoring is calculations just to bring the excuse "I ignored you because we simply have a different point of view"
not to be rude, but that exactly fulfills the definition of "ignorance".
its interesting that in this 23 page long thread I havent seen anyone bringing up any calculations that would substantiate their opinion against T2 BPO`s when akita and others did it numerous times.
Quote:war with an alliance with access to T2BPOs is pointless because they have infinite supply at less than material cost (with experience I know this not to be exactly true, yet the perception of many noob players is that it is. that is complety wrong. A T2 BPO hasnt a limited number of runs, but their output is very limited, so not infinite. No difference to invnetion (yes if all materials you need some datacores extra, but thats all) even a T2 BPO cant just create itmes/ships allone.
Dont you understand that you are just criticizing players for beeing richer than you? even if a corp has access to that many T2 BPO`s to fund a war(gotta be a lot of them), it means that they would have all their trillions in isk, if they wouldnt have spend the isk for the T2 BPO`s. What difference would it make for you?
Quote:Yes, CCP have attempted to address the balance, but it still appears to be really unbalanced they havent done anything really against it, becuase there wasnt a reason for tbh.
Quote:Poll won't work because the guys I know with T2BPOs have a lot of alts; I can only assume that all T2BPO owners are the same i learned ITT that even T2 BPO-haters have alts
Quote:it still doesn't change the fact that I think I can never compete with a guy with more than one T2BPO
lets just pick a T2 BPO, lets say a energized adaptive nano membrane II, sold today for 50bn ISk http://eveeye.com/profit.asp?blueprint=Energized+Adaptive+Nano+Membrane+II+Blueprint&ML=180&PL=202&POS=1&RAP=1&F60=1&P=1
it makes 11 bn p.a. under perfect conditions (24/7/365 manufaction, not including taxes, producing all materials by yourself). thats even less than a billion per month. If you cant even compete with more than that, I find the request to compete to somebody who can afford 50 bn for the print quite overweening. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1651
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 01:20:00 -
[461] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote:So just go answer the "poll" and prove him insignificant :P i've gave your "poll" a look and considering your resonable request quoted below Akita T wrote:"...PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS THE ISSUE OF T2 BPOs IN THE POLL's THREAD. If you wish to discuss the issue, feel free to discuss it in the Science&Industry thread located here : ... This is a poll-only thread. Please keep it to poll answers only. Thank you...." i've decided to post here, so here we are: that is not a public poll... here are some reasons: 1. technicaly: that is not what most of us know to be a real POLL = a thread explaining the question / problem folowed by a serie of options / answers one has to choose from with a simple mouse click[ - done!!!... the rather complicated fill-in procedure in your "poll" would discourage many to take part in that kind of survey, because of that the results would be at least arguable due to low audience... 2. consistency: that is a try, your try to summarize and organize the T2BPO debate, upon your personal prioritization, which might be (no personal harm ment), more or less affected by your personal oppinion - therefore calling it a "public" and a "poll" is to much -a thread-name should be "Akita T's survey on T2BPOS" as said before the one and only question that really matters for ALL of us is (as simple as this): What about the T2BPOs? followed by 3 click'able options to choose from
- should stay
- should go
- i dont care
all ther rest would depend entirely on the poll's audience... and any further steps and / or actions, (if any) would be solely ccp's will, decision and responsability... PS: i havent found a way to proper set a real poll type thread in the "...speakers corner" section on forums... its either - not possible at all because the forum itself hasnt that feature builded / included - we could (through CSM or "Features & Ideas sections) try to ask for this feature to be added or - i myself was not capable to find the way to set the poll up - in which case maybe someone with better skills could do it.- ty..
Guess what, EvE is hard and usually doesn't come with tools to make things simple.
The forums do not have a tool to create clickable automatic polls. Akita's poll is how polls are generally done. If you want to change that, make and F&I request or contact your local CSM.
Anyway, Akita told you exactly why a one question poll is pretty stupid and meaningless on this topic, so I wont repeat her.
As for claiming that's not a poll, Akita's poll pretty well mimics the format of modern public opinion polls: "An opinion poll, sometimes simply referred to as a poll, is a survey of public opinion from a particular sample. Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals."-Wikipedia
Series of Questions? Check. Ready to Extrapolate into Generalities? Check. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:00:00 -
[462] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:as said before the one and only question that really matters for ALL of us is (as simple as this): What about the T2BPOs? followed by 3 click'able options to choose from
- should stay
- should go
- i dont care
The results of that poll without any decent framing would be easy so to guesstimate as to make even posting that poll pointless : there are far too few T2 BPO owners (barely around 1% of the general population) for their opinion to even register, most people do not have a proper understanding of what T2 BPOs are actually good for and what the consequence of their existence really is, plus people generally don't like admitting they don't know/understand stuff, and humans in general are fairly jealous and petty when it comes to wealth.
all the above concerns may sound "legit" from a documented (and ofc side'ed) point of view... nevertheless option is option no matter the (lack of) reason...
Akita T wrote:The obvious outcome would be that only the few people that really know T2 BPOs are not a problem would vote "should stay" (and I estimate that portion to only be 10%-20% of the general public, at best), more than half would vote "should go" even if what they really mean is "I don't know enough" or even "I only slightly care to see them gone, but if those are my choices, sure, make them go away, why not, I don't have one anyway". You don't need a poll to tell you THAT.
you seems to ignore the "dont care" choice - which, IMO, would gather way more then the "pro" or "against" options... and you also seems to ignore the "i have no clue / interes - i wont waste my time with this poll" - also a valid option... anyway: a vote IS a vote no matter the reasons behind it... no matter the colaterall arguments, this kind of poll would eventually make it clear about the stream and it should be considered... even for the main purpose of ruling out the most unlikely possibility of an 30k participants outcome with 25k "against"...
Akita T wrote:What you do need a poll for is to tell you what TYPES of people want T2 BPOs gone, and what is their REASON for wanting them gone, so that CCP can then mitigate the most "popular" dislike reason via better gameplay or blog education.
i (myself that is) dont need a poll at all, any kind of poll... my mind is made long ago but i have a single vote and the option to cast it or not... ccp might need the poll... ccp might need the info about the no and type of ppl who actually care about the T2BPOs... one way or another...
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1652
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:15:00 -
[463] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: i (myself that is) dont need a poll at all, any kind of poll... my mind is made long ago but i have a single vote and the option to cast it or not... ccp might need the poll... ccp might need the info about the no and type of ppl who actually care about the T2BPOs... one way or another...
If you were able to present solid evidence that T2BPOs harm the game, you'd stand a solid chance to change my mind on the subject (depending on the thixtropic qualities of that evidence, ofc).
If you can't be convinced by evidence that is contrary to your position, you are a fanatic and cannot be argued with. Since you cannot be argued with, you cannot take part in a meaningful discussion. Since you cannot take part in a meaningful discussion, I will cease my efforts to discuss the topic with you in a meaningful way.
With that, I say Good Day to you, Sir. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 09:10:00 -
[464] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote: i (myself that is) dont need a poll at all, any kind of poll... my mind is made long ago but i have a single vote and the option to cast it or not... ccp might need the poll... ccp might need the info about the no and type of ppl who actually care about the T2BPOs... one way or another...
If you were able to present solid evidence that T2BPOs harm the game, you'd stand a solid chance to change my mind on the subject (depending on the thixtropic qualities of that evidence, ofc). If you can't be convinced by evidence that is contrary to your position, you are a fanatic and cannot be argued with. Since you cannot be argued with, you cannot take part in a meaningful discussion. Since you cannot take part in a meaningful discussion, I will cease my efforts to discuss the topic with you in a meaningful way. With that, I say Good Day to you, Sir.
well Sir, looks like we have some kind of misunderstanding here (which i even cant blame you for as long as this is not a 2 man debate but a forum with many posts / opinions and having to answer many "one guy" things may get mixed sometimes)... pls be so kind to notice i have never said T2BPOs harm the game in any way!!!... you may check my posts if neccesary - i've allready done it (just to be absolutely sure that, at some point, i havent said something just to annoy a ill-mannered person - i've done that now and then, but not in this thread)... even more: i have always agreed with arguments saying t2bpos are to be ignored when we consider global eve economy... and even more: i've made it clear somewhere that "as an 11 slots inventor / manufacturer as well as bpo owner i dont give a ... errrr... i dont care about the bpos... i do not even bother to waste a manuf slot for the bpo " - maybe not the exact words but that was the spirit... that being said i cannot be asked "to present solid evidence that T2BPOs harm the game" as long as its very clear i dont belive that... i have to say that you (and maybe others aswell) got me all wrong... my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers... same thing makes me consider the exploration buff to actually be a nerf for me because it ruined my well planed and hardworked exclusivity... same thing that makes me consider any "on the run gameplay change" to be unfair except some sort of compensation is offered for those who made their plan considering some rules inplace and sudently find themself, more or less, one way or another, spoiled to some degree by the new rules...
again: (and in bold) i am aware of the obvious fact that some things need to be changed for the overall benefit - but changing rules on the run sometimes literarlly means screwing plans, rendering strategies to be useless, moving months of training time directly into the trashcan... all those situations needs to be carefully considered and compensations should be offered accordinglly whenever the changes are more then resonable "tweaking"
so: in my book bpos should be removed because of their unfair way of seeding and because the lottery was removed and ppl dont have the "chance" of geting one anymore... from the same book of course compensations should be adequatly offered for the current legit owners...
if you Sir could say those are not valid, meaningfull and resonable arguments then i'd have to agree i am a fanatic...
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1654
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 09:18:00 -
[465] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote: i (myself that is) dont need a poll at all, any kind of poll... my mind is made long ago but i have a single vote and the option to cast it or not... ccp might need the poll... ccp might need the info about the no and type of ppl who actually care about the T2BPOs... one way or another...
If you were able to present solid evidence that T2BPOs harm the game, you'd stand a solid chance to change my mind on the subject (depending on the thixtropic qualities of that evidence, ofc). If you can't be convinced by evidence that is contrary to your position, you are a fanatic and cannot be argued with. Since you cannot be argued with, you cannot take part in a meaningful discussion. Since you cannot take part in a meaningful discussion, I will cease my efforts to discuss the topic with you in a meaningful way. With that, I say Good Day to you, Sir. well Sir, looks like we have some kind of misunderstanding here (which i even cant blame you for as long as this is not a 2 man debate but a forum with many posts / opinions and having to answer many "one guy" things may get mixed sometimes)... pls be so kind to notice i have never said T2BPOs harm the game in any way!!!... you may check my posts if neccesary - i've allready done it (just to be absolutely sure that, at some point, i havent said something just to annoy a ill-mannered person - i've done that now and then, but not in this thread)... even more: i have always agreed with arguments saying t2bpos are to be ignored when we consider global eve economy... and even more: i've made it clear somewhere that "as an 11 slots inventor / manufacturer as well as bpo owner i dont give a ... errrr... i dont care about the bpos... i do not even bother to waste a manuf slot for the bpo " - maybe not the exact words but that was the spirit... that being said i cannot be asked " to present solid evidence that T2BPOs harm the game" as long as its very clear i dont belive that... i have to say that you (and maybe others aswell) got me all wrong... my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers... same thing makes me consider the exploration buff to actually be a nerf for me because it ruined my well planed and hardworked exclusivity... same thing that makes me consider any "on the run gameplay change" to be unfair except some sort of compensation is offered for those who made their plan considering some rules inplace and sudently find themself, more or less, one way or another, spoiled to some degree by the new rules... again: (and in bold) i am aware of the obvious fact that some things need to be changed for the overall benefit - but changing rules on the run sometimes literarlly means screwing plans, rendering strategies to be useless, moving months of training time directly into the trashcan... all those situations needs to be carefully considered and compensations should be offered accordinglly whenever the changes are more then resonable "tweaking" so: in my book bpos should be removed because of their unfair way of seeding and because the lottery was removed and ppl dont have the "chance" of geting one anymore... from the same book of course compensations should be adequatly offered for the current legit owners... if you Sir could say those are not valid, meaningfull and resonable arguments then i'd have to agree i am a fanatic...
I SAID GOOD DAY! Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1113
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 05:30:00 -
[466] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers At least they have something very strong in common - neither of those will ever be removed http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 07:25:00 -
[467] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers At least they have something very strong in common - neither of those will ever be removed
ofc this is just a game - a great one but still a game - and should be treated likewise... but, as a general approach and for the sake of the "argument":
that "will ever be removed" its a very overconfident statement... it remembers me of king's vanities in Paris's 17th century, or Tzar's attitude in old Rusia's early 1900... or 80-90 years latter Easter Europe - other times, other "Tzars", same attitude, same outcome, ... which proves that with enough popular will and / or adequate leadership nothing is that "imposible" as it seems to be... |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1672
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 07:35:00 -
[468] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers At least they have something very strong in common - neither of those will ever be removed ofc this is just a game - a great one but still a game - and should be treated likewise... but, as a general approach and for the sake of the "argument": that "will ever be removed" its a very overconfident statement... it remembers me of king's vanities in Paris's 17th century, or Tzar's attitude in old Rusia's early 1900... or 80-90 years latter Easter Europe - other times, other "Tzars", same attitude, same outcome, ... which proves that with enough popular will and / or adequate leadership nothing is that "imposible" as it seems to be...
Where in CCP's marketing have you ever seen the word "fair" or "just"? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 08:11:00 -
[469] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Where in CCP's marketing have you ever seen the word "fair" or "just"?
not very sure but... nowhere? there is a reason for that careless attitude towards "fair & just": marketing as well as services have the natural tendency to capitalize on ppl's expectations... as theres litle to none "market" for those "concepts" why should they care? after all eve IS a game and ppl are looking for fun here rather then surveying the "Human Rights" agenda... but while having all the fun we could have adapting ourselfs the best we could and playing inside this "created" enviroment, i'd say we are entitled to challange what any of us, depending on his / hers own belifs, could find to be unresonable, even if that is mainly at a theoretical level and mostly for the sake of argument...
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1672
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 08:56:00 -
[470] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Where in CCP's marketing have you ever seen the word "fair" or "just"?
not very sure but... nowhere? there is a reason for that careless attitude towards "fair & just": marketing as well as services have the natural tendency to capitalize on ppl's expectations... as theres litle to none "market" for those "concepts" why should they care? after all eve IS a game and ppl are looking for fun here rather then surveying the "Human Rights" agenda... but while having all the fun we could have adapting ourselfs the best we could and playing inside this "created" enviroment, i'd say we are entitled to challange what any of us, depending on his / hers own belifs, could find to be unresonable, even if that is mainly at a theoretical level and mostly for the sake of (everyone's own) argument...
Exactly. You're saying you want T2BPOs removed because they're not "Fair" yet in the next breath you agree that CCP never advertised the game as "Fair." Why are you complaining about a concept that you understand?
Extending your logic, T2BPOs aren't Fair > Delete them EvE isn't Fair > Delete it
My reasoning T2BPOs aren't fair > Deal with it EvE isn't fair > Deal with it harder. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
|
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 09:25:00 -
[471] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: it remembers me of king's vanities in Paris's 17th century, or Tzar's attitude in old Rusia's early 1900... or 80-90 years latter Easter Europe - other times, other "Tzars", same attitude, same outcome, ...
Are you serious dude?
not doubting your knowledge, but have you ever brought up a argument that has anything to do with EVE-Online?
|
India99
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 09:51:00 -
[472] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: that "will ever be removed" its a very overconfident statement... it remembers me of king's vanities in Paris's 17th century, or Tzar's attitude in old Rusia's early 1900... or 80-90 years latter Easter Europe - other times, other "Tzars", same attitude, same outcome, ... which proves that with enough popular will and / or adequate leadership nothing is that "imposible" as it seems to be...
yea look, the 2-3 Crusaders and their alts itt might gave you the illusion that there's a Revolution going on with several thousands of people backing you up, but there really isn`t. Considering there been these 2-3 misguided dudes per year (in the last 8 years or so) getting confused by T2-BPOs, Akita T`s comment accurate enough.
anyway, I wouldn't quite compare this situation with the victory of the democrathy over the monarchy, rather with Simba and Nala didnt understand why lions shouldn`t go to the hyena`s place. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
86
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 16:42:00 -
[473] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers At least they have something very strong in common - neither of those will ever be removed
Never say die Akita, ganking and grief actually draws people to the game. No longer gifted content that is indestructible, non expiring, theft proof, noob invention crushing and down right wrong does. CCP will eventually tire of the drops in subs due to T2BPO's and will remove them. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 16:57:00 -
[474] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:my "pro bpo removal" opinion / atitude comes from some twisted sense of justice/ fairness... same thing that makes me "hate" scammers and highsec gankers At least they have something very strong in common - neither of those will ever be removed Never say die Akita, ganking and grief actually draws people to the game. No longer gifted content that is indestructible, non expiring, theft proof, noob invention crushing and down right wrong does. CCP will eventually tire of the drops in subs due to T2BPO's and will remove them.
What drop in subs? The average users online has risen every year (bottom of the incarna slump was still just over when the online users was the year before), and the Subscriber numbers have also risen every year.
T2BPOs have been around for a very long time, surely if there were going to be a drop in subs we'd have seen in by now?
Same goes for ganking. It's been around in large, well organized, player run, events since m0o's camp in early 2003. And the subs keep rolling in. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 17:53:00 -
[475] - Quote
I will bet you my legs that more new players drop EVE over being ganked or scammed than finding out about T2 BPO's. I'll also bet you my arms that just as more players are drawn to ganking and griefing than are turned off by it, more players are likewise drawn in by T2 BPO's than turned off by them. I mean, you clearly hate them more than anybody and you're still here, aren't you? |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1070
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 18:09:00 -
[476] - Quote
I see no justification to get rid of them atm; if CCP Diagoras or EyoG could delve into how many T2 BPOs exist at the moment and what level of impact they have on the Invention market, I would consider that enough information to make a decision. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 18:18:00 -
[477] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:I see no justification to get rid of them atm; if CCP Diagoras or EyoG could delve into how many T2 BPOs exist at the moment and what level of impact they have on the Invention market, I would consider that enough information to make a decision.
http://k162space.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/2012-03-08-t2_bpo_stats1.png
....@CCP_Diagoras
The Good
93.95% of T2 Gyrostabilizers produced in March 2012 were from invention. In March 2012, 90.23% of Hulks and 84.17% of Mackinaws produced were from invention. 89.77% of 1400mm II, 82.00% of Tachyon II, 87.34% of 425mm Rail II, 74.23% of Torpedo Launcher II produced in March were from invention. 55.25% of Improved Cloaks and 91.93% of Covert Ops Cloaks were produced via invention in March 2012. 86.81% of 220mm Vulcan Autocannons produced in March were produced through invention.
The Eh
67.85% of Sabres and 65.01% of Wolves produced in March 2012 were the from invention. 72.27% of the 2,005 Falcons produced in March 2012 were produced through invention. 66.13% of Ishtars and 63.53% of Zealots produced in March 2012 were produced via invention.
The Ugly
27.60% of Curses and 22.16% of Pilgrims produced in March 2012 were from invention. Only 7.07% of Absolutions and 23.62% of Sleipnirs produced in March 2012 were produced through invention. 44.58% of Cerberus and 6.00% of Eagles produced in March 2012 were procuded through invention.
tl;dr
Post lottery, T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas...... |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 10:21:00 -
[478] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas.[/i].....
errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit...
and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes...
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 10:38:00 -
[479] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote: it remembers me of king's vanities in Paris's 17th century, or Tzar's attitude in old Rusia's early 1900... or 80-90 years latter Easter Europe - other times, other "Tzars", same attitude, same outcome, ...
Are you serious dude? not doubting your knowledge, but have you ever brought up a argument that has anything to do with EVE-Online?
well... never thought it is imperative to link all the arguments with game related issues... and while we are at "brought up arguments" i see no reason why only those pro-removal should argue their position... what about the arguments for "dont touch the T2BPOs"? and dont push the "T2BPOs" are meaningless towards overall eve economy" upfront... that argument is valid for both sides: if it means nothing why keep them?
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 13:12:00 -
[480] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:what about the arguments for "dont touch the T2BPOs"? and dont push the "T2BPOs" are meaningless towards overall eve economy" upfront... that argument is valid for both sides: if it means nothing why keep them? That's easy to answer : just because something is next to meaningless at the big picture level doesn't mean it's meaningless to the individual with a stake in it.
In the grand scheme of things, T2 BPOs might not affect the overall economy by much. However, they DO lower prices of less popular ships and modules. They would become far more expensive and therefore become even less popular (to the point of maybe even vanishing from the game for practical intents and purposes) if T2 BPOs for them were ever removed. Not just that, but also, due to them providing a less lossy manufacture method for a portion of the market, they enable more T2 stuff to be made out of a limited amount of bottleneck moongoo, which means they lower the costs of ALL T2 items that contain the bottleneck material, so removing them will most likely raise prices of all other T2 items slightly. Also, they are a high-value low-ROI investment for their owners. The ISK value of any individual T2 BPO might be insignificant compared to total ISK in-game, but that can be said about the wallet content of 99+% of the game's population too. Don't tell me people would take it well if all of it would be gone overnight, no matter how little it was.
Tadeo Musashy wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas.[/i]..... errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit... That assumes you can unload the investment at a similar price later, which is not always the case. And what about higher RoI investments that also are easily resellable ? Supercapital BPC creation for instance, overall RoI is often at about the same level as T2 BPO ownership, it requres less effort, and is probably more easily re-convertable into ISK. In fact, come to think of it, can you name any initial investment in EVE other than skills that can not be re-converted into ISK after you decide you no longer wish to take part in the activity ?
Quote:and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes. Funny you should say that, because passive datacore harvesting WAS NOT REMOVED from the game - it just got an efficiency reduction alongside an alternate production method. And it's not even guaranteed to really translate into an income reduction for all datacore types either, since some of them might just increase in price to compensate. Also, you know, it's pretty much the same way T2 BPO income was drastically reduced when invention was introduced. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 13:14:00 -
[481] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas.[/i]..... errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit...
that was actually not me speaking, it was a quote of CCP_Diagoras... and I think nobody ever seriously complained about the ROI since its everyone's free choice to invest in T2 BPO`s or not. T2 BPO`s arent automaticly profitable either, I would guess that of all T2 BPO`s there at least 30% that dont make profit at all or arent worth the little effort even.
Tadeo Musashy wrote: and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes...
Datacores are a different story, THEY are really 100% afk isk (no T2 BPO`s are not) but the most important difference is that there is no investment at all.Thats what your "passive isk removal" was about. They are also still in the game and still entirely passive.
Quote:well... never thought it is imperative to link all the arguments with game related issues... and while we are at "brought up arguments" i see no reason why only those pro-removal should argue their position... what about the arguments for "dont touch the T2BPOs"?
analogies are fine imho, but what she probably thought is that you seem not to be able to bring arguments within even online due a lack of knowledge/understanding (no offence). Especially the T2 BPO thing( !=patent) is hard to explain with a real live business comparison and probably not accurate enough. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 21:04:00 -
[482] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas.[/i]..... errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit... and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes...
You're discounting the risk of a nerf to T2BPOs, the item your BPO makes, or the market changing and you being unable to sell at the price you paid.
Datacores were passive income with nothing put in them and would always result in a profit. A T2BPO needs to be fed at least once a month and can easily lose you buckets of ISK if the price falls. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
86
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:13:00 -
[483] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas.[/i]..... errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit... and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes... You're discounting the risk of a nerf to T2BPOs, the item your BPO makes, or the market changing and you being unable to sell at the price you paid. Datacores were passive income with nothing put in them and would always result in a profit. A T2BPO needs to be fed at least once a month and can easily lose you buckets of ISK if the price falls.
LOL T2BPO requires a mouse click once which can reward 1 billion isk. 1 billion isk for one mouse click and handfull of RP. Sweet, please spawn more T2BPO for newer players please or remove those that you gifted to older players or be reminded time and time again why T2BPO needs removed. |
Hockston Axe
110
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:38:00 -
[484] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: LOL T2BPO requires a mouse click once which can reward 1 billion isk. 1 billion isk for one mouse click and handfull of RP. Sweet, please spawn more T2BPO for newer players please or remove those that you gifted to older players or be reminded time and time again why T2BPO needs removed.
Translated.
My T2 BPOs are such money machines they usually sit there doing nothing... |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:30:00 -
[485] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: T2 BPOs do make very passive income for a very large price. For the time it takes to get a return on your investment, the capital could better be spent in other areas.[/i]..... errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit... and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes... You're discounting the risk of a nerf to T2BPOs, the item your BPO makes, or the market changing and you being unable to sell at the price you paid. Datacores were passive income with nothing put in them and would always result in a profit. A T2BPO needs to be fed at least once a month and can easily lose you buckets of ISK if the price falls. LOL T2BPO requires a mouse click once which can reward 1 billion isk. 1 billion isk for one mouse click and handfull of RP. Sweet, please spawn more T2BPO for newer players please or remove those that you gifted to older players or be reminded time and time again why T2BPO needs removed.
That mouseclick can also lose that player 1 billion isk if the market changes.
If you think owning one is free, you don't understand opportunity cost. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:36:00 -
[486] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:LOL T2BPO requires a mouse click once which can reward 1 billion isk. More like, set up 7-10 buy orders in a trade hub, move a massive amount of goods to a system with a free manufacture slot, THEN THAT ONE CLICK (actually, several more, but ok, there is one single very important one), then waiting, then another important delivery click, then moving a massive amount of goods from the system you manufactured in into a trade hub, then babysitting sell orders for your stuff to sell. Even if you give up a whole load of ISK on the market orders and just buy from sell and sell to buy, there's still the moving of the stuff to and fro. And if you also give up even more money for a freight service, there's really not that much left over afterwards.
Quote:1 billion isk for one mouse click and handfull of RP. Oh, you meant GETTING the T2 BPO initially, from the lottery ? So, you mean working up standings back in the day working them up was a relatively grueling task, and probably doing so on a whole truckload of alts to get a decent chance of a BPO actually dropping ? Did I mention a lot of science skills were generally also quite expensive, especially when also compared to ISK income levels back in the day ?
Were you even around back when the lottery was still running ? Because I sure as hell was, for quite a long while too, but it sounds like you weren't. And by the way, I never got even a single T2 BPO offer from the lottery, let alone a non-crappy one.
Quote:Sweet, please spawn more T2BPO for newer players please or remove those that you gifted to older players Nobody was GIFTED one by CCP, except those that were subsequently REMOVED. Every other one was EARNED through either work or luck or a combination of both during the lottery. That, or paying metric truckloads of ISK to whoever won one. You know, the way almost all people that have one worth mentioning today have gotten it. It's funny how you seldom even acknowledge that any time you type a reply, let alone properly address it.
Quote:or be reminded time and time again why T2BPO needs removed. I'm still not seeing any decent reason as to why they should be removed, only as to how weird the way they were introduced was, which is not even the beginning of a reason for justifying their removal.
P.S. It's also extremely funny how the overwhelming vast majority of poll responses look like so far : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 If you discount that one single guy who didn't even bother to ANSWER the poll but just droned on about why T2 BPOs are bad, it looks like there isn't much support against T2 BPOs (NOT EVEN A SINGLE 9a SELECTION), but quite a bit for it (eight 9b answers, against the removal, nine if you count mine). And it's not like the poll is a secret or anything, it's even been repeatedly linked in this very thread, where allegedly we have some people with opposing views. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Linda Shadowborn
Dark Steel Industries
135
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 02:21:00 -
[487] - Quote
hey i thought you had quit brewlar, at least you made a big emo post about it. so guess that was just another of your.
\hey look at me! posts |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 04:20:00 -
[488] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:
errr... looks like you forgot to mention its a trade'able item and you could sell it anytime you want or you see fit to... so stop crying about the huge ROI time: investment is there anyway... all the "return" is pure proffit...
and since you allready mentioned the "passive" magic word: that was a good enough reason for nerfing datacores... now that they start the "NO to passive" crusade maybe, just maybe, ccp would care to look into ALL the "passive" endeavours with the same "lets screw it" eyes...
You're discounting the risk of a nerf to T2BPOs, the item your BPO makes, or the market changing and you being unable to sell at the price you paid.
Please dont insult my intelligence... and neither those which, with no guaranties (?), spent hundreds of billions to buy the bpos...
RubyPorto wrote:Datacores were passive income with nothing put in them and would always result in a profit. A T2BPO needs to be fed at least once a month and can easily lose you buckets of ISK if the price falls.
one more time, please dont insult my intelligence... or Akita's... (i wont bother argumenting again since she did it perfectlly... see below...)
Akita T wrote: Oh, you meant GETTING the T2 BPO initially, from the lottery ? So, you mean working up standings back in the day working them up was a relatively grueling task, and probably doing so on a whole truckload of alts to get a decent chance of a BPO actually dropping ? Did I mention a lot of science skills were generally also quite expensive, especially when also compared to ISK income levels back in the day ?
all this "working" also applys to datacore "passive" income - those were nerfed (with no compensation)... let me guess: some are more equal then the others... good point indeed...
Akita T wrote: If you discount that one single guy who didn't even bother to ANSWER the poll but just droned on about why T2 BPOs are bad, it looks like there isn't much support against T2 BPOs (NOT EVEN A SINGLE 9a SELECTION), but quite a bit for it (eight 9b answers, against the removal, nine if you count mine). And it's not like the poll is a secret or anything, it's even been repeatedly linked in this very thread, where allegedly we have some people with opposing views.
IF by "that one single guy" you are reffing me let me say i clearlly stated my oppinion about your "poll" - its way too complicated for ppl to bother answering... ofc i mean ppl with only the marginal interes of seeing a fair and balanced enviroment... i wasnt talking about ppl with huge concerns about the faith of their "preciousssss" - the t2bpos owners and their intereses...
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 04:36:00 -
[489] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
You're discounting the risk of a nerf to T2BPOs, the item your BPO makes, or the market changing and you being unable to sell at the price you paid.
Please dont insult my intelligence... and neither those which, with no guaranties (?), spent hundreds of billions to buy the bpos... RubyPorto wrote:Datacores were passive income with nothing put in them and would always result in a profit. A T2BPO needs to be fed at least once a month and can easily lose you buckets of ISK if the price falls. one more time, please dont insult my intelligence... or Akita's... (i wont bother argumenting again since she did it perfectlly... see below...)
Unless Datacore prices drop below 10k ISK per, you will not lose any money, thus you will always find a profit from your Datacores.
A Nerf to T2 Items, a Removal of T2BPOs, or a change in the market would all make you lose (not profit less, actually have less NAV) ISK at the end of the month. In addition, See Akita's post on the effort working a BPO takes.
Datacores only require one trip in a Covops per year or so to profit. Guaranteed profit.
Quote:
all this "working" also applys to datacore "passive" income - those were nerfed (with no compensation)... let me guess: some are more equal then the others... good point indeed...
You're asking for the BPOs to be REMOVED. Datacores are still there, you just don't make as much profit passively, so your initial effort is still being compensated.
Quote:
IF by "that one single guy" you are reffing me let me say i clearlly stated my oppinion about your "poll" - its way too complicated for ppl to bother answering... ofc i mean ppl with only the marginal interes of seeing a fair and balanced enviroment... i wasnt talking about ppl with huge concerns about the faith of their "preciousssss" - the t2bpos owners and their intereses...
People seem to be answering just fine. But you're discounting everyone's opinion but your own as being "biased." That's called "poisoning the well". Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 04:46:00 -
[490] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:IF by "that one single guy" you are reffing me Not you. A guy called Revolution Rising. Post #7 in the poll. You didn't post in that thread.
Tadeo Musashy wrote:its way too complicated for ppl to bother answering. So... wait a second... you want to say people have no problem arguing a lot about T2 BPOs in many-page threads with long posts, after researching the issue of T2 BPOs to a sufficient depth to actually contribute something to the discussion as opposed to (for the lack of a better word) troll around, yet still somehow, copypasting a few lines and deleting those answers that do not apply is all of a sudden too complicated to bother doing ? What's next, translating Shakespeare into Chinese for somebody, then complaining that attaching it to an email and sending your bank account details in order to get paid for doing it is too much hassle ?
Tadeo Musashy wrote:all this "working" also applys to datacore "passive" income - those were nerfed (with no compensation)... let me guess: some are more equal then the others... good point indeed... T2 BPOs were nerfed without compensation too. REPEATEDLY. And in a much, much larger proportion. The first and largest of those nerfs came the moment invention was introduced. Subsequent nerfs to T2 BPOs were due to various direct and indirect buffs to invention.
Funny enough, this most recent datacore change is ALSO a buff to some invention branches, and therefore a nerf to T2 BPOs (in particular those which require mecheng datacores and/or ship tech datacores, which basically means, ALL DAMN SHIPS, which constitute the bulk of valuable BPOs). Funny how that works, eh ? Are you going to sit here and pretend that T2 BPOs were never nerfed ? Or that they weren't nerfed as much as datacores just were ? Here's a hint in form of a concrete example : when profit drops from 500 bil ISK/year to around 10 bil ISK/year for a BPO... you just know that's a nerf, a pretty hard one too. And that's exactly what happened to the Cap Recharger II BPO when invention was introduced. Or is that not enough of a nerf ? How much harder would you think the nerf has to be for you to consider it a nerf ? You do know that you CAN nerf T2 BPOs even harder (almost just as hard as before) for every other T2 BPO that was less affected back then by simply buffing base invented ME/PE levels to 0 from -4, or allowing T1 BPCs to influence T2 BPC ME/PE levels. Or don't you realize that ?
I still do not see any good reason to remove T2 BPOs altogether, instead of the more reasonable alternative of just buffing invention further, where it matters. You also do realize that CCP knows that too, or don't you ? And they specifically choose not to buff invention like that because THEY consider T2 BPOs to be a non-issue even in their current form. Radically buffing invention even further would come a long, long time before any potential removal of T2 BPOs. But not even that is happening. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 06:22:00 -
[491] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: You're asking for the BPOs to be REMOVED..
no i'm not... i'm suggesting T2BPOs should be removed WITH the right COMPENSATION for the legit owners... altho you seems to consider otherwise, i'm not a fanatic but a very resonable person... i made that very clear from my "pro-removal" initial post in this thread... my suggested "compensation" was the "AliBaba lamp" which would spam indefinitivelly a single run copy of the initial t2bpo every x hours (x should be bpc type dependant)
about Akita's poll:
RubyPorto wrote:People seem to be answering just fine.... looks like "just fine" isnt that great... 14 replies out of 352 views is "iust fine"? as i've said before, 1st: you are "driving" your "poll" with your question/answers selection... 2nd: IF / WHEN a real poll featured thread with 1 simple and clear question and 3 clear simple options (pro / against / dont care) would be available the "outcome" will be 9x% replies out of views number... that would be fine and would means something...
Akita T wrote: T2 BPOs were nerfed without compensation too. ... The first and largest of those nerfs came the moment invention was introduced. Subsequent nerfs to T2 BPOs were due to various direct and indirect buffs to invention.
this ^^^ would mean something IF lottery or another way to be "gifted" a t2bpo would still be available... if everyone would have the option to chose between going for invention or waiting for the t2bpo to "land" i would agree and even second your complain for being fair... but unfortunatelly (and unfairly) that is not the case...
Akita T wrote:Here's a hint in form of a concrete example: when profit drops from 500 bil ISK/year to around 10 bil ISK/year for a BPO... you just know that's a nerf, a pretty hard one too. And that's exactly what happened to the Cap Recharger II BPO when invention was introduced. Or is that not enough of a nerf ? How much harder would you think the nerf has to be for you to consider it a nerf . this ^^^ isnt a valid argument because if things havent been changed from lottery to invention, sooner or later several / many more Cap Recharger II BPOS would have been seeded resulting in price / proffit drop anyway, due to competition care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 06:45:00 -
[492] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote: no i'm not... i'm suggesting T2BPOs should be removed WITH the right COMPENSATION for the legit owners... altho you seems to consider otherwise, i'm not a fanatic but a very resonable person... i made that very clear from my "pro-removal" initial post in this thread... my suggested "compensation" was the "AliBaba lamp" which would spam indefinitivelly a single run copy of the initial t2bpo every x hours (x should be bpc type dependant)
There is no "right" compensation for something that's purchased for collector's value and a passive income. People sink BILLIONS to get a very small passive return. An AliBaba lamp would be no different from a BPO, except you'd be able to sell the BPCs and not even have to bother manufacturing your stuff to make a profit.
Quote: looks like "just fine" isnt that great... 14 replies out of 352 views is "iust fine"? as i've said before, 1st: you are "driving" your "poll" with your question/answers selection... 2nd: IF / WHEN a real poll featured thread with 1 simple and clear question and 3 clear simple options (pro / against / dont care) would be available the "outcome" will be 9x% replies out of views number... that would be fine and would means something...
Then post that. But it's not going to capture anything more than the unthinking, knee-jerk reactions of the people answering.
Quote: Everybody has the option to buy a BPO. I doubt very much that many BPOs are owned by their original owner. Besides that, seeding more BPOs would kill invention entirely, creating the market forces you and OP are (wrongly) claiming that they currently produce.
[quote] this ^^^ isnt a valid argument because if things havent been changed from lottery to invention, sooner or later several / many more Cap Recharger II BPOS would have been seeded resulting in price / proffit drop anyway, due to competition
That's not how the lottery worked. CCP manually added a bunch of BPOs to the stack every few months. They kept the BPO numbers low on purpose. Had the lottery continued, invention would never have been introduced, and the profit would have only dropped slightly since at that time, BPOs were the bottleneck in T2 production by a HUGE margin. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
T2BPO Producer
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 07:17:00 -
[493] - Quote
As original posted in CSM forum:
Quote:Disclaimer: The provided values are from april and are indications only, not precise and influenced by our activity and how fast we are with putting ships back in. They are provided from our sheets and applications to provide us with an indication how weGÇÖre doing. In no way is this a complaint in what IGÇÖm doing or I wouldnGÇÖt be doing this. The values for may are more grim, but as we still have a week to go, I used april. IGÇÖm also posting with an alt to make wardeccing us slightly harder, you know what to look for at least :) On another note, it seems invention got a nice boost/fix: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112471Are t2 bpo really passive income or bad for the market? Monthly production cycles. We think they aren't worth it. You would need about 3 months of cost in production chain. 1 month in ships in production, 1 month in materials for component production. And then you have another month in ships you just finished. In our case that would tie up 240b, which we'd rather use to buy another bpo. Markup ranges from 14% to 169%. With an average of 56%. This is just taking into account sale price-material cost. There's the brokers fee and sales taxes and 6b per months in plex. In april we sold 120b worth of t2 ships, which cost us roughly 77b resulting in 43b profit. Per month we need 80 jobs for components, restarted every week. And this is on a pos for the time bonus so we need to move the materials from 1 component assembly array to the other. ThereGÇÖs also some planning needed to calculate how much we need to produce that week, buying materials and move them to production system. And then we need another 35 jobs for the ships themselves. And then some more for t1 ships and R.A.M.s. All this production then needs to be shipped to jita. This means 13,966,250 m3 or 15 freighters per month. And prices need to be updated every day to get everything sold as soon as possible which sometimes isn't possible. In the past we didn't produce from some bpos because we'd be oversaturating the market or because we don't make profit at all from the bpo. Buying a bpo also entails quite some risk because future changes can make an expensive bpo worthless. Other way around can happen too. But with a t2 bpo you can't just switch. Bpo's cost now 7 to 10 years of profit to earn that back. So for all this work in april we earned <37b, not just for installing 35 jobs. And that's after buying all those t2 bpo's, which would now cost at least 84 months *37b profit =3108b. This means a ROI of less than 1.2% per month. If weGÇÖd be doing this is 0.0 with a fully upgraded station with 60% production speed bonus, multiply values by 2.5. The majority of the finished products need to go to empire as you canGÇÖt sell everything in 0.0. This would require 111 JF jumps, say, 15 min per 2 jumps meaning 14 hours per month which doesnGÇÖt include checking if itGÇÖs safe to jump. I canGÇÖt be bothered to calculate the fuel cost for that or losses to due to JF being killed. Summary! This means for 37b profit you need: - 3108b isk for buying t2 Bpos + 60-90b for a weekly the production chain - ~130 24/7 production slots - 15 Freighter runs per month - Daily market updating - Time to create and maintain production (planning) spreadsheets and sales monitoring website. - Our corporation was founded 9 years ago. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 08:07:00 -
[494] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote:T2 BPOs were nerfed without compensation too. The first and largest of those nerfs came the moment invention was introduced. this ^^^ would mean something IF lottery or another way to be "gifted" a t2bpo would still be available... if everyone would have the option to chose between going for invention or waiting for the t2bpo to "land" i would agree and even second your complain for being fair... but unfortunatelly (and unfairly) that is not the case... You keep saying "gifted". Even within quotes it's still detestably misleading. But let's ignore that for a while. I personally have nothing against introducing even more BPOs into the system, in fact, as a consumer of T2 goods, I would actually appreciate it, would it not be for the bad side-effects - adding more BPOs into the mix only makes things worse for most types of industrialists, no matter which way or at which price you introduce new ones (unless it's a price so high almost no sane person would ever buy them, so then why the heck introduce them).
Let's see what would happen if new T2 BPOs would get introduced.
For current T2 BPO owners - the increased amounts of T2 BPOs would drive profits lower and lower, until T2 manufacture would be barely more profitable than T1 manufacture. T2 BPOs also lose collector status, which drives their price down even further. Eventually, you make T2 BPOs as worthless as they can possibly become without actually removing them.
For new T2 BPO owners - pretty much same as above, with the added insult to injury of enabling them to become the architects of their own NAV's demise.
For inventors - eventually, the inventor profession becomes almost completely useless, as no T2 item can be invented for a profit, because T2 BPO production fills the entirety of demand, unless invention is the process through which new T2 BPOs are acquired, in which case, see above paragraph.
For datacore gatherers (there's two now, R&D and FW, we're talking of R&D because at least for FW you have alternative uses for the LPs), this spells the end to any halfway reasonable income if they persist in following that profession, because nothing really uses datacores anymore. That remains the case even if invention is the way to get new T2 BPOs, it just takes a while longer and the decline is slower, but ultimately, R&D also becomes practically useless.
Congratulations - you just destroyed any shred of profitability from four separate classes of industrialists, just because your "morals" demand either a removal of T2 BPOs or an unlimited supply of them. Hope you're happy.
...
Besides, how exactly ARE you going to introduce new T2 BPOs into the game ? I hope you're not suggesting a return a luck-based distribution method akin to the lottery, or are you ? That's the very essence of what most people despised about the entire thing, the heavy influence of luck on when and what you'd get, if you'd get anything. Making it a very low chance result of invention would be almost just as luck-based as the lottery, by the way, from a statistical standpoint. So that's no way to do it either. Making it a longer-than-normal public NPC-issued auction on the contracts system would only hasten the demise of the inventor and datacore harvester professions, which would also be quite bad. The only silver lining would be that it would be a huge ISK sink (at first), but then, that would have ripple effects throughout the entire game economy, possibly kicking up a deflationary feedback loop which would put any remaining large liquid ISK amount holders into tremendous positions of power, which is arguably also a bad thing. The only halfway reasonable option would be to have it as a LP shop reward requiring a token amount of LP/ISK but a metric truckload of datacores, which would keep the whole system afloat for quite a while longer, but eventually would still meet with the same fate... ...why, you ask ? As more T2 BPOs get created and more of the market is taken over by T2 BPO owners, supported inventor population goes down, datacore demand drops, datacore value decreases, which makes the LP shop offers cheaper, which makes new T2 BPO creation cheaper, and it's a downwards price spiral from there onwards.
So, really, there is no good way to introduce new T2 BPOs even if CCP wanted to introduce new ones. A "good way" being defined as causing more benefit than harm.
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote:Here's a hint in form of a concrete example: when profit drops from 500 bil ISK/year to around 10 bil ISK/year for a BPO... you just know that's a nerf, a pretty hard one too. And that's exactly what happened to the Cap Recharger II BPO when invention was introduced. Or is that not enough of a nerf ? How much harder would you think the nerf has to be for you to consider it a nerf . this ^^^ isnt a valid argument because if things havent been changed from lottery to invention, sooner or later several / many more Cap Recharger II BPOS would have been seeded resulting in price / proffit drop anyway, due to competition NOT "many more". CCP has been seeding T2 BPOs sparingly in time, and they tried to do the seeding at least somewhat proportionately to the increase in player population counts. Since player population has not increased radically in the past few years (and even went back every now and then since around the time of Incarna), even if they would have kept the lottery going, the number of T2 BPOs in circulation would have not increased significantly. A much more likely scenario would be that the vast majority of "new" T2 BPOs would have been actually "replacement" BPOs for those destroyed or located on banned accounts.
You just don't have much of a point besides "I feel in my gut that this is the way things should be, and damn the consequences" while also being oblivious to what the consequences would actually BE. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 08:21:00 -
[495] - Quote
What do you know, character limit reached...
Tadeo Musashy wrote:about Akita's poll: RubyPorto wrote:People seem to be answering just fine.... looks like "just fine" isnt that great... 14 replies out of 352 views is "iust fine"? Yes, actually. Take this very thread for instance - 493 replies, 11,735 views. That's a 4.02% reply:view ratio for this thread, 3.97% for the poll thread. The replies:views ratios of other threads are not much higher. In fact, quite a lot have an even worse ratio, and very few a noticeably higher one. If anything, both threads (this one and the poll one) are getting a quite noteworthy response ratio.
Quote:as i've said before, 1st: you are "driving" your "poll" with your question/answers selection... 2nd: IF / WHEN a real poll featured thread with 1 simple and clear question and 3 clear simple options (pro / against / dont care) would be available the "outcome" will be 9x% replies out of views number... that would be fine and would means something... I am still waiting for you to create it. Feel free to place it wherever you like and link it just about anywhere.
P.S. You know what, I did you a favour and included it at the very START of my poll thread.
Quote:ALTERNATIVE SHORT POLL
Q-SOLO : Your opinion about T2 BPOs ? QSa) remove them QSb) leave them alone QSc) don't care / other - specify Happy ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 09:36:00 -
[496] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Sweet, please spawn more T2BPO for newer players please or ....
hahaha so your trying to convince us that T2 BPO`s should be removed becuase they make invention pointless, or generally HURT THE GAME SO MUCH for 25 pages and now your requesting to seed them again so the newer players (like you) can afford them too?
Do actually understand that, that one sentence just INVALIDATED all your previous postings?
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: or remove those that you gifted to older players or be reminded time and time again why T2BPO needs removed.
so BASICLY,
your treating CCP to change EVE how you think it should be, or you will keep "reminding" em to do so? that is kindoff terrorism dude. |
lol fourm troll
State War Academy Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 00:37:00 -
[497] - Quote
If you look at the test server market all t2bpos are there, kinda suggests that they will NEVER be removed, no point to remove them any way, if people would just look at the data that has been presented several times you would understand why, to the op, as goonswarm would say "go skill yourself" ( and by that I mean biomass your toon, I do not have any grudge against you as a person) |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 01:30:00 -
[498] - Quote
Akita T wrote: Let's see what would happen if new T2 BPOs would get introduced .... So, really, there is no good way to introduce new T2 BPOs even if CCP wanted to introduce new ones. A "good way" being defined as causing more benefit than harm.
I have never suggested reintroducing T2BPOs - so all your demonstration is pointless (at least for me it was)... i agree 90% with your arguments so i will not debate fyrther...to conclude i'd (also) say that a RE would be a mistake unless the system would be totally reversed (lottery back in, invention out) and that would be a even bigger mistake as it would screw the inventors... and it would also reflame the debate "luck"...
Akita T wrote: ... when profit drops from 500 bil ISK/year to around 10 bil ISK/year for a BPO... you just know that's a nerf, a pretty hard one too .... CCP has been seeding T2 BPOs sparingly in time, and they tried to do the seeding at least somewhat proportionately to the increase in player population counts. ... You just don't have much of a point besides "I feel in my gut that this is the way things should be
so basically you consider a 500 bil / year BPO to be something "fair" and say the seeding system was supervised in order to protect that kind of "fair" isk-printing machine... and then you wonder why i want the BPOs removed?... are you kidding me? why would someone be that "deserving" to have one of those? and consequentlly: was the system which alowed that to happen a "fair" one?
as for the "POLL" - i WILL start the sinlqle q. poll when / if a real poll type of thread would be available - the read / copy / paste / delete is nothing like read question / chose answer / click answer - done...
anyway; thx for your effort and goodwill to add my q. to your poll but... see above...
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 01:58:00 -
[499] - Quote
about the single q. POLL i'm supporting - unfortunatelly poll features are not available for threads for now - maybe they'd upgrade the forums soon...
RubyPorto wrote: There is no "right" compensation for something that's purchased for collector's value and a passive income. People sink BILLIONS to get a very small passive return. An AliBaba lamp would be no different from a BPO, except you'd be able to sell the BPCs and not even have to bother manufacturing your stuff to make a profit.
agree... but then what about the right compensation for anyone who was denied the chamce to have one of those? removing the lottery done exactly that...
RubyPorto wrote: That's not how the lottery worked. CCP manually added a bunch of BPOs to the stack every few months. They kept the BPO numbers low on purpose. Had the lottery continued, invention would never have been introduced, and the profit would have only dropped slightly since at that time, BPOs were the bottleneck in T2 production by a HUGE margin.
thats a bad argument... thats part of the UNFAIR seeding system witch i blame...
btw: do you find the existence of the T2BPOs to be FAIR?
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 04:15:00 -
[500] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:so basically you consider a 500 bil / year BPO to be something "fair" and say the seeding system was supervised in order to protect that kind of "fair" isk-printing machine... and then you wonder why i want the BPOs removed?... are you kidding me? But we don't have 500 bil/year BPOs anymore, do we ? And I never claimed I liked the lottery system, quite the contrary actually, did I not ? Me stating how things were and how things are does not necessarily mean I support how things were or are, it just means that's how things were or still are.
That being said...
EVE is not supposed to be perfectly fair. It's only supposed to be "reasonably" fair, or, in other words, "reasonably unfair". EVE is designed to give some degree of advantage to those that have numerical superiority, financial superiority, foresight, seniority, or even just more gameplay experience. EVE is also designed in such a way that either single one of those many possible sources of advantage in a sufficient quantity can easily trump all others taken together, at least in certain fields. You always have something to look forward for, and always a way to dethrone an apparent leader if only you're sufficiently better at something than he is at something else.
And that's one of the main reasons why we LIKE EVE.
Tadeo Musashy wrote:btw: do you find the existence of the T2BPOs to be FAIR? Fairness is not a boolean quality, it's a full spectrum from "completely and totally unfair" to "perfectly fair and balanced", with "reasonably unfair" and "reasonably fair" much closer to the middle. That "perfectly fair and balanced" part, by the way, is so difficult to achieve without complete sameness to not be ever worth bothering to achieve it if you ever desire a good degree of diversity... you could say it has one heck of a stack-nerf, the closer to it you get, the harder it gets to make it even more balanced. So, the real question is: "Is the existence of T2 BPOs sufficiently unfair to warrant their removal instead of dampening their unfairness in other ways?"
...
Now, does a T2 BPO confer some advantage over an inventor inventing the same item ? Obviously, it does. And it's supposed to. Now, does that T2 BPO offer a sufficiently UNFAIR advantage ? My conclusion was that no, it does not offer that much of an UNfair advantage. Why is the advantage at least somewhat fair, then ? Because it comes at a heavy price, a price determined by the free market, and as such, by its very definition, it sort of has to be a reasonably fair price. If the price the advantage comes at is a fair price, then the advantage is also at least somewhat fair.
What's the one advantage a T2 BPO offers ? It makes manufacturing of the T2 BPO cheaper than through invention. The T2 BPO itself is useless in direct combat, it's the price of the corresponding T2 items that matters.
IT USED TO give the potential advantage of denying your opponents access to even remotely reasonably priced items if you managed to monopolize most of the T2 BPOs for your side, but with invention that's no longer possible. Invention might be a tad more expensive, but it's certainly NOT insanely more expensive. Also, denying access to a certain T2 item is all but impossible, because nobody can hold any monopoly over any T2 item production, so all items are always available in sufficient quantities on the market at most at a price that's not radically higher than invention breakeven.
Now, is there some situation where an inventor could actually have an advantage over T2 BPO manufacturers ? As it happens, yes, there are situations where invention has some degree of advantage over T2 BPO manufacture. And that's when your demand for something is high enough that you can't make enough of the item for your needs with just a T2 BPO. Sure, the T2 BPO owner could supplement his production with invention too, but isn't that pretty much one of the best arguments that invention does have some advantages over the T2 BPO ? If the T2 BPO would really offer an universal advantage, shouldn't the BPO owner just get a second BPO of that item for his own needs instead of supplementing the need with additional invention ?
So please do tell me again, how exactly is it that T2 BPOs offer a sufficiently UNFAIR advantage to justify their removal ? And "they let people manufacture slightly cheaper stuff" is not even remotely unfair enough to warrant a change, let alone a removal. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 04:21:00 -
[501] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote: Let's see what would happen if new T2 BPOs would get introduced .... So, really, there is no good way to introduce new T2 BPOs even if CCP wanted to introduce new ones. A "good way" being defined as causing more benefit than harm.
I have never suggested reintroducing T2BPOs - so all your demonstration is pointless (at least for me it was)... i agree 90% with your arguments so i will not debate fyrther...to conclude i'd (also) say that a RE would be a mistake unless the system would be totally reversed (lottery back in, invention out) and that would be a even bigger mistake as it would screw the inventors... and it would also reflame the debate "luck"...
Yeah, you did. Half a page up.
Tadeo Musashy wrote: this ^^^ would mean something IF lottery or another way to be "gifted" a t2bpo would still be available... if everyone would have the option to chose between going for invention or waiting for the t2bpo to "land" i would agree and even second your complain for being fair... but unfortunatelly (and unfairly) that is not the case...
Quote:Akita T wrote: ... when profit drops from 500 bil ISK/year to around 10 bil ISK/year for a BPO... you just know that's a nerf, a pretty hard one too .... CCP has been seeding T2 BPOs sparingly in time, and they tried to do the seeding at least somewhat proportionately to the increase in player population counts. ... You just don't have much of a point besides "I feel in my gut that this is the way things should be
so basically you consider a 500 bil / year BPO to be something "fair" and say the seeding system was supervised in order to protect that kind of "fair" isk-printing machine... and then you wonder why i want the BPOs removed?... are you kidding me? why would someone be that "deserving" to have one of those? and consequentlly: was the system which alowed that to happen a "fair" one? as for the "POLL" - i WILL start the sinlqle q. poll when / if a real poll type of thread would be available - the read / copy / paste / delete is nothing like read question / chose answer / click answer - done... anyway; thx for your effort and goodwill to add my q. to your poll but... see above...
Akita never said that, and you know it. You were implying that T2BPOs had never been nerfed when in fact they had been to the tune of cutting their profits by 80%.
The whole point of this argument is that T2BPOs have no significant impact on the game -as-a-whole- today. They have no significant negative impact on inventors, thus removing them is Silly. If you think the original lottery was unfair, fine. There are a LOT of artifacts from that time in the game that were spectacularly less "fair," static 10/10 Plexes for one (want CCP to remove every Deadspace item traced to one of those?), Early adopters also were able to research T1BPOs much faster than we can now (that's why the market is saturated with Battleship BPOs and joining the Battleship mfg crew is a good way to lose money) should that research be revoked?
The original "unfairness" or lack thereof is not relevant to this discussion. All that is relevant is whether T2BPOs cause harm to the game Right Now.
As for the poll, make a post in F&I asking for such a feature. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1740
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 04:30:00 -
[502] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:about the single q. POLL i'm supporting - unfortunatelly poll features are not available for threads for now - maybe they'd upgrade the forums soon... RubyPorto wrote: There is no "right" compensation for something that's purchased for collector's value and a passive income. People sink BILLIONS to get a very small passive return. An AliBaba lamp would be no different from a BPO, except you'd be able to sell the BPCs and not even have to bother manufacturing your stuff to make a profit.
agree... but then what about the right compensation for anyone who was denied the chamce to have one of those? removing the lottery done exactly that...
The right compensation for that is the fact that they're availible on the open market if you think they are worth it. The other right compensation is the fact that you can create T2 items without a T2BPO through invention.
Quote:RubyPorto wrote: That's not how the lottery worked. CCP manually added a bunch of BPOs to the stack every few months. They kept the BPO numbers low on purpose. Had the lottery continued, invention would never have been introduced, and the profit would have only dropped slightly since at that time, BPOs were the bottleneck in T2 production by a HUGE margin.
thats a bad argument... thats part of the UNFAIR seeding system witch i blame... btw: do you find the existence of the T2BPOs to be FAIR?
Sure. BPO owners have fairly traded 5-8 years worth of capital in exchange for being able to -potentially- make a small profit without a huge amount of effort. (If they are original owners, they have traded the Opportunity to sell the BPO for 5-8 years of profit. Opportunity cost is demonstrably equivalent to actual cost).
The lottery system is irrelevant.
It's like saying that buying land in the Western United States is unfair because the Federal Government gave it away free to Homesteaders in exchange for their willingness to work the land. (In the analogy, Land is the BPO, working the land is grinding for standings, and the Gov't is CCP). Nobody whines that the Homestead Act was unfair, even though I can't go and get the federal government to give me free land, because the market for land isn't changed by those who own land via the Homestead Act. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1136
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 04:35:00 -
[503] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tadeo Musashy wrote:I have never suggested reintroducing T2BPOs Yeah, you did. Half a page up. To be fair, he didn't exactly suggest doing that. He just put up a hypothetical apropos about degree of fairness of some measures if new T2 BPOs would still be introduced, but he never directly said adding some more would be a good idea. He might have implied it to some small degree, but never outright said it. Brewlar Kuvakei however did flat out suggest their reintroduction through unspecified means. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 13:42:00 -
[504] - Quote
ok... i'm posting this more like a clarification statement because i have the feeling that some of my arguments are either misinterpreted or even dis'regarded - i'm not blaming anyone for doing that on purpose tho... i will try to keep it as short and as clear as i can so rather then detailed explanations i'll go for short and brief statements... i also want to point out that i DO own some T2BPOs (at least one of those would worth well in excess of 100bill at current market prices) and i wouldnt sell any of them no matter the offer... therefore i could say i'm considering the matter both sides...
1. Yes I DO support the removal of T2BPOs but only with the right compensation for legit owners... 2. i would agree having unlimited source of bpcs to be a right compensation for the legit owners and aswell a fair one considering everybody else in the game is able to have / own / produce bpcs... 2. my reasons are only about fairness and justice so there's no point in argueing they mean (next to) nothing to economy... 3. considering the overall eve economy i DO NOT see the existing T2BPOs to be a serious problem 4. theres still some room left for some invention buff - remaping the decryptors attributes and / or seeding some new decryptor types to push the ME for invented bpcs at 0 or even +1 would be a fair and resonable solution for leveling the gap even further... 5. I DO NOT support any type of seeding new T2BPOs solution - same no support for reverting to old lottery system with no invention in place... 6....... (i'd keep the post "open" for further clarifications if needed)
care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1137
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 13:49:00 -
[505] - Quote
Hmm. Now, that's somewhat surprising. Just a thing though - how exactly would "unlimited source of BPCs" differ from a plain old BPO ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1750
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 14:50:00 -
[506] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Hmm. Also, again, why nerf T2 BPOs when you can buff invention instead ? Invention is an annoying clickfest on top of being more wasteful than T2 BPO manufacture, so the more reasonable choice if you want to bring them closer to each-other would be to make invention much less of a clickfest while also making it less wasteful, not make T2 BPO production (or whatever thing you replace a T2 BPO with) more of a drag.
Just reducing the clickfest would be a Godsend. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 14:51:00 -
[507] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:. i also want to point out that i DO own some T2BPOs (at least one of those would worth well in excess of 100bill at current market prices) and i wouldnt sell any of them no matter the offer... therefore i could say i'm considering the matter both sides...
sure, I BET If I would ask you now, to proove your ownership of T2 Ship BPO`s, we would just hear an excuse why you cant/want do that, right?
Sorry, but beefing up your reasoning by saying that you would accept to lose your 100b+ BPO`s ( that you seem to be even emotional attached with, since you even mentioned that you wouldnt sell it for no matter what) makes you just even more untrustworthy. It doesnt fit to your previous postings either.
|
Tadeo Musashy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 16:56:00 -
[508] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Hmm. Just a thing though - how exactly would an "unlimited source of BPCs" differ from a plain old BPO ?
you said it right there, its in your words: "unlimited source of BPCs"... everybody would be able to have copies like anyone else in this game...
Akita T wrote:I am curious on the exact details of your proposal that would make that a sufficiently fair substitute for a removed T2 BPO while also being able to eliminate enough of the initially intentional unfairness of T2 BPOs to satisfy current T2 BPO opponents. Honestly, I doubt it would pass both criteria at the same time.
lets say you own a "xyz" BPO whos base manuf time is 32 hrs... then every 32 hrs you would find in your hangar a single run "xyz" BPC... some owners could see a drawback in not having the BPO available for at will sale... i see it different, or at least i see somethint that compensate that:: the bpcs would be available both for sale or manufacturing... i still havent made my mind yet wether or not the unlimited bpcs source should be a trade'able ownership deed... i'd say it shouldnt... but if one would really want to capitalize on his ownership the selling the char option (including the rights) would always be there as a last resort...
Akita T wrote:Also, again, why nerf T2 BPOs when you can buff invention instead ? Invention is an annoying clickfest on top of being more wasteful than T2 BPO manufacture, so the more reasonable choice if you want to bring them closer to each-other would be to make invention much less of a clickfest while also making it less wasteful, not make T2 BPO production (or whatever thing you replace a T2 BPO with) more of a drag.
Buffing invention would be a VERY easy task: and most important would mean no trouble at all for ccp: the only thing that should be changed are the decryptors properties, maybe adding 2-3 more types... that would be fairly easy to be done...
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: sure, I BET If I would ask you now, to proove your ownership of T2 Ship BPO`s, we would just hear an excuse why you cant/want do that, right?
Sorry, but beefing up your reasoning by saying that you would accept to lose your 100b+ BPO`s ( that you seem to be even emotional attached with, since you even mentioned that you wouldnt sell it for no matter what) makes you just even more untrustworthy. It doesnt fit to your previous postings either.
- i'll ignore your 1st req. as i'm not here to "prove" anything... - i would NOT accept to lose my bpos but to switch into something inline with the current state of the game... you may find it odd but i dont use to talk about owning T2BPOs because some sort of guilt feeling... it may sound foolish but it isnt... at least not to me... - none of my previous postings said other then i said in the last one... NONE... maybe i wasnt crystal clear but you should blaim my english for that... care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1755
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 17:04:00 -
[509] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:
you said it right there, its in your words: "unlimited source of BPCs"... everybody would be able to have copies like anyone else in this game...
lets say you own a "xyz" BPO whos base manuf time is 32 hrs... then every 32 hrs you would find in your hangar a single run "xyz" BPC... some owners could see a drawback in not having the BPO available for at will sale... i see it different, or at least i see somethint that compensate that:: the bpcs would be available both for sale or manufacturing... i still havent made my mind yet wether or not the unlimited bpcs source should be a trade'able ownership deed... i'd say it shouldnt... but if one would really want to capitalize on his ownership the selling the char option (including the rights) would always be there as a last resort...
The BPOs advantage is their efficiency (by being able to be researched). Your unlimited source of BPCs wouldn't negate that advantage in any way. All it would mean is that owners would be able to make their isk without having to actually build anything.
EvE has no bound items (besides implants, which are different). Making them bound items is a terrible idea.
Quote: Buffing invention would be a VERY easy task: and most important would mean no trouble at all for ccp: the only thing that should be changed are the decryptors properties, maybe adding 2-3 more types... that would be fairly easy to be done...
That might work, but figuring out what properties are balanced would not be easy. It's a fine suggestion (I'd prefer nerfing the clickfest, myself, but..). Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 17:29:00 -
[510] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: sure, I BET If I would ask you now, to proove your ownership of T2 Ship BPO`s, we would just hear an excuse why you cant/want do that, right?
->
Tadeo Musashy wrote: - i'll ignore your 1st req. as i'm not here to "prove" anything...
how suprising
Quote:you may find it odd but i dont use to talk about owning T2BPOs because some sort of guilt feeling... it may sound foolish but it isnt... at least not to me... - none of my previous postings said other then i said in the last one... NONE... maybe i wasnt crystal clear but you should blaim my english for that...
As the gentleman that you apparently are, why did you feel mentioning it then, when you feel so guilty owning them?
"pointing something out" that you are clearly not able to prove (esp. in this implausible case) is just the lowest niveau a discussion can have. Its so obvious you said it just to inforce your postion in this anti-T2 BPO discussion. I didn`t say, that you ever stated not owning them, but the jump from a whiny "removalist" to a person that "likes his T2 BPO so much, that he would never ever sell it, not evne for 100b isk" is a bit far, dont you think?
tl;dr not gona bother reading your posts anymore till you start providing some evidences for your stories.
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1140
|
Posted - 2012.06.04 16:36:00 -
[511] - Quote
Tadeo Musashy wrote:Akita T wrote: curious on the exact details of your proposal lets say you own a "xyz" BPO whos base manuf time is 32 hrs... then every 32 hrs you would find in your hangar a single run "xyz" BPC... some owners could see a drawback in not having the BPO available for at will sale... i see it different, or at least i see somethint that compensate that:: the bpcs would be available both for sale or manufacturing... i still havent made my mind yet wether or not the unlimited bpcs source should be a trade'able ownership deed... i'd say it shouldnt... but if one would really want to capitalize on his ownership the selling the char option (including the rights) would always be there as a last resort. That doesn't really solve much, if anything. You just add extra clicking to BPO production (instead of removing clicking from invention), and maybe extra hassle for BPO selling, everything else remains the same. BPO opponents will still be against it for pretty much the same reasons they are against it now, ability to make stuff cheaper. That doesn't change in your proposal, not one bit. And if you also go with the "can't be traded" option, you make getting a T2 BPO (or better said, its bizarre proposed equivalent) for somebody who does not have one (but has the ISK for it) even harder than it already is. Bottom line, it's a pretty lousy "solution", if you can even call it that. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
VaMei
Meafi Corp
168
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 11:51:00 -
[512] - Quote
While I'm opposed to removing T2BPOs (even though IGÇÖve never seen one), I still feel that the best option for many of the things CCP might want to do would be an Eve Central Bank, funded by isk & items confiscated by the GMs and CCP Screegs & Co.
Confiscated items could be sold at market to reduce isk in circulation, and undesirable items could be bought off the market or at auction. No one is penalized for their legal high value purchases, nothing is spawned into existence, and ill-gotten gains are used to improve the game for the rest of us.
While CCP would need to be open about the process if they chose this road (possibly to include a periodic ECB asset report), for obvious reasons the characters directly involved would need to remain anonymous.
|
Pacifica Mata
NORAD NAVY
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 15:07:00 -
[513] - Quote
Well I am not really surprise that for irrevelant reasons people complaining...
in RL ppl complaining about neightboors having better car, pretty wife, succes in their job, thinking it was to them to be successfull, to have the nice girl, so wishing higher tax on them, illness and so ;)
Here ppl complaining about game mechanics when they was not successfull. Yes it is, it's called life, that is. It was a lottery. In RL ppl complaining about lottery? of course not, they play once and once again.
Instead of trying to leverage by the bottom, why not seed T2 BPO again.
Let's take an example: CCP could analyze that for the size of TQ, there is a need of 2000 T2 small shield booster a day. They could know how many are producing from BPO T2, and how many are producing from invention.
They see there is a gap of 500 pieces a day, so let seed 20 BPO T2 of this and see production increasing and price decreasing (maybe).
Let have also T2 BPO disapearing, being transformed into BPC if not used for a certain amount of time (3, 6 months?) By this, they can seed new BPO and live is going forward.
But after reading several pages of unrevelant arguments written in this topic I didn't see any reason to change game mechanics. After it is easy to complain on moon minerals ratio, unfair blablabla..., complain on bad gallente ship, or bad amarr, depending of what ship you fly, complain on scamers because you are stupid and get scamed, conplaining on slow concord response time because you mine afk...
complaining is an easy hatitude.
make ISK and drive your world
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1148
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 17:30:00 -
[514] - Quote
@Pacifica Mata : that kind of reseeding would also remove the point of even having the inventor profession... http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
44
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 19:23:00 -
[515] - Quote
lets face it, no idea who came up with that, but the BPC-compesnation Idea is just a really bad one, for so many reasons.
you have to consider the the changes you are looking for would only take in place WHEN these BPC`s are used in a cple years later. This solution would kill inventions aswell, since the amount of BPC`s would inflate the bpc market to death for quite a while. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1787
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 19:36:00 -
[516] - Quote
Pacifica Mata wrote:Well I am not really surprise that for irrevelant reasons people complaining...
in RL ppl complaining about neightboors having better car, pretty wife, succes in their job, thinking it was to them to be successfull, to have the nice girl, so wishing higher tax on them, illness and so ;)
Here ppl complaining about game mechanics when they was not successfull. Yes it is, it's called life, that is. It was a lottery. In RL ppl complaining about lottery? of course not, they play once and once again.
Instead of trying to leverage by the bottom, why not seed T2 BPO again.
Let's take an example: CCP could analyze that for the size of TQ, there is a need of 2000 T2 small shield booster a day. They could know how many are producing from BPO T2, and how many are producing from invention.
They see there is a gap of 500 pieces a day, so let seed 20 BPO T2 of this and see production increasing and price decreasing (maybe).
Let have also T2 BPO disapearing, being transformed into BPC if not used for a certain amount of time (3, 6 months?) By this, they can seed new BPO and live is going forward.
But after reading several pages of unrevelant arguments written in this topic I didn't see any reason to change game mechanics. After it is easy to complain on moon minerals ratio, unfair blablabla..., complain on bad gallente ship, or bad amarr, depending of what ship you fly, complain on scamers because you are stupid and get scamed, conplaining on slow concord response time because you mine afk...
complaining is an easy hatitude.
make ISK and drive your world
If there's a gap of 500 units, the price will rise until enough people stop buying them or enough inventors start making them that the gap disappears. L3ARN 2 MicroEconomics. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1148
|
Posted - 2012.06.05 21:21:00 -
[517] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:the amount of BPC`s would inflate the bpc market to death for quite a while. You can set a BPC's remaining runs higher than the normal max runs on a BPC in the system - proof that it is actually possible lies with older BPCs created before a reduction in max runs on certain items which actually have more runs than should be possible (and those were awesome to use for invention, because the obtained T2 BPC also had quite a few extra runs on it). Theoretically, CCP could just as well issue a single BPC with many thousands of runs on it (enough to last years of production) in lieu of each of the BPOs, as opposed to many small run count BPCs (which would indeed create the problem you describe). I mean, in case you really want to go the replacement route and want to keep the "damage" to minimum. Not that I would condone doing that. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
86
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 14:20:00 -
[518] - Quote
Akita T wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:the amount of BPC`s would inflate the bpc market to death for quite a while. You can set a BPC's remaining runs higher than the normal max runs on a BPC in the system - proof that it is actually possible lies with older BPCs created before a reduction in max runs on certain items which actually have more runs than should be possible (and those were awesome to use for invention, because the obtained T2 BPC also had quite a few extra runs on it). Theoretically, CCP could just as well issue a single BPC with many thousands of runs on it (enough to last years of production) in lieu of each of the BPOs, as opposed to many small run count BPCs (which would indeed create the problem you describe). I mean, in case you really want to go the replacement route and want to keep the "damage" to minimum. Not that I would condone doing that.
I thought replacing the BPO's with something that would be easily worth the cost of BPO but not allow owners to hammer out competition. A one off ship with something usefull for all security space. A ship with features that would warrant the 50billion + isk cost of current BPO's.
This was CCP's greatest mistake with T2BPO's introducing content that is worth trillions of isk without having trillions of isk of effort put in to obtain them. As this simply devalued the whole EVE experince and completely opposes the ''EVE is real CCP objective''. Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1797
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 21:56:00 -
[519] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:the amount of BPC`s would inflate the bpc market to death for quite a while. You can set a BPC's remaining runs higher than the normal max runs on a BPC in the system - proof that it is actually possible lies with older BPCs created before a reduction in max runs on certain items which actually have more runs than should be possible (and those were awesome to use for invention, because the obtained T2 BPC also had quite a few extra runs on it). Theoretically, CCP could just as well issue a single BPC with many thousands of runs on it (enough to last years of production) in lieu of each of the BPOs, as opposed to many small run count BPCs (which would indeed create the problem you describe). I mean, in case you really want to go the replacement route and want to keep the "damage" to minimum. Not that I would condone doing that. I thought replacing the BPO's with something that would be easily worth the cost of BPO but not allow owners to hammer out competition. A one off ship with something usefull for all security space. A ship with features that would warrant the 50billion + isk cost of current BPO's. This was CCP's greatest mistake with T2BPO's introducing content that is worth trillions of isk without having trillions of isk of effort put in to obtain them. As this simply devalued the whole EVE experince and completely opposes the ''EVE is real CCP objective''. Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery.
What evidence do you have that BPO's have an effect on active markets?
Where are you getting "trillions of Isk"?
50b ships either cost that much due to rarity or mineral price. The Adrestia's a one off and is worth around that much. How much is a 3000 off ship gonna be worth? Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1149
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 02:08:00 -
[520] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery. So, you're basically talking almost only to people that got prints so crappy that they didn't even bother trying to sell them ? The bulk of valuable BPOs changed hands at least once, probably many times. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
153
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 05:03:00 -
[521] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery. The bulk of valuable BPOs changed hands at least once, but usually many more times. They got concentrated in the hands of alliances, alliance leaders, traders, collectors or massive industrialists in the times of decent T2 BPO ROI, before invention. So, you're basically talking mainly to people that got prints so crappy that they didn't even bother trying to sell them, and to the very few that actually held onto a valuable T2 BPO in spite of being offered a metric truckload of ISK for it. Good to know that your post basically does NOT apply to the owners of maybe 90% of T2 BPOs.
I think..
There is another, alternative solution.
Next Fanfest, CCP should have a Pinata filled with all the T2 BPO's in the game, and 2 wooden baseball bats, one for Akita and one for Brewlar, some blindfolds and lots of beer.
Whoever beats the BPO's out of the pinata first wins the argument! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1798
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 05:08:00 -
[522] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery. The bulk of valuable BPOs changed hands at least once, but usually many more times. They got concentrated in the hands of alliances, alliance leaders, traders, collectors or massive industrialists in the times of decent T2 BPO ROI, before invention. So, you're basically talking mainly to people that got prints so crappy that they didn't even bother trying to sell them, and to the very few that actually held onto a valuable T2 BPO in spite of being offered a metric truckload of ISK for it. Good to know that your post basically does NOT apply to the owners of maybe 90% of T2 BPOs. I think.. There is another, alternative solution. Next Fanfest, CCP should have a Pinata filled with all the T2 BPO's in the game, and 2 wooden baseball bats, one for Akita and one for Brewlar, some blindfolds and lots of beer. Whoever beats the BPO's out of the pinata first wins the argument!
EvE Solution to ensure victory: Don't swing for the prize. Swing to incap the other guy's weapon. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
153
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:36:00 -
[523] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Kara Books wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery. The bulk of valuable BPOs changed hands at least once, but usually many more times. They got concentrated in the hands of alliances, alliance leaders, traders, collectors or massive industrialists in the times of decent T2 BPO ROI, before invention. So, you're basically talking mainly to people that got prints so crappy that they didn't even bother trying to sell them, and to the very few that actually held onto a valuable T2 BPO in spite of being offered a metric truckload of ISK for it. Good to know that your post basically does NOT apply to the owners of maybe 90% of T2 BPOs. I think.. There is another, alternative solution. Next Fanfest, CCP should have a Pinata filled with all the T2 BPO's in the game, and 2 wooden baseball bats, one for Akita and one for Brewlar, some blindfolds and lots of beer. Whoever beats the BPO's out of the pinata first wins the argument! EvE Solution to ensure victory: Don't swing for the prize. Swing to incap the other guy's weapon.
as long as the baseballs are locked out of reach.
What where you talking about? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1799
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:47:00 -
[524] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Kara Books wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yet again if you bought your BPO ignore I'm talking about those who were gited BPO's and ''won'' them in a lottery. The bulk of valuable BPOs changed hands at least once, but usually many more times. They got concentrated in the hands of alliances, alliance leaders, traders, collectors or massive industrialists in the times of decent T2 BPO ROI, before invention. So, you're basically talking mainly to people that got prints so crappy that they didn't even bother trying to sell them, and to the very few that actually held onto a valuable T2 BPO in spite of being offered a metric truckload of ISK for it. Good to know that your post basically does NOT apply to the owners of maybe 90% of T2 BPOs. I think.. There is another, alternative solution. Next Fanfest, CCP should have a Pinata filled with all the T2 BPO's in the game, and 2 wooden baseball bats, one for Akita and one for Brewlar, some blindfolds and lots of beer. Whoever beats the BPO's out of the pinata first wins the argument! EvE Solution to ensure victory: Don't swing for the prize. Swing to incap the other guy's weapon. as long as the baseballs are locked out of reach. What where you talking about?
A great Opportunity for CCP to enter the PPV market. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
88
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 13:46:00 -
[525] - Quote
This is a great idea for fan fest!
But only Akita should get a baseball to represent T2BPO. I should only get the opportunity to make a baseball bat that is limited to 5 swings but first I have to construct my 5 swing bat in a complex process involving a multitude of operations all while Akita is free to swing at the prize. My 5 swing bat should also have a negative -10% chance penalty at actually hitting the prize than Akita's bat.
This would be the EVE online and CCP way. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1802
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 14:02:00 -
[526] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:This is a great idea for fan fest!
But only Akita should get a baseball to represent T2BPO. I should only get the opportunity to make a baseball bat that is limited to 5 swings but first I have to construct my 5 swing bat in a complex process involving a multitude of operations all while Akita is free to swing at the prize. My 5 swing bat should also have a negative -10% chance penalty at actually hitting the prize than Akita's bat.
This would be the EVE online and CCP way.
So, T2 Mods created by invention don't work as well as the ones made by BPOs? Wow, who knew. Single-Shard, Player Driven-áSandbox.
5 words. That's what makes it special. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
154
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 17:21:00 -
[527] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:This is a great idea for fan fest!
But only Akita should get a baseball to represent T2BPO. I should only get the opportunity to make a baseball bat that is limited to 5 swings but first I have to construct my 5 swing bat in a complex process involving a multitude of operations all while Akita is free to swing at the prize. My 5 swing bat should also have a negative -10% chance penalty at actually hitting the prize than Akita's bat.
This would be the EVE online and CCP way.
Nice, nice. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 20:45:00 -
[528] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:This is a great idea for fan fest!
But only Akita should get a baseball to represent T2BPO. I should only get the opportunity to make a baseball bat that is limited to 5 swings but first I have to construct my 5 swing bat in a complex process involving a multitude of operations all while Akita is free to swing at the prize. My 5 swing bat should also have a negative -10% chance penalty at actually hitting the prize than Akita's bat.
This would be the EVE online and CCP way. So, T2 Mods created by invention don't work as well as the ones made by BPOs? Wow, who knew.
The 10% was reffering to BPC's -10 ME rating but you are right the items are not 10% less effective they just cost a crap ton more to produce. The rest of my anology was spot on. Fixed below. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 20:50:00 -
[529] - Quote
This is a great idea for fan fest!
But only Akita should get a baseball bat to represent T2BPO. I should only get the opportunity to make a baseball bat that is limited to 5 swings but first I have to construct my 5 swing bat in a complex process involving a multitude of operations all while Akita is free to swing at the prize. My 5 swing bat should also need 10% more wood but somehow be the same shape and size as Akita's bat.
This would be the EVE online and CCP way. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Angry Mustellid Iron Oxide.
190
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 21:27:00 -
[530] - Quote
Don't really get the point of these threads, no I don't own any T2 BPOs, they are a terrible investment.
I'm assuming the majoritory of the arguments against T2 BPOs are from people who can't afford them, as others would just buy them an keep quiet considering how great they are.
So assuming you are space poor and you think its unfair that some players have T2 BPOs, you might decide to complain and argue that they should be more readily available. If CCP decided to listen to you and suddenly T2 BPOs are seeded on the market relatively cheaply. Great, now you have a T2 BPO! Except whats this, they no make no money as everyone has them and you are still space poor, all you have done is made the players who bothered investing in them pissed off.
Yes maybe they could have been added to the game in a different way but its too late to change that, yes Invention could do with a bit of a buff to make it less of a click fest, yes higher MEs might be a good idea from invention. No Removing T2 BPOs is not a reasonable solution.
Eve isn't fair, it will never be, this would not change that.
|
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 19:41:00 -
[531] - Quote
The point was that content was put into the game that effects a huge stake in the market yet is no longer being given out. It would have been ok if the items had some sort of end date but they do not. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
45
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 20:16:00 -
[532] - Quote
cute, whenever the thread keeps calming down, brewlar bumps it after some time...
Quote:The point was that content was put into the game that effects a huge stake in the market yet is no longer being given out. It would have been ok if the items had some sort of end date but they do not.
how many times ppl have to show you, that they dont affect a huge part of the market? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 12:06:00 -
[533] - Quote
I've made it perfectly clear that I intend to bump the T2BPO point. T2BPO moan threads are here to stay at the top of the forum untill the issue is resolved. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 12:09:00 -
[534] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
how many times ppl have to show you, that they dont affect a huge part of the market?
Because 70% of T2 line is not huge? Uhm ok keep telling yourself that T2BPO was not a huge mistake.
|
Diana Kim
Wolfsbrigade Lost Obsession
45
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 13:08:00 -
[535] - Quote
I was producing a lot of t2 modules some time ago. It was very profitable disregarding existent BPOs. Of course, production of some modules was more expensive than available in market because of these BPOs (for example, shield boost amplifiers II), but still lots iskies can be made regardless through invention provided you have time for all the hard work. I believe that the only reason for removal of t2 bpos is hatred to their owners.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 13:10:00 -
[536] - Quote
Diana Kim wrote:I was producing a lot of t2 modules some time ago. It was very profitable disregarding existent BPOs. Of course, production of some modules was more expensive than available in market because of these BPOs (for example, shield boost amplifiers II), but still lots iskies can be made regardless through invention provided you have time for all the hard work. I believe that the only reason for removal of t2 bpos is hatred to their owners.
No the hatred stems from CCP gifting items and propping choesn corps and allinces up with a fountain of other gifts other than T2BPO. T2BPO is however a gift that is a direct pain in the ass to anyone wanting to build T2 for profit. Yes there are a lines where invention can compete but it's still totaly bullshit that ccp has given chosen corps monoply in some fields. |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1034
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 13:21:00 -
[537] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Diana Kim wrote:I was producing a lot of t2 modules some time ago. It was very profitable disregarding existent BPOs. Of course, production of some modules was more expensive than available in market because of these BPOs (for example, shield boost amplifiers II), but still lots iskies can be made regardless through invention provided you have time for all the hard work. I believe that the only reason for removal of t2 bpos is hatred to their owners.
No the hatred stems from CCP gifting items and propping choesn corps and allinces up with a fountain of other gifts other than T2BPO. T2BPO is however a gift that is a direct pain in the ass to anyone wanting to build T2 for profit. Yes there are a lines where invention can compete but it's still totaly bullshit that ccp has given chosen corps monoply in some fields.
Whats it like to blindly strive on in your T2 BPO quest despite being bludgeoned half to death with logic, reason and common sense? My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got makes me so horny |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 13:28:00 -
[538] - Quote
It's like playing baseball except my team is not allowed a bat. Anyway it's all just a game and is supposed to be fun. Well it's a job for CCP but they must be happy with current player subscriptions otherwise they'd have removed T2BPO and let the game grow by now.
''This is a great idea for fan fest!
But only Akita should get a baseball bat to represent T2BPO. I should only get the opportunity to make a baseball bat that is limited to 5 swings but first I have to construct my 5 swing bat in a complex process involving a multitude of operations all while Akita is free to swing at the prize. My 5 swing bat should also need 10% more wood but somehow be the same shape and size as Akita's bat.
This would be the EVE online and CCP way.'' |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
46
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:01:00 -
[539] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
how many times ppl have to show you, that they dont affect a huge part of the market?
Because 70% of T2 line is not huge? Uhm ok keep telling yourself that T2BPO was not a huge mistake.
Numbers dont lie, prove mathematicly that 70% of all T2 itmes are made by T2 BPO`s or leave it forever.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I've made it perfectly clear that I intend to bump the T2BPO point. T2BPO moan threads are here to stay at the top of the forum untill the issue is resolved.
Ok, so what your saying is, that since you cant win this discussion with arguments or evidences, you will terrorize us with your moan threads till CCP does what little brewlar wants?
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1860
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:22:00 -
[540] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Diana Kim wrote:I was producing a lot of t2 modules some time ago. It was very profitable disregarding existent BPOs. Of course, production of some modules was more expensive than available in market because of these BPOs (for example, shield boost amplifiers II), but still lots iskies can be made regardless through invention provided you have time for all the hard work. I believe that the only reason for removal of t2 bpos is hatred to their owners.
No the hatred stems from CCP gifting items and propping choesn corps and allinces up with a fountain of other gifts other than T2BPO. T2BPO is however a gift that is a direct pain in the ass to anyone wanting to build T2 for profit. Yes there are a lines where invention can compete but it's still totaly bullshit that ccp has given chosen corps monoply in some fields.
Got any evidence that the lottery was rigged towards members of certain corps or alliances?
Other than the T20 issue, where the BPOs were removed from the game. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:39:00 -
[541] - Quote
Well CCP has been asked to reveal actual figures for all T2BPO's on many an occasion yet they simply provide snippets of info because they know what a terrible picture t2BPO paints. MY figures were from the eve blog that gave out this snippet. I fear that some runs of T2 will be far worse than 70% but untill CCP gives out the info we will never know.
As for providing evidence go use google or check old forum posts unless CCP went on another rampage deleting them all like they did during the initial lottery and T20 incident.
Remove T2BPO make eve Real. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
82
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 17:00:00 -
[542] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
As for providing evidence go use google or check old forum posts
The reason why people ask you to provide evidences and numbers for your stories is not that they are not able to search for them on their own, its more because you never brought up any own evidences.
These 70% were prolly something stupid like interceptors that you selectively sold us for the avg. T2 Item made by a BPO.
I guess someone should make a thread "why T2 BPO`s are fine and should stay in the game as they are" and keep it bumped because this would be the only niveau of communication you understand, apparently. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1860
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 22:46:00 -
[543] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Remove T2BPO make eve Real.
Your contention is that T2 BPOs are unfair.
You suggest that CCP should make EvE more realistic.
Real Life is unfair. Thus, T2 BPOs are realistic. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 02:41:00 -
[544] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
how many times ppl have to show you, that they dont affect a huge part of the market?
Because 70% of T2 line is not huge? Uhm ok keep telling yourself that T2BPO was not a huge mistake.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
No, 70% of one item that hardly sells IS NOT HUGE.
And it's not like invention doesn't have it's own lines: 87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from inventino 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72$ of Falcons from invention.
By your logic, invention needs to be nerfed as they are having too big an impact on these markets. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 12:47:00 -
[545] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
how many times ppl have to show you, that they dont affect a huge part of the market?
Because 70% of T2 line is not huge? Uhm ok keep telling yourself that T2BPO was not a huge mistake. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. No, 70% of one item that hardly sells IS NOT HUGE. And it's not like invention doesn't have it's own lines: 87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from inventino 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72$ of Falcons from invention. By your logic, invention needs to be nerfed as they are having too big an impact on these markets.
60% of invention could be split over 100 people. 70% of T2BPO will be split amongst 10 people and possibly their corps. End T2BPO end CCP's support of it's pet corps and allinces. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1867
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 14:03:00 -
[546] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
60% of invention could be split over 100 people. 70% of T2BPO will be split amongst 10 people and possibly their corps. End T2BPO end CCP's support of it's pet corps and allinces.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 16:59:00 -
[547] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
how many times ppl have to show you, that they dont affect a huge part of the market?
Because 70% of T2 line is not huge? Uhm ok keep telling yourself that T2BPO was not a huge mistake. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. No, 70% of one item that hardly sells IS NOT HUGE. And it's not like invention doesn't have it's own lines: 87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from inventino 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72$ of Falcons from invention. By your logic, invention needs to be nerfed as they are having too big an impact on these markets. 60% of invention could be split over 100 people. 70% of T2BPO will be split amongst 10 people and possibly their corps. End T2BPO end CCP's support of it's pet corps and allinces.
could be...
OK, well 60% of T2 BPO could be split over 100 people, and 70% of invention could be split amongst 10 people and possibly their corps. We don't know, so where you're going with this meaningless statement is beyond me. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
53
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 14:09:00 -
[548] - Quote
Brewlar sees BPO holders getting three quarters of a certain pie and demands a fair share. Everybody else sees that in fact, the entire pie in question smaller than a single crumb from one of the many gigantic cakes on offer. We all get fat on cake, he still moans about pie.
"But Brewlar," we all say. "Who cares if they have a whole pie to themselves? There's more than enough cake out here for everybody! And it's much tastier, too!"
"I don't care," he says. "The only reason I don't have pie is because I wasn't at the front of the line when they were being handed out! I should get pie too!"
"No, the people at the front get the first slice of pie. That's how it works. But come on, there's no line up at all for cake and there's still mountains of it left!"
"I don't care," he goes on. "They only got to the front of the line because they're bigger and shoved all the others to the back!"
"Well yes, there are no rules against that. In fact it's almost the entire point of EVE."
"But that one time that one guy got that one slice of pie without even being in line! It's so unfair! Nobody should have pie at all if there isn't enough for everybody!"
"So what? He had to give it back anyway. Seriously, give it a rest about the pie."
"No! As long as there is still pie I will demand loudly that it all be thrown in the garbage!"
"That's just a **** move. All those guys that are eating pie had to pay a **** load for their tiny slice. How would you like it if somebody just threw a bunch of your hard earned food in the trash?"
"See? You're proving me right! People wouldn't pay so much for pie if it wasn't so tasty! And what about the guys that were at the front of the line, they still got it for nothing even if they just ended up selling it to somebody else. Pie is bull ****! DEATH TO PIE!"
"They didn't get it for nothing, the got it by being at the front of the line. Do you know how hard they had to work to get there? Being at the front means starting at the back and pushing everybody ahead of you out of the way. And each one is bigger and meaner than the next. And staying at the front means you have a never ending line of people wanting to shove you out of the way. Being first gets you free stuff sometimes, but being first isn't free at all."
"DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE!" |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1878
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:31:00 -
[549] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:
"DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE!"
Pumpkin Pie > Cake This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Dystopia Arkaral
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 23:27:00 -
[550] - Quote
I recently met and talked to someone who has a Jaguar BPO.
He runs it 24/7 and makes 99 jags a month. He could make more by using a conquorable station in 0.0 but t2 bpos in 0.0 is probably not a good idea
He looked at how many jags had been sold through all trade hubs and he was around 5% of sales, this is a very rough figure because some jags might have been bought from him in jita and then shipped to rens to sell for more.
He complains that he is always getting undercut by inventors. He has his price and sticks to it |
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
54
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 01:44:00 -
[551] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Salo Aldeland wrote:
"DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE!"
Pumpkin Pie > Cake
But you only got that pie because you know the baker, so really it should be banned. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1880
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 02:04:00 -
[552] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Salo Aldeland wrote:
"DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE! DEATH TO PIE!"
Pumpkin Pie > Cake But you only got that pie because you know the baker, so really it should be banned.
I will shank you (In Game, ofc [Hi ISDs o/], as soon as that's allowed with WiS[I hear it's SoonGäó) for suggesting such a thing as banning my precioussss pumpkin pie. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 11:04:00 -
[553] - Quote
Ehm no.
Brewlar says that no longer created game content that select players were given which allows them to dominate and under cut new players is wrong and that said content should be removed from game. I have no problem with unique ships that I do not have access to as they can be destroyed. T2BPO however can not as it sits in a station locked yet somehow accessible to an entire corp (makes zero sense) same goes for all BPO's. I believe a fair nerf to T2BPO would be to allow them only to be used in WH or null SOV null sec which would at least offer the chance for these items to be removed from game by POS destruction, ship ganks or at least have their value smashed in a station capture. Another simple nerf would be to insure that their ME falls behind invention BPC's along with no longer being able to manufacture while locked in station.
For the love of EVE either remove T2BPO as it was ill thought game content that completely undermines EVE's principles. Simply knowing a dev or being in EVE at the start should not guarantee success and these are factors that epitomise T2BPO's.
Make EVE real remove T2BPO. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1885
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 13:27:00 -
[554] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Ehm no.
Brewlar says that no longer created game content that select players were given which allows them to dominate and under cut new players is wrong and that said content should be removed from game. It doesn't
Quote:I have no problem with unique ships that I do not have access to as they can be destroyed. T2BPO however can not as it sits in a station locked yet somehow accessible to an entire corp (makes zero sense) same goes for all BPO's. They can be stolen or destroyed easier than station queens Quote:I believe a fair nerf to T2BPO would be to allow them only to be used in WH or null SOV null sec which would at least offer the chance for these items to be removed from game by POS destruction, ship ganks or at least have their value smashed in a station capture. Another simple nerf would be to insure that their ME falls behind invention BPC's along with no longer being able to manufacture while locked in station. That's idiotic
Quote: For the love of EVE either remove T2BPO as it was ill thought game content that completely undermines EVE's principles. Simply knowing a dev or being in EVE at the start should not guarantee success and these are factors that epitomise T2BPO's.
Make EVE real remove T2BPO.
The BPOs introduced by Dev malfeasance were removed. Stop lying. Older players will always have certain advantages. Make some Isk and you can have the same advantages for yourself.
*epitomize
T2BPOs make EvE more realistic due to surmountable unfairness being perfectly realistic. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
56
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 13:34:00 -
[555] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:... that completely undermines EVE's principles. Simply knowing a dev or being in EVE at the start should not guarantee success and these are factors that epitomise T2BPO's.
Make EVE real remove T2BPO.
So what exactly are the principles being violated? |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 13:39:00 -
[556] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Ehm no.
Brewlar says that no longer created game content that select players were given which allows them to dominate and under cut new players is wrong and that said content should be removed from game. I have no problem with unique ships that I do not have access to as they can be destroyed. T2BPO however can not as it sits in a station locked yet somehow accessible to an entire corp (makes zero sense) same goes for all BPO's. I believe a fair nerf to T2BPO would be to allow them only to be used in WH or null SOV null sec which would at least offer the chance for these items to be removed from game by POS destruction, ship ganks or at least have their value smashed in a station capture. Another simple nerf would be to insure that their ME falls behind invention BPC's along with no longer being able to manufacture while locked in station.
For the love of EVE either remove T2BPO as it was ill thought game content that completely undermines EVE's principles. Simply knowing a dev or being in EVE at the start should not guarantee success and these are factors that epitomise T2BPO's.
Make EVE real remove T2BPO.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
Are you not listening??
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 15:21:00 -
[557] - Quote
poor Brewlar ...seriously sad to read |
Sen Roo
The 22nd Jenquai Deep Space Corp High Rollers
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 19:18:00 -
[558] - Quote
Hey Brewlar? I hate to be the one to say this to you but you've gone way past the point of requesting something to the point of whining about it when you were told it wasn't gong to happen. It's gotten to the point that in my mind that Brewlar = one of those small and annoying dogs that yap all the time. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 12:50:00 -
[559] - Quote
Poor EVE, lets make an interesting crafting system called invention that has players compete in a capitalist competition of obtaining resources, combining resources, manufacturing a product then selling on a free and open market. Nope this idea is too great lets make it irrelevant in most lines of T2 by also having a game breaking item (T2BPO) that will see our chosen players succeed by enabling them to cut inventors out of all lines unless demand for line surpasses chosen players manufacturing ability.
Hey why don't we have T3 BPO's? oh yeah T2BPO is ********. Remove them it was a mistake, CCP take responsibility for it and stop undermining a great concept 'invention' with an insta win button given to pet players. If you are desperate to keep T2BPO buff invention so far beyond them that they can no longer undercut inventors. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1909
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 13:51:00 -
[560] - Quote
Time runs in one direction, Brewlar. T2 BPOs and Invention were created at different times.
You're ideas are idiotic, have already been debunked, and you're no longer bothering to reply to anyone else. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
57
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 14:15:00 -
[561] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:DEATH TO PIE!
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 14:32:00 -
[562] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Time runs in one direction, Brewlar. T2 BPOs and Invention were created at different times.
You're ideas are idiotic, have already been debunked, and you're no longer bothering to reply to anyone else.
Because content just randomly appears out of no where with out a plan or any prior planning or discussion amongst Devs? Actually you may be onto something here.
Clearly an event occurred at CCP where someone put forward the well thought out invention plan but sadly another tard existed who had a half arsed idea called a T2BPO lottery that got let out the bag first. Can some one link with information to who these individuals are and what other areas of eve they work on? Or is there some crazy Jeckle and Hyde character at CCP who made both? Who comes out with brilliant ideas for gameplay (Invention) and then suffers from severe bouts of brain damage (T2BPO). |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1909
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 14:35:00 -
[563] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Time runs in one direction, Brewlar. T2 BPOs and Invention were created at different times.
You're ideas are idiotic, have already been debunked, and you're no longer bothering to reply to anyone else. Because content just randomly appears out of no where with out a plan or any prior planning or discussion amongst Devs? Actually you may be onto something here. Clearly an event occurred at CCP where someone put forward the well thought out invention plan but sadly another tard existed who had a half arsed idea called a T2BPO lottery that got let out the bag first. Can some one link with information to who these individuals are and what other areas of eve they work on? Or is there some crazy Jeckle and Hyde character at CCP who made both?
If CCP had a Time Machine, I don't think they'd be running EvE.
Salo Aldeland wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:DEATH TO PIE!
This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
82
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 14:39:00 -
[564] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: My opinion that anyone dumb enough to support T2BPO is probably a big enough idiot to steal from their employer or do the DEVS at CCP seriously support invention running alongside T2BPO's? Because if that is the case I will have to create a new group to describe them.)
Since this forum section is for discussions and THERE IS no discussion ITT happening anymore and even the op offcially stated that its all about bumping the thread to keep the political agenda up, I request to close this thread. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 14:47:00 -
[565] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: My opinion that anyone dumb enough to support T2BPO is probably a big enough idiot to steal from their employer or do the DEVS at CCP seriously support invention running alongside T2BPO's? Because if that is the case I will have to create a new group to describe them.)
Since this forum section is for discussions and THERE IS no discussion ITT happening anymore and even the op offcially stated that its all about bumping the thread to keep the political agenda up, I request to close this thread.
Thread was closed once before and all that occurred was several threads on the T2BPO discussion opening by several different players, I think all sides of the T2BPO argument can agree that more than one post on T2BPO is not welcome as it obscures other industry posts in it's shadow. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 15:26:00 -
[566] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:[quote=shar'ra matcevsovski]
Thread was closed once before and all that occurred was several threads on the T2BPO discussion opening by several different players.
several chars, not players.
Forums are made to discuss issues, not to advertise the opinion just of 1 person because he thinks its against his business.
close this thread make CCP real, remove EVE and close this thread. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 15:40:00 -
[567] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:[quote=shar'ra matcevsovski]
Thread was closed once before and all that occurred was several threads on the T2BPO discussion opening by several different players. several chars, not players. Forums are made to discuss issues, not to advertise the opinion just of 1 person because he thinks its against his business. close this thread make CCP real, remove EVE and close this thread.
Adjust your Tin foil hat because anyone and everyone who speaks out against T2BPO is my alt according to you. At last count I have around 200 accounts. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1910
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 15:57:00 -
[568] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:[quote=shar'ra matcevsovski]
Thread was closed once before and all that occurred was several threads on the T2BPO discussion opening by several different players. several chars, not players. Forums are made to discuss issues, not to advertise the opinion just of 1 person because he thinks its against his business. close this thread make CCP real, remove EVE and close this thread.
Actually, I only saw two characters create threads when the last one was locked. So, assuming that the second character, whose views and rationale match Brewlar's perfectly and whose writing and posting style matches (to my untrained eye) Brewlar's, is a second person; Two people have an issue with T2BPOs, many more do not. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 16:44:00 -
[569] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Poor EVE seriously sad to see that such a lame item as T2BPO exists in an interesting and complex game, shame one or a small amount of Devs can have such a negative effect on the game. T2BPO's seriously do not belong in this game especially running alongside invention.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from invention 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72% of Falcons from invention.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
Where is this "negative effect" of which you speak? Invention has some lines, bpo have some lines. No biggie. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
57
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 17:33:00 -
[570] - Quote
Dude seriously hates pie. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 19:27:00 -
[571] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Poor EVE seriously sad to see that such a lame item as T2BPO exists in an interesting and complex game, shame one or a small amount of Devs can have such a negative effect on the game. T2BPO's seriously do not belong in this game especially running alongside invention. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. 87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from invention 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72% of Falcons from invention. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. Where is this "negative effect" of which you speak? Invention has some lines, bpo have some lines. No biggie.
BPO has every line, invention only has lines where no T2BPO exists or where demand outstrips the T2BPO. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 20:26:00 -
[572] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Poor EVE seriously sad to see that such a lame item as T2BPO exists in an interesting and complex game, shame one or a small amount of Devs can have such a negative effect on the game. T2BPO's seriously do not belong in this game especially running alongside invention. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. 87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from invention 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72% of Falcons from invention. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. Where is this "negative effect" of which you speak? Invention has some lines, bpo have some lines. No biggie. BPO has every line, invention only has lines where no T2BPO exists or where demand outstrips the T2BPO.
BPO does not have every line, invention has more lines than T2BPO and on the ones that make more money. You come up with your numbers, then multiply by how many are sold and multiply that by how much they're worth, you'll see you're talking about TRIVIAL numbers.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 20:38:00 -
[573] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Poor EVE seriously sad to see that such a lame item as T2BPO exists in an interesting and complex game, shame one or a small amount of Devs can have such a negative effect on the game. T2BPO's seriously do not belong in this game especially running alongside invention. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. 87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from invention 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72% of Falcons from invention. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012. Where is this "negative effect" of which you speak? Invention has some lines, bpo have some lines. No biggie. BPO has every line, invention only has lines where no T2BPO exists or where demand outstrips the T2BPO. BPO does not have every line, invention has more lines than T2BPO and on the ones that make more money. You come up with your numbers, then multiply by how many are sold and multiply that by how much they're worth, you'll see you're talking about TRIVIAL numbers. "The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
By significant he means absolutely game breaking for those that do no own said T2BPO. To say the amount of Hulks produced from BPO is ********. It's billions of isk worth each month. |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 20:50:00 -
[574] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: By significant he means absolutely game breaking for those that do no own said T2BPO. To say the amount of Hulks produced from BPO is ********. It's billions of isk worth each month.
http://eveeye.com/profit.asp?blueprint=Hulk+Blueprint&ML=10&PL=10
~2,5 bn profit for 24/7 manufaction is hardly unfair, significant or game breaking when the BPO is a investment of easy half a trillion (means no matter if the Owner uses the BPO or not, he has still much more cake than you)
bring more such good examples, Cakehater |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1916
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 21:23:00 -
[575] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: By significant he means absolutely game breaking for those that do no own said T2BPO. To say the amount of Hulks produced from BPO is ********. It's billions of isk worth each month.
Ok, Brewlar's converted me. I hate Pie too. Too many cream pies have I stuffed down my gullet. My belt's burst, and I think I need the hospital. Oh, the crap I'm going to take in the morning.
Anyway, the Hulks produced from BPOs are a trivial percentage of the market, make no meaningful impact on the income of inventors, and are still a terrible ROI for BPO holders. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 21:40:00 -
[576] - Quote
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
Quote:
By significant he means absolutely game breaking for those that do no own said T2BPO. To say the amount of Hulks produced from BPO is ********. It's billions of isk worth each month.
Most of which is profit for INVENTORS. Thus, Hulk BPO holders do not have a significant impact on the market.
By significant, he means that if most of them are made by T2BPO holders, you can bet that item probably has little demand, also. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 22:26:00 -
[577] - Quote
''Interceptors'' A commonly used and commonly destroyed ship which is dominated by a handful of t2BPO owners. Sweet.
Remove T2BPO let non pet players manufacture interceptors for profit instead of CCP's chosen friends. |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 22:48:00 -
[578] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Interceptors'' A commonly used and commonly destroyed ship which is dominated by a handful of t2BPO owners. Sweet.
Remove T2BPO let non pet players manufacture interceptors for profit instead of CCP's chosen friends.
WRONG...do your homework better please (or actually do the numbers finally)
even with a BPO you can make negative profit--> http://eveeye.com/profit.asp?blueprint=Crusader+Blueprint&ML=50&PL=50&P=1&sellPrice=11.048.992,00
or make decent profit with a bpc http://eveeye.com/profit.asp?blueprint=Crow+Blueprint&ML=-4&PL=-4&P=1
|
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 23:07:00 -
[579] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Interceptors'' A commonly used and commonly destroyed ship which is dominated by a handful of t2BPO owners. Sweet.
Remove T2BPO let non pet players manufacture interceptors for profit instead of CCP's chosen friends.
OK, let's look at the paragraphs which you are basing your argument on:
Quote: Heavy Assault Ships have historically been one of the most popular Tech II ship class due to their high versatility in combat, resulting in high demand. However, their production time is rather long, requiring 1.5 days to build each unit on average. BPO holders therefore cannot fully keep up with the high demand, which creates opportunity for inventors to step in and provide the much needed supply. On the other end of the spectrum are Interceptors, which are mostly produced from BPOs. Due to their fast build time, BPO holders can churn them out quickly in great numbers, filling a large portion of the demand for these ships. Their relatively slim profit margins versus larger and more expensive ship classes make them an unattractive choice for inventors. Three out of every four Heavy Assault Ships available on the market are built using BPCs, while only 16% of all Interceptors are produced with BPCs. High demand therefore leads to increased number of invention jobs for popular spaceships, such as the Heavy Assault ships, even though the main rule seems to be that invention for spaceships is a high risk but low profit venture. As evident from the Demographics section in this QEN, the Hulk is currently the most frequently flown ship in EVE. During Q2 more than 20,000 Hulks were manufactured.
With BPCs accounting for almost 90% of all Hulk production, we can assume that the high demand for the ship as well as the low supply provided by BPO owners due to the long manufacturing time contributes greatly to the attractiveness of pursuing Hulk invention.
From this, you have decided that BPO's are overpowered. From one type of ship on the far end of the spectrum from a 3-year-old report. If someone pushes you for a specific statistic, this is the one you keep using like it represents how all T2 BPO's work.
So, again....
87% of Vulcan Autocannons from invention 97% of Scourge Fury Heavy missiles from invention 66% of Ishtars from invention 63% of Zealots from invention 92% of covert ops cloaks from invention 72% of Falcons from invention.
"The only markets where T2 BPO's have a significant impact are where there is little demand for the item." CCP Diagora, 5/3/2012.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 23:11:00 -
[580] - Quote
WTF are you on? You link two different ships. Lets clear this up a T2BPO is always capable of undercutting invention after success rate is factored correctly. T2BPO undercuts every single invention field if there is profit in making an invention then so will there be using the BPO. Where as the other way round is not guaranteed because and let me write this in caps T2BPO IS BROKEN IT IS OVERPOWERED. T2BPO'S UNDERCUT INVENTION for zero effort and only negligible investments in RP, THIS IS WRONG. Please understand this.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real. |
|
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 23:27:00 -
[581] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
WTF are you on? You link two different ships.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real.
no ****, I linked two ships!
2 examples to prove that your theory about interceptors was just wrong. first example that showed you, that even with a T2 BPO you make negative profit (who cares if somebody can uncercut you or not when you lose money by building it), the other that you can make significant profit with inventing them.
god damn, I even have to explain the simplest explanation and you still dont get it. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
90
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 23:44:00 -
[582] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
WTF are you on? You link two different ships.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real.
no ****, I linked two ships! 2 examples to prove that your theory about interceptors was just wrong. first example that showed you, that even with a T2 BPO you make negative profit (who cares if somebody can uncercut you or not when you lose money by building it), the other that you can make significant profit with inventing them. god damn, I even have to explain the simplest explanation and you still dont get it.
I never said all invention was unprofitable I simply state that it is wrong that T2BPO can exist printing isk at zero effort.
Please show me an example where an inventor can undercut a T2BPO please. Good luck BTW. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1917
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 02:12:00 -
[583] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
WTF are you on? You link two different ships.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real.
no ****, I linked two ships! 2 examples to prove that your theory about interceptors was just wrong. first example that showed you, that even with a T2 BPO you make negative profit (who cares if somebody can uncercut you or not when you lose money by building it), the other that you can make significant profit with inventing them. god damn, I even have to explain the simplest explanation and you still dont get it. I never said all invention was unprofitable I simply state that it is wrong that T2BPO can exist printing isk at zero effort. Please show me an example where an inventor can undercut a T2BPO please. Good luck BTW.
Nobody's suggested that (except your straw man). We have simply stated that the things that are unprofitable to invent are so because demand is tiny, and they would be terrible to invent regardless of BPOs existence.
Someone has also shown that running T2BPOs at a profit is a significant amount of work.
Moreover, T2BPOs don't significantly affect any large market, so they don't matter.
Finally, EvE is not Fair. Suck it up and eat your goddamn cake. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
60
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 03:01:00 -
[584] - Quote
Christ's sake, he's only got a handful of line he uses over and over. Every time you refer him to proof that one is wrong, he goes on to another at random.
Certain players having an advantage over others is counter to EVE's particular paradigm - debunked. I call this one "DEATH TO PIE!"
BPO's exist which were given out for free by CCP to personal friends - debunked. That crap is false. I actually think it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world even if it were true. It would really be a bold statement about games as art. Why just make a game that appears corrupt when you can actually MAKE it corrupt? In other words, "NO FAIR! YOU KNOW THE BAKER!"
BPO lottery was rigged in favor of chosen groups or players - debunked. Players spent seriously significant resources in order to put themselves into better positions to acquire BPO's. Those with more resources had more success, as expected, and as intended. Apparently, apart from love, BPO's should be the only thing in EVE you can't buy for ISK. "I WASN'T AT THE FRONT OF THE LINE? NO FAIR!"
Lottery winners got billions for nothing - debunked. The diminished advantage currently afforded by BPO's is quaint in comparison to the initial outlay and even to the current, greatly diminished, market price for a BPO. Also known as "WAAAAHHHHH!"
Inventors are undercut by BPO holders - debunked. BPO holders undercutting inventors is a losing strategy. People don't acquire the power or wealth need to own a BPO by following losing strategies. Sure. a BPO holder COULD undercut inventors, but he'd have to be as stupid as Brewlar to do so. "HERP DERP!"
The rest can be summarized as variations of the above.
|
Sen Roo
The 22nd Jenquai Deep Space Corp High Rollers
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 21:07:00 -
[585] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:YAPYAPYAPYAPYAPYAPYAPYAP
|
qDoctor Strangelove
Beware of the Red Fox
26
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 22:01:00 -
[586] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:
Inventors are undercut by BPO holders - debunked. BPO holders undercutting inventors is a losing strategy. People don't acquire the power or wealth need to own a BPO by following losing strategies. Sure. a BPO holder COULD undercut inventors, but he'd have to be as stupid as Brewlar to do so. "HERP DERP!"
The rest can be summarized as variations of the above.
I sell **** I make from T2 BPOs at about 2x what it cost me no matter what the market price is. some of it I can not even get 1.5 times what it costs to make, but I try to sell it at that. Also, some of the stock I just can never unload at any price, so **** that..
It takes 3 BPOs just to pay for 1 plex month, and it requires me to do quite a lot of work. |
Skorpynekomimi
223
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 00:55:00 -
[587] - Quote
Still going after thirty pages? Shut the buggery up about T2 BPOs already. It was a lottery.
As for 'zero effort'... You still have to acquire the materials, and can't risk moving the thing. A T1 BPO, you can always replace, for a price. T2 ones are unique, priceless things too risky to move. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
172
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 22:27:00 -
[588] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
WTF are you on? You link two different ships.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real.
no ****, I linked two ships! 2 examples to prove that your theory about interceptors was just wrong. first example that showed you, that even with a T2 BPO you make negative profit (who cares if somebody can uncercut you or not when you lose money by building it), the other that you can make significant profit with inventing them. god damn, I even have to explain the simplest explanation and you still dont get it. I never said all invention was unprofitable I simply state that it is wrong that T2BPO can exist printing isk at zero effort. Please show me an example where an inventor can undercut a T2BPO please. Good luck BTW.
Well technically, I can accidentally buy a misspriced ship off the contracts in Jita and undercut some T2 BPO makers sell orders of his finished product
But yhe, the T2 situation is in a current state of accidenlied. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 23:01:00 -
[589] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:
But yhe, the T2 situation is in a current state of accidenlied.
very nice semi-cool Oneliner!
btw. didnt you get disqualified for posting unsourced fantasy numbers already? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
91
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 10:12:00 -
[590] - Quote
CCP remove T2BPO and remove this embarrassing no longer gifted game item that completely strips EVE of it's self proclaimed top of the MMO intelligence pile and throws it down into WOW realm. An item that bitter vets had access to but new players are encouraged to spend 1000's of dollars on to obtain so they can succeed in producing T2 lines of their choice and maintain strict monopolies over by having the ability to undercut all other competition.
An item that is so overpowered that your own staff will risk their jobs to steal from you and sell/give to friends in game. An item that has cost you 1000's of dollars in lost subscriptions, time and effort , staffing problems and bad advertising across the entire web. T2BO brings nothing but negativity to the game and continues to harm CCP/EVE's image and the game itself.
Cut of this diseased limb or for ever have it hanging dead off EVE so people can sit and point to it and say ''well it's not really a real E sport, look at these legacy items that give select players an invincible advantage over others, an item unlike unique ships that can work 100% safe locked in station yet magically still usable.''. |
|
Fluffi Flaffi
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 10:36:00 -
[591] - Quote
There are so many T1 BPOs outside, that make more profit than T2 BPOs at much lower ISK investment. Why the hell do you care about T2 BPOs. I am sure you have absolutely no clue about this question. Leave it as it is. T2 BPOs do not harm CCPs image.... you are completely escapist. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
87
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 10:57:00 -
[592] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:An item that bitter vets had access to but new players are encouraged to spend 1000's of dollars on to obtain so they can succeed in producing T2 lines - without having any offcial numbers I call this pure bullshit...the lest people bought their BPO`s with selling plex, you just have to be not totally bad at this game and put some effort into it. - even if it would be true, why would CCP not want that ppl spend so much money for their ingame items?
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: staffing problems and bad advertising across the entire web. T2BO brings nothing but negativity to the game and continues to harm CCP/EVE's image and the game itself.
to be fair, it would be just easier and simpler to remove YOU from the game, since your the only one I know, who is a real bad addvertisment till you decided to tell dumb untrue facts (steam forums) about eve. fortunetly even in these out of game forums nobody realy believes you and even people who have never played the game find your propaganda embarassing and know that T2 BPO`s are not the problem
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Cut of this diseased limb or for ever have it hanging dead off EVE so people can sit and point to it and say ''well it's not really an E sport,'.
there we go, this is your main-problem...Eve cannot be an e-sport game because a sandbox-game works tottaly different.
E-sport != sandbox games
also if it would be a sport, it would be the lamest thing ever to cry like a whiny baby to change the rules to make it easier for indivduals |
Lukriss
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 11:34:00 -
[593] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:An item that is so overpowered that your own staff will risk their jobs to steal from you and sell/give to friends in game. An item
That was before invention.
The only reason to remove T2 bpo's is to stop the constant bitching about them.
Sincerly the guy who can't afford one and probably never will be able to. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
91
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 12:39:00 -
[594] - Quote
Lukriss wrote:
Sincerly the guy who can't afford one and probably never will be able to.
I have plenty of RP here so technically yes I can afford one for what they were traded. It's simply that I'm not allowed to trade my RP for T2BPO's.
As for removing me from the game or at least removing all my posts about T2BPO or T20. This was an option that CCP used in the past they had mass deletes to try hide the T20 incident and the ban hammer was swung several times but going into details about bans on this forum are against rules so I won't. |
Lukriss
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 13:05:00 -
[595] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I have plenty of RP here so technically yes I can afford one for what they were traded. It's simply that I'm not allowed to trade my RP for T2BPO's.
And now they trade for more, I don't see you complaining to Coca-Cola that you could once buy a coke for 5c and you can't anymore. Using that as argumentation is just plain stupid, but again, so is this entire discussion. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
91
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 13:51:00 -
[596] - Quote
Lukriss wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I have plenty of RP here so technically yes I can afford one for what they were traded. It's simply that I'm not allowed to trade my RP for T2BPO's.
And now they trade for more, I don't see you complaining to Coca-Cola that you could once buy a coke for 5c and you can't anymore. Using that as argumentation is just plain stupid, but again, so is this entire discussion.
No T2BPO were never initialy sold they were given out for realitively small amounts of RP. If CCP wants to allow us to trade RP for T2BPO they should give this option to everyone not just a select group of corps and players that they chose. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
91
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 14:08:00 -
[597] - Quote
Fluffi Flaffi wrote:There are so many T1 BPOs outside, that make more profit than T2 BPOs at much lower ISK investment. Why the hell do you care about T2 BPOs. I am sure you have absolutely no clue about this question. Leave it as it is. T2 BPOs do not harm CCPs image.... you are completely escapist.
I can get access to t1 bpo's on a level playing field heck If I wanted to get titan and capital prints that option is open to me, it may be difficult and take time and effort but it is an option. T2BPO however were given out to players of CCP choosing allowing them to build up massive stocks of isk through monopolising T2 in turn giving them access to even greater numbers of T2BPO further monopolising this. CCP countered with inventiion which was ******** because invention falls short of T2BPO when clearly it should be above it in terms of ME efficency while factoring in success rates.
Pro T2BPO supporters are right in one thing just plain removing the t2BPO's is not fair, to be fair would require nothing less than a full server restart to the point before the first T2BPO entered Tranq. If CCP were to acknowledge the error of the lottery, T20, T2BPO gifts and Inventions short comings by removing T2BPO now the game may actually settle into a true sandbox and be seen to have an E-sport side to the game.
Eve at this time is nothing but a MMO like WOW that tries to pretend to be a true sandbox but fails misreably because it has giant boils all over itself called T2BPO's that no amount of quirky advertising can cover. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1963
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 15:59:00 -
[598] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Lukriss wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I have plenty of RP here so technically yes I can afford one for what they were traded. It's simply that I'm not allowed to trade my RP for T2BPO's.
And now they trade for more, I don't see you complaining to Coca-Cola that you could once buy a coke for 5c and you can't anymore. Using that as argumentation is just plain stupid, but again, so is this entire discussion. No T2BPO were never initialy sold they were given out for realitively small amounts of RP. If CCP wants to allow us to trade RP for T2BPO they should give this option to everyone not just a select group of corps and players that they chose.
They were never sold for RP. There was a lottery. Each RP was (in essence) a ticket. None of the T2BPOs currently in game were acquired unfairly. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1963
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 16:00:00 -
[599] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Fluffi Flaffi wrote:There are so many T1 BPOs outside, that make more profit than T2 BPOs at much lower ISK investment. Why the hell do you care about T2 BPOs. I am sure you have absolutely no clue about this question. Leave it as it is. T2 BPOs do not harm CCPs image.... you are completely escapist. I can get access to t1 bpo's on a level playing field heck If I wanted to get titan and capital prints that option is open to me, it may be difficult and take time and effort but it is an option. T2BPO however were given out to players of CCP choosing allowing them to build up massive stocks of isk through monopolising T2 in turn giving them access to even greater numbers of T2BPO further monopolising this. CCP countered with inventiion which was ******** because invention falls short of T2BPO when clearly it should be above it in terms of ME efficency while factoring in success rates. Pro T2BPO supporters are right in one thing just plain removing the t2BPO's is not fair, to be fair would require nothing less than a full server restart to the point before the first T2BPO entered Tranq. If CCP were to acknowledge the error of the lottery, T20, T2BPO gifts and Inventions short comings by removing T2BPO now the game may actually settle into a true sandbox and be seen to have an E-sport side to the game. Eve at this time is nothing but a MMO like WOW that tries to pretend to be a true sandbox but fails misreably because it has giant boils all over itself called T2BPO's that no amount of quirky advertising can cover.
You can get access to a T2BPO just as easily as T1. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=121807&find=unread
Cheaper than a Titan BPO, too. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
174
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 16:49:00 -
[600] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Fluffi Flaffi wrote:There are so many T1 BPOs outside, that make more profit than T2 BPOs at much lower ISK investment. Why the hell do you care about T2 BPOs. I am sure you have absolutely no clue about this question. Leave it as it is. T2 BPOs do not harm CCPs image.... you are completely escapist. I can get access to t1 bpo's on a level playing field heck If I wanted to get titan and capital prints that option is open to me, it may be difficult and take time and effort but it is an option. T2BPO however were given out to players of CCP choosing allowing them to build up massive stocks of isk through monopolising T2 in turn giving them access to even greater numbers of T2BPO further monopolising this. CCP countered with inventiion which was ******** because invention falls short of T2BPO when clearly it should be above it in terms of ME efficency while factoring in success rates. Pro T2BPO supporters are right in one thing just plain removing the t2BPO's is not fair, to be fair would require nothing less than a full server restart to the point before the first T2BPO entered Tranq. If CCP were to acknowledge the error of the lottery, T20, T2BPO gifts and Inventions short comings by removing T2BPO now the game may actually settle into a true sandbox and be seen to have an E-sport side to the game. Eve at this time is nothing but a MMO like WOW that tries to pretend to be a true sandbox but fails misreably because it has giant boils all over itself called T2BPO's that no amount of quirky advertising can cover. You can get access to a T2BPO just as easily as T1. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=121807&find=unreadCheaper than a Titan BPO, too.
I rather have the titan, more fun =) |
|
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
61
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 17:53:00 -
[601] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I don't care if I can still line up for cake, I missed the line up for pie and that's not fair! People are asking way too much for their slice of pie, pie was really cheap back when people first started lining up. Besides, people who knew the baker got to cut ahead, I'm positive! I can't think of any other way people could possible manage to be at the front of the line up other than the baker just choosing who goes where! In real life you don't have to line up for pie and there's enough for everybody, and if the baker ever stops making pie all the pies he's already baked have to be handed back in! Death to pie! Death to pie! You guys hate WoW, right? Well WoW is totally full of pie (don't look into it just believe me, I'm totally right) so if you like pie you like WoW, and around here that makes you stupid, so you're stupid!
Seriously, explain it to me like I'm five. What's a sandbox game? What's an e-sport? Where do BPO's come into this? Because it sounds to me like you're saying EVE isn't a sandbox at all because there's a limited number of BPO's in the game, and they're useful to own. And it isn't an e-sport at all, for exactly the same reason. So BPO's somehow simultaneously make EVE less like an e-sport ( and so more like a sand box ) and less of a true sand box ( therefor more like an e-sport). This is god damned confusing. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
87
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 18:29:00 -
[602] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Quote:Cheaper than a Titan BPO, too. I rather have the titan, more fun =)
Titan BPO does not mean he gets a free titan, Mr. Badass
should read more carefully before you drop your extremly usefull oneliner, next time |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
1964
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 19:37:00 -
[603] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: I rather have the titan, more fun =)
Titan BPCs have gotten so cheap now, I don't think it's worth it. Back when they were 15-20b per copy, owning a BPO was awesome. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Toramii
Le Moulin Rouge
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 21:20:00 -
[604] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: 2. ... Information about the workings of the lottery were also released to key players. This information was regarding the amount of BPO's in each individual lottery and how many tickets were participating. This gave key players insight into which lottery to enter giving them far greater chances of obtaining T2BPO's...
Do you know that information about the numbers and types of BPO's seeded was publically available on the forums during the lottery
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2006
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 07:34:00 -
[605] - Quote
Toramii wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: 2. ... Information about the workings of the lottery were also released to key players. This information was regarding the amount of BPO's in each individual lottery and how many tickets were participating. This gave key players insight into which lottery to enter giving them far greater chances of obtaining T2BPO's...
Do you know that information about the numbers and types of BPO's seeded was publically available on the forums during the lottery
He defines "Key Players" as "Anyone who had a Sub during the lottery time period"
Do try to keep up. It's more fun when everyone has the same pair of pants on their head. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 18:58:00 -
[606] - Quote
Salo Aldeland wrote:Dude seriously hates pie.
I laugh every time I read this. |
Ms Bax
Union Of EVE
6
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 04:22:00 -
[607] - Quote
This thread is really amusing.
Brewlar is a great troll (or completely nuts). |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
61
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 13:37:00 -
[608] - Quote
Ms Bax wrote:This thread is really amusing.
Brewlar is a great troll (or completely nuts).
Like I said, he's either the biggest idiot or the best troll I've seen in at least a decade. And when find a mountain like that, you damn well climb it. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1154
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 21:24:00 -
[609] - Quote
Ms Bax wrote:This thread is really amusing. Brewlar is a great troll (or completely nuts). If I wouldn't have been up to my neck and beyond in RL work for the past 2++ weeks, I would have have totally answered in here more often. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 22:59:00 -
[610] - Quote
Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2030
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 23:16:00 -
[611] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort.
Huh?
Also, explain how T2BPOs were placed into the hands of *chosen* players as opposed to anyone who played the lottery, and explain how they're zero effort. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 01:12:00 -
[612] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort. Huh? Also, explain how T2BPOs were placed into the hands of *chosen* players as opposed to anyone who played the lottery, and explain how they're zero effort.
Oh, come on, now, you've seen the protocol. Change the subject, make outrageous claims, back the claims up with statements that make no sense and proclaim that everyone agrees. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2030
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 01:31:00 -
[613] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort. Huh? Also, explain how T2BPOs were placed into the hands of *chosen* players as opposed to anyone who played the lottery, and explain how they're zero effort. Oh, come on, now, you've seen the protocol. Change the subject, make outrageous claims, back the claims up with statements that make no sense and proclaim that everyone agrees.
Actually, just found the Goon LP thing. It's freaking hilarious, and CCP did say they're considering some undisclosed thing to deal with it. They didn't threaten anything.
I do think the first clause of that post was the closest thing to a truth that Brewlar's expressed in this thread. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
175
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 02:11:00 -
[614] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort. Huh? Also, explain how T2BPOs were placed into the hands of *chosen* players as opposed to anyone who played the lottery, and explain how they're zero effort.
Way back when, once upon a time, there where some Devs who litarally gave out BPO's to some... undisclosed parties, This was quiqly found out, proven and spread across new eden like wildfire, Never the less, in very short order, a few people where fired and some acounts where banned/deleted, taking the Unfair BPO's out of the game, forever (suposently), Dont know the exact details, but thats the word on the streets. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2030
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 02:19:00 -
[615] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort. Huh? Also, explain how T2BPOs were placed into the hands of *chosen* players as opposed to anyone who played the lottery, and explain how they're zero effort. Way back when, once upon a time, there where some Devs who litarally gave out BPO's to some... undisclosed parties, This was quiqly found out, proven and spread across new eden like wildfire, Never the less, in very short order, a few people where fired and some acounts where banned/deleted, taking the Unfair BPO's out of the game, forever (suposently), Dont know the exact details, but thats the word on the streets.
Yes, the T20 incident (PS, T20 is still working at CCP last I checked), which resulted in those BPOs being removed from the game, which means that any market effects that those BPOs caused have long since disappeared.
And Brewlar said "netted" which implies that the players in question got to keep anything. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 10:00:00 -
[616] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kinda amusing how CCP is threatning to remove hard won and worked ISK from a goon LP and market manipulation scheme when CCP itself was dumping T2BPO's into the hands of chosen players that netted them billions of ISK for zero effort.
yep, btw as a Owner of T2 BPO`s I obviously know all the dev's and they told me, that they are not listening to your moaning anymore, even tho they know your 100% right, they need a way to risk their job by giving certain ppl a advantage. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 11:12:00 -
[617] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
yep, btw as a Owner of T2 BPO`s I obviously know all the dev's and they told me, that they are not listening to your moaning anymore, even tho they know your 100% right, they need a way to risk their job by giving certain ppl a advantage.
I don't think anyone here would suggest that the Devs think T2BPO was a good idea or we'd have more T2BPO lottery for the new T2 items and T3. T2BPO lottery, T20 and the fact that invention has lower ME than a T2BPO is moronic and the Devs need to get off their ass stop moaning about goons playing the game better than their friends and fix T2BPO and invention.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2030
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 15:22:00 -
[618] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:
yep, btw as a Owner of T2 BPO`s I obviously know all the dev's and they told me, that they are not listening to your moaning anymore, even tho they know your 100% right, they need a way to risk their job by giving certain ppl a advantage.
I don't think anyone here would suggest that the Devs think T2BPO was a good idea or we'd have more T2BPO lottery for the new T2 items and T3. T2BPO lottery, T20 and the fact that invention has lower ME than a T2BPO is moronic and the Devs need to get off their ass stop moaning about goons playing the game better than their friends and fix T2BPO and invention.
Does the inefficiency of invention stop people from making money from invention? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 15:33:00 -
[619] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
I don't think anyone here would suggest that the Devs think T2BPO was a good idea
what?
|
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 16:35:00 -
[620] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: the fact that invention has lower ME than a T2BPO is moronic
..no its not.
T2 BPOs give you a quite low hard limit on how much you can build with them, so they have to have a better ME to be of any use. Invention doesnt have a limit on how many items( aka profit) you can make, wich at the end gives invention a much better potencial.
seriously if your not able to get that you should stop posting, its getting ridiculous. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 17:29:00 -
[621] - Quote
Yeah Joy, T2BPO undercutting my manufcature and invention cost lucky for me I have the potential to blow billions of ISK away with multiple BPC's in mutliple slots while the T2BPO is stuck making zero effort profit in one slot. Joy for T2BPO and legacy game content that is no longer avalible to noobs unless they want to spend thousands of dollars, yeah CCP joy.
Sony I hope you're reading this. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 17:34:00 -
[622] - Quote
------- Cut by ISD Stensson -------
Talking about Kugutsumen.
Shame CCP can not talk this way about T2BPO's as it besmriches EVE and CCP's image while doing damage to the game.
Edit: Private communication between the Game Masters, Eve Team members, moderators and administrators of the forum and the forum users is not allowed - ISD Stensson |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 17:42:00 -
[623] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yeah Joy, T2BPO undercutting my manufcature and invention cost lucky for me I have the potential to blow billions of ISK away with multiple BPC's in mutliple slots while the T2BPO is stuck making zero effort profit in one slot.
you said that crap 100 times now, and we've proven you 100 times that its just wrong. Even if you would remove all T2 BPO`s not every item can be made with profit. Your looking for a ******-prove game that eve clearly is not supposed to be.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 17:51:00 -
[624] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yeah Joy, T2BPO undercutting my manufacture and invention cost lucky for me I have the potential to blow billions of ISK away with multiple BPC's in multiple slots while the T2BPO is stuck making zero effort profit in one slot. you said that crap 100 times now, and we've proven you 100 times that its just wrong. Even if you would remove all T2 BPO`s not every item can be made with profit. Your looking for a ******-prove game that eve clearly is not supposed to be.
------- Cut by ISD Stensson -------
T2 production can be unprofitable disregarding invention woes just like all T1 production can be unprofitable from BPO's. However T2 BPC's have the problem that they must compete against T2BPO's and in some lines this is not possible. T3 with no BPO's does not have this problem, CCP know that T2BPO's are a major problem or we'd have T3 BPO's.
------- Cut by ISD Stensson -------
Edit: Please refrain from personal attacks. Also, be constructive while posting - ISD Stensson |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1154
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 18:19:00 -
[625] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where is Akita Busy@job.
The maelstrom of arguments so far basically boil down to something very simple.
On one hand, producing from a BPO is always cheaper, but has a much higher initial cost (which can be recovered, sometimes lower, sometimes higher) and has a maximum production volume. For items with low demand, the max production volume from BPOs is sufficient to satisfy the entire demand, so invention can't compete because equilibrium price is below invention breakeven (and many times, barely above BPO breakeven). However, the overall total value of those items is relatively small, even if by pure item TYPE count they represent the majority.
On the other hand, production from an invented BPC is always more expensive, but has a very small initial cost (recurring and non-recoverable) and is as good as unlimited as far as production volume of any particular item goes. For items with high demand, BPOs can't possibly match demand, so price rises, quickly surpassing invention breakeven, so demand for invented items starts existing. The more popular the item, the higher the demand, the more slice of the pie inventors have. The overall total value of those items is very high, even if by total item count they're a minority. T2 BPO owners *COULD* significantly undercut inventors if they wanted, but it would generally be a very stupid thing to do, because it would further decrease the already pathetically small RoI of the T2 BPOs.
To me, this looks like a perfect compromise - you can always get what you want, and stuff only a few people want is dirt cheap ; T2 BPO profit is capped by whatever the added invention costs are for the corresponding item, as opposed to it being it free to soar, while RoI remains very low ; inventors can quickly switch to whatever the "item of the month" might be, whereas BPO owners have a very high inertia.
To Brewlar Kuvakei, it looks like "unfairness" because he can't accept different production methods for the exact same items, and because he feels too many of the current owners (for HIS taste) have obtained the BPOs as too much of a good deal (in his opinion), so he is perfectly willing to sacrifice the older alternative production method in pursuit of that illusory fairness, and damn the consequences.
And that's pretty much it.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 19:00:00 -
[626] - Quote
Akita the initial cost of t2BPO is not high, it was RP cheap and easy and as you know this is one of the major problems of T2BPO. You talk about high ROI but the initial investment of Research Points was minuscule to the amount of ISK T2BPO's produce on top of their actual value for being able to do so with out fail each month. ROI on T2BPO was immediate and massive. Players chosen by CCP in a 'lottery' were given items worth 100's of billions of ISK with out the same value of ISK being taken out of the game or effort being put in.
If there is no reason to remove T2BPO why have CCP not introduced T3 BPO's, T2BPO's for newer items or even a single t2BPO on the newer Chinese server?
Seriously someone answer this. If there is nothing wrong with T2BPO's why has CCP stopped producing them?
T2BPO diminishes the game putting it's complexity on par with every other MMO.
CCP remove T2BPO make Eve real. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 19:27:00 -
[627] - Quote
funny that you only "allow" Akita T to be the only T2 BPO supporter here, even tho he is the one who is killing your points brutally by numbers, every time.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita the initial cost of t2BPO is not high, it was RP cheap and easy and as you know this is one of the major problems of T2BPO. You talk about high ROI but the initial investment of Research Points was minuscule to the amount of ISK when you talk about ROI, you have to take current market numbers, using 8 year old values to compare them to current return is just wrong/stupid
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: T2BPO's produce on top of their actual value for being able to do so with out fail each month. ROI on T2BPO was immediate and massive.
you clearly dont know what ROI means, please do your Homework.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: If there is no reason to remove T2BPO why have CCP not introduced T3 BPO's,
how many T3 items are existing at them moment? are T3 ships made by invention? is it maybe something total different?
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: If there is nothing wrong with T2BPO's why has CCP stopped producing them?
oh now your using CCP`s decisions for your arguments? hmm...on the other hand, why havent they revomed the BPO`s yet?
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: CCP remove T2BPO make Eve real.
your told to be constructive, paroles are not. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 19:37:00 -
[628] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yeah Joy, T2BPO undercutting my manufcature and invention cost lucky for me I have the potential to blow billions of ISK away with multiple BPC's in mutliple slots while the T2BPO is stuck making zero effort profit in one slot. Joy for T2BPO and legacy game content that is no longer avalible to noobs unless they want to spend thousands of dollars, yeah CCP joy.
Hurray! |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1155
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 20:13:00 -
[629] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita the initial cost of t2BPO is not high, it was RP cheap and easy and as you know this is one of the major problems of T2BPO. Time is, as far as we know, irreversible. Some distant past value of T2 BPOs is no longer relevant. The only value that matters now is CURRENT value.
Holding on to a T2 BPO today instead of selling it is interchangeable with having the necessary ISK for it but not purchasing one.
Quote:Players chosen by CCP in a 'lottery' were given items worth 100's of billions of ISK with out the same value of ISK being taken out of the game or effort being put in. The players were not chosen by any CCP staff manually, the overwhelming vast majority was chosen by a random number generator operating an automated lottery. The vast majority of the items were not worth nearly that many billions of ISK at that time anyway, and people that approved the exchange of RP (in amounts which were nowhere near as low as you seem to keep on claiming) for offered T2 BPOs also lost out on an extremely profitable opportunity some time later, when RPs were extremely valuable, shortly after invention was introduced.
All NPC drops, all mining, most of PI, everything adds items to the game without removing their corresponding ISK value from the game, so that's no good argument. People today STILL RECEIVE other items that can be worth many billions of ISK on a daily basis via another random number generator picking NPC loot drops, so that's not a good argument either, and I don't ever hear you complaining about that anyway.
Quote:If there is no reason to remove T2BPO why have CCP not introduced T3 BPO's, T2BPO's for newer items or even a single t2BPO on the newer Chinese server? Seriously someone answer this. If there is nothing wrong with T2BPO's why has CCP stopped producing them? Invention is a more attractive alternative in case T2 BPOs never existed. That could be achieved on the Serenity cluster (and for newly introduced items after invention started on TQ), but, again, since time is irreversible for humans on this planet at this time (and may forever be irreversible), it is impossible to do for the Tranquility cluster for the older T2 items.
Removing existing T2 BPOs now does not change the past, it only alters the present and future, and it's a BAD choice for many reasons already heavily explained in this thread. So, yes, if somehow CCP could actually go back in time and introduce invention instead of the T2 BPO lottery, then heck yeah, I would be the strongest supporter for such a thing. Too bad time travel does not exist, eh ?
The least damaging POSSIBLE alternative would be for CCP to bring invention manufacture cost closer to T2 BPO manufacture cost, BUT THEY DO NOT WANT TO DO EVEN THAT MUCH to any radical extent. They did however slightly nudge invented item production costs closer to T2 BPO enabled item production costs, but only very slightly, and very infrequently.
Quote:T2BPO diminishes the game putting it's complexity on par with every other MMO. Invention exists. Invention is used. It may not be used to the EXTENT you might like, but that doesn't change the fact that it exists and it is used. T2 BPOs are an alternative production method to invention, a choice that can be made for each individual item. REMOVING T2 BPOs reduces complexity, it does not increase it. You're arguing against your own position here.
...
P.S. This is all the time I can spare today. You may be wise to listen to the rest of the people attempting to talk to you, they have quite decent explanations, even if their presentation is less polite or sometimes less extensive. Not being willing to even consider anybody else's explanations except mine is a low move. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2031
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 22:00:00 -
[630] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yeah Joy, T2BPO undercutting my manufcature and invention cost lucky for me I have the potential to blow billions of ISK away with multiple BPC's in mutliple slots while the T2BPO is stuck making zero effort profit in one slot. Joy for T2BPO and legacy game content that is no longer avalible to noobs unless they want to spend thousands of dollars, yeah CCP joy.
Sony I hope you're reading this.
Ah, now we get to why Brewlar's mad. He lost money on invention because he didn't look at the market first.
If you pick your invention without doing your market research and loose all your money, that's your fault. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
|
Rhys Thoth
Endland
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 22:07:00 -
[631] - Quote
T2 BPOs are not ideal, but they are also not a problem. I'm not going to bother rehashing what all of the rational people in this thread have said.
That being said, I would support their removal if:
a) CCP completely revamped research b) CCP also removed all T1 BPOs and c) They could figure out how to do this without making industry grind to a halt / all the industrialists emoragequit.
I've disliked NPC seeded goods since back in the day, when everyone stockpiled minerals to sell at server uptime to NPC orders. I'd much rather CCP just scrap BPs altogether and move to a system where you build (a potentially limited number of) factories, you do R&D to configure said factories and then effectively have a BPO you can use to make stuff, sell to a pure manufacturer, tear down to configure it to make something else, or maybe use to make some BPC-like schematics that budding manufacturers can just run through an NPC station's 3d printer.-á
I do not, however, believe that this is possible in in my lifetime. Particularly part C.
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
175
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 23:34:00 -
[632] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where is Akita Mostly ? Very busy at my day-job. ... The maelstrom of arguments so far basically boil down to something very simple. On one hand, producing from a T2 BPO is always cheaper, but has a much higher initial cost (which can be recovered, sometimes lower, sometimes higher) and has a maximum production volume. For items with low demand, the max production volume from T2 BPOs is sufficient to satisfy the entire demand, so invention can't compete because equilibrium price is below invention breakeven (and many times, barely above T2 BPO breakeven). However, the overall total value of those items is relatively small, even if by pure item TYPE count they represent the majority. On the other hand, production from an invented T2 BPC is always more expensive, but has a very small initial cost (recurring and non-recoverable) and is as good as unlimited as far as production volume of any particular item goes. For items with high demand, T2 BPOs can't possibly match demand, so price rises, quickly surpassing invention breakeven, so demand for invented items starts existing. The more popular the item, the higher the demand, the more slice of the pie inventors have. The overall total value of those items is very high, even if by total item count they're a minority. T2 BPO owners *COULD* significantly undercut inventors if they wanted, but it would generally be a very stupid thing to do, because it would further decrease the already pathetically small RoI of the T2 BPOs. Arguments about not being able to get new ones or items without any are not really all that relevant, barely more than demagoguery and rhetoric. ... To me, this looks like a decent compromise (far from perfect, but given the time evolution and time's irreversibility, doubtful to have any overall better alternatives). You can always get what you want, and stuff only a few people want is dirt cheap ; T2 BPO profit is capped by whatever the added invention costs are for the corresponding item, as opposed to it being it free to soar, while RoI remains very low ; inventors can quickly switch to whatever the "item of the month" might be, whereas T2 BPO owners have a very high inertia (due to difficulty of switching T2 BPO type, having to go through long-duration sale/purchase periods and find willing counterparts). Also, CCP has specifically "pre-nerfed" invention heavily, then slightly buffed it from time to time. If they wanted to make invention more on par with T2 BPO production, they would have had ample occasions to buff it even further, BUT THEY DID NOT, because they don't feel like the current situation is a problem. This really says most of what needs to be said. To Brewlar Kuvakei, it looks like "UNACCEPTABLE levels of unfairness" because he can't accept radically different production chain methods for the exact same items, and because he feels too many of the current owners (for HIS taste) have obtained the BPOs as too much of a good deal (in his opinion), so he is perfectly willing to sacrifice the older alternative production method in pursuit of that illusory fairness, and damn the consequences. He used to agree that buffing invention to further limit the advantage of BPOs would be a decent middle ground concession, but he dropped that much more CCP-palatable alternative a short while after. I can't help but suspect that he doesn't actually want to achieve anything practically achievable anymore, but is mainly just upset by the situation and is on a crusade for the Holy Grail. ... And that's pretty much it, in a nutshell. --T.
Mans got a point, Why arent new T2 BPO's being introduced or New T3 BPO's? Clearly this is a problem, 100% fact undeniable in every way possible.
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
175
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 23:36:00 -
[633] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yeah Joy, T2BPO undercutting my manufcature and invention cost lucky for me I have the potential to blow billions of ISK away with multiple BPC's in mutliple slots while the T2BPO is stuck making zero effort profit in one slot. Joy for T2BPO and legacy game content that is no longer avalible to noobs unless they want to spend thousands of dollars, yeah CCP joy.
Sony I hope you're reading this. Ah, now we get to why Brewlar's mad. He lost money on invention because he didn't look at the market first. If you pick your invention without doing your market research and loose all your money, that's your fault.
Your taking the Logical approach, this is usually wrong, trying to make logic of people's doings and undoings in a world with little to zip law, isnt the right way to go, Perhaps im wrong? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 01:07:00 -
[634] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: Mans got a point, Why arent new T2 BPO's being introduced or New T3 BPO's?
:facepalm:
sure, if you are desperately looking for analogies and want to take CCP decisions that have actually nothing to do With T2 BPO`s as a argument, you could ask that. BUT since we are trusting CCP now in their decisions, we could also ask why they simply havent removed the BPO`s yet, can't we?
to clear this up:
current T3 Ships are not an improvement of any T2 or T1 ships, they are designed as a unique ship type
there are only 4 ]different T3 items/ships in the game yet, while there thousands of T2 items and ships.
there is not just 1 way to manufacture things...T1, T2, T3, Drugs and Capitals have all their unique parts of manufaction to keep the game more exciting and create different professions.
they didn`t decide to use the invention system either, wich makes the question for a BPO even more pointless
Kara Books wrote: Perhaps im wrong?
absolutely |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
93
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 01:30:00 -
[635] - Quote
Nope Kara your spot on. T2BPO was a massive mistake that needs rectifying. I myself am contemplating a move to Serenity server where T2BPO's do not exist because there is one thing I do agree with T2BPO supporters and owners is that I doubt they are going to be fixed any time soon. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2033
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 01:34:00 -
[636] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Nope Kara your spot on. T2BPO was a massive mistake that needs rectifying. I myself am contemplating a move to Serenity server where T2BPO's do not exist because there is one thing I do agree with T2BPO supporters and owners is that I doubt they are going to be fixed any time soon.
You still have missed the part where you show that it needs fixing in any way, let alone a compelling reason for fixing the "problem" being a higher priority than any other "problem." *cough*Tech*cough* This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
176
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 01:49:00 -
[637] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Kara Books wrote: Mans got a point, Why arent new T2 BPO's being introduced or New T3 BPO's?
:facepalm: sure, if you are desperately looking for analogies and want to take CCP decisions that have actually nothing to do With T2 BPO`s as a argument, you could ask that. BUT since we are trusting CCP now in their decisions, we could also ask why they simply havent removed the BPO`s yet, can't we? to clear this up:current T3 Ships are not an advancement of any other ships, like its the case inT2 mfg. they are designed as a unique ship type (No Base item/BPO)
there are only 4 ]different T3 items/ships in the game yet, while there thousands of T2 items and ships.
there is not just 1 way to manufacture things...T1, T2, T3, Drugs and Capitals have all their unique parts of manufaction to keep the game more exciting and create different professions.
they didn`t decide to use the invention system either, wich makes the question for a BPO even more pointlessKara Books wrote: Clearly this is a problem, 100% fact undeniable in every way possible.
what do you mean with "this" ? just the whole thing again or do you have anything concrete this time? Kara Books wrote: Perhaps im wrong?
absolutely
Very professional post, Oversimplified, almost compelling, still doesn't provide any kind of answer to a problem.
What do I mean? I believe I was pretty clear as to what I meant, in plain English. I dont know if they will ever remove T2 BPO's but the fact still stands, no new T2 or T3 BPO's are being introduced. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
94
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 07:33:00 -
[638] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: Very professional post, Oversimplified, almost compelling, still doesn't provide any kind of answer to a problem.
What do I mean? I believe I was pretty clear as to what I meant, in plain English. I dont know if they will ever remove T2 BPO's but the fact still stands, no new T2 or T3 BPO's are being introduced..
I did explain quite simply why there are no T3 BPO`s are seeded, if u want to argue these reasons please go ahead, but please be specific. I obviously dont think, that there is an issue at all, hence no answer for the problem that only you two seem to understand
if you want to see that as a proof that CCP feels so guilty about the T2 BPO`s..fiiiiiine. I think its kindoff wishthinking as you also cant explain why they havent removed them.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
94
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 11:11:00 -
[639] - Quote
The reason CCP has not removed them is because it's not the t2BPO owners fault that they were gifted the item. They feel that removing them will cause a lot of forum crying and maybe even some unsubs. CCP should take the forum whine and the unsubs which will quickly be replenished by new players, higher player retention and of course new subs for invention alts. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
94
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 12:31:00 -
[640] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: CCP should take the forum whine and the unsubs which will quickly be replenished by new players, higher player retention and of course new subs for invention alts.
counterpoint: Now you need even more subs/invention chars to achieve the same profit.(in your world at least)
|
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
89
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 12:50:00 -
[641] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Now you need even more subs/invention chars to achieve the same profit
Is there a problem? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
94
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 13:24:00 -
[642] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Now you need even more subs/invention chars to achieve the same profit Is there a problem?
its a problem for brewie-¦s argument, that the removal of the BPO`s would cause more subscriptions |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
94
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 13:36:00 -
[643] - Quote
Nope no problem actually great for the game. T2 Price will rise slightly and even increase T1 profits too. Removing T2BPO would be nothing but a positive for the game placing it back into the sandbox where it belongs instead of scripted by CCP and controlled with gifted legacy content such as T2BPO. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Krawdad
The Racket
6
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 17:37:00 -
[644] - Quote
I'm new to this debate so forgive me if this idea has already been suggested. I don't own any T2 BPOs, but there might be a way to compromise, rather than just removing them altogether.
What if these T2BPOs were given some sort of regenerating number of runs? By that I mean, perhaps a certain one would have 50 runs available every week, and another only 10 runs per week. The available runs would regenerate every Tuesday or something like that.
Those are just random numbers I threw in there, but ideally the number of runs would be based on what is an attainable number of runs from invention, obviously dependent on the item type. Also the time frame for regeneration could be something else, I just picked weekly.
I think this could help reduce the power of the T2 BPOs by limiting the amount of items they could produce, yet still allow the owners to bypass the god awful invention process and thus still be worth something.
Any thoughts? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2039
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 17:48:00 -
[645] - Quote
Krawdad wrote:I'm new to this debate so forgive me if this idea has already been suggested. I don't own any T2 BPOs, but there might be a way to compromise, rather than just removing them altogether.
What if these T2BPOs were given some sort of regenerating number of runs? By that I mean, perhaps a certain one would have 50 runs available every week, and another only 10 runs per week. The available runs would regenerate every Tuesday or something like that.
Those are just random numbers I threw in there, but ideally the number of runs would be based on what is an attainable number of runs from invention, obviously dependent on the item type. Also the time frame for regeneration could be something else, I just picked weekly.
I think this could help reduce the power of the T2 BPOs by limiting the amount of items they could produce, yet still allow the owners to bypass the god awful invention process and thus still be worth something.
Any thoughts?
If they changed it to the number of runs available to inventors. they'd be massively buffing BPOs. The whole reason invention has killed BPO profits is that it can't be monopolized and an individual can run many lines of an item in parallel. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Krawdad
The Racket
6
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 18:07:00 -
[646] - Quote
I probably should have rephrased that part, but I was imagining the number of runs being based on some percent of what's attainable via invention. EDIT: With the exact percent being determined by people who have a better understanding of how this works than me.
That may still end up doing what you said, though. I'm not really familiar with the scope of the problem nor the breakdown of production from invention versus that of BPOs, just thought I'd chime in.
For now, disregarding the specifics I mentioned, do you think the idea could ever be used to achieve a compromise? Do you think limiting the production capabilities of the t2 BPOs is even worth considering? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2039
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 18:11:00 -
[647] - Quote
Krawdad wrote:I probably should have rephrased that part, but I was imagining the number of runs being based on some percent of what's attainable via invention.
That may still end up doing what you said, though. I'm not really familiar with the scope of the problem nor the breakdown of production from invention versus that of BPOs, just thought I'd chime in.
For now, disregarding the specifics I mentioned, do you think the idea could ever be used to achieve a compromise? Do you think limiting the production capabilities of the t2 BPOs is even worth considering?
There is no problem. Low demand items have their demand filled (and price set) by BPOs, high demand items have their demand filled (and price set) by invention.
T2BPOs have very limited production capabilities. That's why they're a non-issue. A Hulk BPO can make around 30 Hulks per month. The Jita churn for Hulks is some 6,000 a month. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
94
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 18:47:00 -
[648] - Quote
Krawdad wrote:
For now, disregarding the specifics I mentioned, do you think the idea could ever be used to achieve a compromise? Do you think limiting the production capabilities of the t2 BPOs is even worth considering?
thats how it is right now, dude...with just ONE invention char you can out-perform any T2 BPO by the pure number that you can build. If you want to read up, Akita actually didput a lot of effort into sheets and did the numbers very carefull with the result that T2 BPO`s are no Problem for Inventions
tbh. at the moment its just about beeing bu**hurt and 1-2 desperate haters that simply ignore all facts and numbers and just want them removed JUST to win this argument, justified or not.
the other thing is that brewlar keeps saying that most or many BPO`s were gifted to certain players wich would really just be bull** and I think nobody would argue that these players along with their donators should be fined/banned. Allthough, so far we havent seen any proof of that, yet. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
176
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:14:00 -
[649] - Quote
I still think Nerfing is not the way to go, if CCP could play this card into their hand to gain more subscriptions, somehow without hurting the T2 BPO holders, I think every one would be more then happy. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
176
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:16:00 -
[650] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Krawdad wrote:
For now, disregarding the specifics I mentioned, do you think the idea could ever be used to achieve a compromise? Do you think limiting the production capabilities of the t2 BPOs is even worth considering?
thats how it is right now, dude...with just ONE invention char you can out-perform any T2 BPO by the pure number that you can build. If you want to read up, Akita actually didput a lot of effort into sheets and did the numbers very carefull with the result that T2 BPO`s are no Problem for Inventions tbh. at the moment its just about beeing bu**hurt and 1-2 desperate haters that simply ignore all facts and numbers and just want them removed JUST to win this argument, justified or not. the other thing is that brewlar keeps saying that most or many BPO`s were gifted to certain players wich would really just be bull** and I think nobody would argue that these players along with their donators should be fined/banned. Allthough, so far we havent seen any proof of that, yet.
You cant, Thank you. |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
96
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:59:00 -
[651] - Quote
Kara Books wrote: You cant, Thank you.
LOL...did you really just double Post to get this one liner again? not as cool as you might think it is...
btw. talking about beeing specific... "you cant" does not really explain that much. IF your refer to that 1 char cant out-perform a T2 BPO... please go ahead and throw us some nombers or a example (first time in your live). |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:05:00 -
[652] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Krawdad wrote:
For now, disregarding the specifics I mentioned, do you think the idea could ever be used to achieve a compromise? Do you think limiting the production capabilities of the t2 BPOs is even worth considering?
thats how it is right now, dude...with just ONE invention char you can out-perform any T2 BPO by the pure number that you can build. If you want to read up, Akita actually didput a lot of effort into sheets and did the numbers very carefull with the result that T2 BPO`s are no Problem for Inventions tbh. at the moment its just about beeing bu**hurt and 1-2 desperate haters that simply ignore all facts and numbers and just want them removed JUST to win this argument, justified or not. the other thing is that brewlar keeps saying that most or many BPO`s were gifted to certain players wich would really just be bull** and I think nobody would argue that these players along with their donators should be fined/banned. Allthough, so far we havent seen any proof of that, yet. You cant, Thank you.
so cool, lol
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
176
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:12:00 -
[653] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Kara Books wrote: You cant, Thank you.
LOL...did you really just double Post to get this one liner again? not as cool as you might think it is... btw. talking about beeing specific... "you cant" does not really explain that much. IF your refer to that 1 char cant out-perform a T2 BPO... please go ahead and throw us some nombers or a example (first time in your live).
Dude, do you want me to switch sides? are we that bored? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2039
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:51:00 -
[654] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:I still think Nerfing is not the way to go, if CCP could play this card into their hand to gain more subscriptions, somehow without hurting the T2 BPO holders, I think every one would be more then happy.
Nobody subscribes to do T2 manufacture. Nobody leaves because of BPOs (if they did, we'd be rid of Brewlar's plague).
Best way to nerf T2BPOs: Fix the invention click-fest interface. That would kill a whole lot of the convenience that is BPOs biggest selling point.
(And it wouldn't invite CCP to massively fuck the system up like they have every time they've touched anything related to T2 manufacture *cough*Tech*cough*PI Release*cough*POSes*cough*) This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
430
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 11:28:00 -
[655] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Nope no problem actually great for the game. T2 Price will rise slightly and even increase T1 profits too. Removing T2BPO would be nothing but a positive for the game placing it back into the sandbox where it belongs instead of scripted by CCP and controlled with gifted legacy content such as T2BPO.
Oh, for ****'s sake, will you just go away. In irae, veritas. |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
61
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 13:42:00 -
[656] - Quote
Akita T wrote: To Brewlar Kuvakei, it looks like "UNACCEPTABLE levels of unfairness" because he can't accept radically different production chain methods for the exact same items, and because he feels too many of the current owners (for HIS taste) have obtained the BPOs as too much of a good deal (in his opinion), so he is perfectly willing to sacrifice the older alternative production method in pursuit of that illusory fairness, and damn the consequences. He used to agree that buffing invention to further limit the advantage of BPOs would be a decent middle ground concession, but he dropped that much more CCP-palatable alternative a short while after. I can't help but suspect that he doesn't actually want to achieve anything practically achievable anymore, but is mainly just upset by the situation and is on a crusade for the Holy Grail.
He has a pathological hatred for pie. He can't even help it. It's a sickness. He needs massive therapy. Probably electro-shock. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1157
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 20:58:00 -
[657] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Akita T wrote:And that's pretty much it, in a nutshell. --T. Mans got a point, Why arent new T2 BPO's being introduced or New T3 BPO's? Clearly this is a problem, 100% fact undeniable in every way possible. Not really. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1519417#post1519417 Already answered in the very next post of mine under that you fully quoted, before you did the quoting.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2066
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 21:02:00 -
[658] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Kara Books wrote:Akita T wrote:And that's pretty much it, in a nutshell. --T. Mans got a point, Why arent new T2 BPO's being introduced or New T3 BPO's? Clearly this is a problem, 100% fact undeniable in every way possible. Not really. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1519417#post1519417Already answered in the very next post of mine under that you fully quoted, before you did the quoting.
I think Kara's decided that she also really hates Pie. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1157
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 21:11:00 -
[659] - Quote
On the other hand, there are good reasons to want to kill pie if you're a trader :) Think of all the technetium cake that would be rising even faster and even higher !
P.S. Tinfoilhat moment, Brewlar is a Tech cartel alt ! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
14
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 22:03:00 -
[660] - Quote
After reading this...I must go buy a T2BPO and start building off it. Don't know if you've heard, apparently they break the game. |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
96
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 05:49:00 -
[661] - Quote
Akita T wrote:P.S. Tinfoilhat moment, Brewlar is a Tech cartel alt ! no worries, I already had these moments where I thought that him and kara beeing actually one of the richest T2 BPO owners and want to save their investment for all time by using some weird kind of reverse psychologie that tells us, there arent any valid points against T2 BPO`s at all. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.06 18:20:00 -
[662] - Quote
I've been playing on Serenity server but I'm back on Tranq for a bit, any news on CCP removing the unfair advanatage that T2BPO brings yet? Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1169
|
Posted - 2012.07.12 03:47:00 -
[663] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I've been playing on Serenity I hear it was close to being shut down, it was actually down a bit but was somehow relaunched ? What's the deal with it, is it still alive or on its way to becoming completely dead ?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2012.07.12 09:29:00 -
[664] - Quote
why akita...just why. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.12 11:07:00 -
[665] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I've been playing on Serenity I hear it was close to being shut down, it was actually down a bit but was somehow relaunched ? What's the deal with it, is it still alive or on its way to becoming completely dead ?
It was not down for as long as appeared it was because people were using Chibra's eve server tracking graph and the Serenity server address changed but the graph never got updated so it made it look like Serenity was down when it in fact had many people playing on it. I think the graph is now fixed.
Yeah it is the graph is showing Serenity having over 32 thousand people playing on it now which rivals tranq. Serenity server has just left beta and is now 100% live you can join and play via the tin city website who run Serenity not CCP. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1169
|
Posted - 2012.07.13 05:23:00 -
[666] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:why akita...just why. Best keep all nonsense in a single huge thread. If it slips out, some other thread will soon begin afresh as if the discussion was not already done to death (more than once). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.13 10:23:00 -
[667] - Quote
On that point why are T2BPO not being seeded onto Serenity or any more onto Tranq? I mean T2BPO's are great yes? Oh wait no they suck and are in dire need of removal. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2012.07.13 13:34:00 -
[668] - Quote
anyone remember the TNG episode where the enterprise is cought in a time-loop and the entire episode is all about the same 2 minutes over and over again? I fear the same happened to this thread aswell
Brewlar you made that point a couple of times already and its still as stupid as the first time. arguments really dont get better just by the number you bring them up... |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
363
|
Posted - 2012.07.13 13:57:00 -
[669] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:anyone remember the TNG episode where the enterprise is cought in a time-loop and the entire episode is all about the same 2 minutes over and over again? I fear the same happened to this thread aswell
Brewlar you made that point a couple of times already and its still as stupid as the first time. arguments really dont get better just by the number you bring them up... I do. Actually I think every time I see this thread bumped I'm going to make a post about a Star Trek episode (any series) or from the movies.
Speaking of which, the JJ Abrams Star Trek has to be the best pre-quel of all time. Meeting Bones for the first time...the kobiashi maru...he'll even the scene of Kirk driving the car...and seeing 'Iowa' in the corner of the screen....make me think of this line "No, I'm from Iowa, I only work in outer space."
Can't wait for the next one. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Chandra K'ailar
Darkstar Trading Conglomerate Inc
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 19:35:00 -
[670] - Quote
this posts are really funny!
why should CCP take T2 BPOs out of game? and also just fyi, t2 bpos owners cant compete in market against inventors, so shut up with this type of threads . . .
and comparing this to real life, if u cant afford a boat or a ferrari or whatever, someone should take them out of the market? what is your point with that? |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 20:00:00 -
[671] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Can't wait for the next one.
yep "search for Mrs. Spock" (Spock's mum) will come next year, its a Michael bay production so expect a US navy aircraft carrier saving the World... No thanks
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
363
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 23:59:00 -
[672] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Zifrian wrote:Can't wait for the next one. yep "search for Mrs. Spock" (Spock's mum) will come next year, its a Michael bay production so expect a US navy aircraft carrier saving the World... No thanks Um, not finding anything?
But I won't watch another Michael Bay film. Transforms 1....ok, not bad...different take. Fun film. 2 and 3? I could crap on three pieces of paper and made a better plot. I don't get why people keep paying that guy to make movies.
Speaking of T2BPO's though, favorite part in Star Trek 6....the last part when Spock gives him his torpedo that could detect gas emissions ("Well the thing's gotta have a tailpipe")...and Kirk says "Fire."...loved it. Although the final scene with Nero in the Black Hole and Kirk asking him if he needs assistance...Spock's reply almost as good. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 01:43:00 -
[673] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Zifrian wrote:Can't wait for the next one. yep "search for Mrs. Spock" (Spock's mum) will come next year, its a Michael bay production so expect a US navy aircraft carrier saving the World... No thanks Um, not finding anything? But I won't watch another Michael Bay film. Transforms 1....ok, not bad...different take. Fun film. 2 and 3? I could crap on three pieces of paper and made a better plot. I don't get why people keep paying that guy to make movies. Speaking of T2BPO's though, favorite part in Star Trek 6....the last part when Spock gives him his torpedo that could detect gas emissions ("Well the thing's gotta have a tailpipe")...and Kirk says "Fire."...loved it. Although the final scene with Nero in the Black Hole and Kirk asking him if he needs assistance...Spock's reply almost as good.
Story was ~OK~ and it was a good action movie no doubt, but you could clearly see the trend of just more unnecessary explosions and even a bit of martial arts, wich I never missed in Star Trek.
to find a Analogic story to this topic, I would rather see Kirk beeing a T2 BPO and Khan beeing brewlar... Kahn is p. mad at the Starfleet (CCP) because Kirk is an Admiral now (makes too much isk). He also blames Kirk for making so less profit ,because he was stranded on the wrong planet (lets call it invention) through Kirk. So Kahn was looking for an insturment of Power, "the Genesis" (Forums) wich would allow him to destroy Kirk and all his friends, but after Spock (akita) showed some extraordinary efforts, they defeated Kahn and the world was saved.
No offense tho, Khan was extremly intelligent, just displaced in the wrong century. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
412
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 02:02:00 -
[674] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:On that point why are T2BPO not being seeded onto Serenity or any more onto Tranq? I mean T2BPO's are great yes? Oh wait no they suck and are in dire need of removal.
Nobody here's said they're "Great," just that they're "Not a Problem."
If there were a way to turn back time and not have released them, that would be fine. But removing them at this point would cause problems without solving any actual problems.
Because, again, they're not a problem anymore.
If Serenity's so much better, go play there, and stop bothering us. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
363
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 02:47:00 -
[675] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: Story was ~OK~ and it was a good action movie no doubt, but you could clearly see the trend of just more unnecessary explosions and even a bit of martial arts, wich I never missed in Star Trek.
to find a Analogic story to this topic, I would rather see Kirk beeing a T2 BPO and Khan beeing brewlar... Kahn is p. mad at the Starfleet (CCP) because Kirk is an Admiral now (makes too much isk). He also blames Kirk for making so less profit ,because he was stranded on the wrong planet (lets call it invention) through Kirk. So Kahn was looking for an insturment of Power, "the Genesis" (Forums) wich would allow him to destroy Kirk and all his friends, but after Spock (akita) showed some extraordinary efforts, they defeated Kahn and the world was saved.
No offense tho, Khan was extremly intelligent, just displaced in the wrong century.
Haha, wonderful! Although, I'm not sure I want my friends with that crazy worm/bug thing stuck in their ears. Oh crap...it's probably me!
And yeah, Transformers 3 had so much "Action" you couldn't even watch the damn movie because everything was moving so fast. The only Michael Bay movie I like is Bad Boys. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
156
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 14:23:00 -
[676] - Quote
+1 for removing them. I'm not even an industrial player but I see why this is flat out stupid. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
444
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 17:48:00 -
[677] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:I'm not even an industrial player
The actual industrialists here keep pointing out that T2 BPOs don't actually cause the problems Brewlar thinks they do. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
365
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 18:27:00 -
[678] - Quote
Did you all know the first inter-racial kiss was on Star Trek? Kirk and Ohura. Facinating! Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 19:09:00 -
[679] - Quote
Chandra K'ailar wrote:why should CCP take T2 BPOs out of game? and also just fyi, t2 bpos owners cant compete in market against inventors, so shut up with this type of threads . . .
Yes they can. They can keep prices lower because they don't have to use time and money to invent T2 BPCs (do you really think it's free?). |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 19:24:00 -
[680] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Chandra K'ailar wrote:why should CCP take T2 BPOs out of game? and also just fyi, t2 bpos owners cant compete in market against inventors, so shut up with this type of threads . . . Yes they can. They can keep prices lower because they don't have to use time and money to invent T2 BPCs (do you really think it's free?).
of course they can, but as a economic thinking person they would never waste money and do that. everyone can manipulate the market, you dont have to be a manufcature at all, btw.
Jorma Morkkis wrote: +1 for removing them. I'm not even an industrial player but I see why this is flat out stupid.
surprisingly, that seems to happen only to not industrial ppl. |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 19:37:00 -
[681] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:of course they can, but as a economic thinking person they would never waste money and do that. everyone can manipulate the market, you dont have to be a manufcature at all, btw.
Of course they wouldn't waste money because they don't have to invent anything. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 19:55:00 -
[682] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:of course they can, but as a economic thinking person they would never waste money and do that. everyone can manipulate the market, you dont have to be a manufcature at all, btw. Of course they wouldn't waste money because they don't have to invent anything. If you have an item that can sell for several billion, don't use it, but don't sell it either, what do you call that ? If you have an item that can sell for several billion, but use it to make some small profit instead, was that really free ?
The vast majority of the anti-T2-BPO argument collapses as soon as you realize that selling a T2 BPO you have when you need the ISK is pretty much almost the same as buying a T2 BPO somebody else is selling when you have the ISK and don't need it urgently in terms of total net asset value. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Cap James Tkirk
Gung-HO Guns Moon Warriors
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 22:32:00 -
[683] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:of course they can, but as a economic thinking person they would never waste money and do that. everyone can manipulate the market, you dont have to be a manufcature at all, btw. Of course they wouldn't waste money because they don't have to invent anything.
as an inventor they may nto "waste money inventing" but they are limited to that one print and can only pump out so many copies, look at t2 invuls if bpo owner could meet the demands the item would be a few 100k not 2ish m a pop
just sayin if ya dont have first hand knowledge on a facet of the game prob should leave the tinfoil hattry at the door also the great one line responses |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 22:51:00 -
[684] - Quote
Cap James Tkirk wrote:as an inventor they may not "waste money inventing" but they are limited to that one print and can only pump out so many items per day, look at t2 invuls if bpo owner could meet the demands the item would be a few 100k not 2ish m a pop
They can't copy those BPOs? |
Cap James Tkirk
Gung-HO Guns Moon Warriors
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 22:59:00 -
[685] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Cap James Tkirk wrote:as an inventor they may not "waste money inventing" but they are limited to that one print and can only pump out so many items per day, look at t2 invuls if bpo owner could meet the demands the item would be a few 100k not 2ish m a pop They can't copy those BPOs?
they can but apparently they are not making enough voulmeon thier own to cover certain market areas or they would just market pvp everyone to the ground also for example i can make 20x300 runs on 10 adaptive ivuls in x amount of hours so i could essentially pump out 200 copies of 10 run adapt invuls II (wont happen but i can hope) so in theroy i could make 2k of these items in x days they woul need to make copies and can onlymake so many at a time not sure as i dont have t2 bpos to play with but if i can do that across 4 toons how are is the bpo better? |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
445
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 23:32:00 -
[686] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Cap James Tkirk wrote:as an inventor they may not "waste money inventing" but they are limited to that one print and can only pump out so many items per day, look at t2 invuls if bpo owner could meet the demands the item would be a few 100k not 2ish m a pop They can't copy those BPOs?
You really, really need to do your homework.
Copying a T2 BPO generally (I think it's universal, but I haven't looked at every T2 BPO) takes longer per run then manufacturing from it. And it costs materials.
For instance, copying a T2 Invuln BPO takes 5hrs per run, and costs 30 data sheets and .5 of a R.Db - Ishukone, so ~100k Isk per copy. Manufacturing takes ~3hrs per run.
There are maybe a half dozen reasons to copy a T2 BPO. Running on multiple lines isn't one of them. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 23:32:00 -
[687] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:They can't copy those BPOs? Copy time is longer than manufacture time (IIRC, even with max theoretically possible boosts), so copying would not really make a lot of sense.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 23:34:00 -
[688] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Cap James Tkirk wrote:as an inventor they may not "waste money inventing" but they are limited to that one print and can only pump out so many items per day, look at t2 invuls if bpo owner could meet the demands the item would be a few 100k not 2ish m a pop They can't copy those BPOs?
takes twice as long to copy 1 run as to manufacture. And no you dont get a second BPO if you copy it, Cpt. Invention. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 23:38:00 -
[689] - Quote
Confidence in expressed position and willingness to defend it appears to be an inverted bell curve with respect to knowledge about the subject :P http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:00:00 -
[690] - Quote
Funny how you all defend these people.
Maybe you all own T2 BPOs. That makes sense. |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:15:00 -
[691] - Quote
You have all but conclusively proven you barely know how things work with regards to T2 invention/production, and you haven't shown a lot of signs of being capable of understanding the economic implications of the things you're trying to argue, whereas people with various degrees of proven track records argue the exact opposite thing of what you're trying to imply would be better. So, you know, maybe you just don't have much of an idea about what you think you're talking about, and almost certainly can't propose an overall beneficial solution or at least an improvement to something that's not really much of a problem to begin with.
P.S. And, by the way, if I'd own any number of T2 BPOs, do you know what would be one of the first things I'd do with them ? SELL THEM ALL. Slowly (careful to not crash the T2 BPO trade market) but surely, every last one of them. Oh, that's even if I actually have the skills to build almost anything in the game, with only a handful of exceptions. That's because T2 BPOs have horrible, atrociously low, barely noteworthy RoIs, while also requiring a non-trivial amount of effort to properly and fully utilize. Even with ISK just sitting there for over one year, maybe up to almost two years barely touched, and I can still find better opportunities to make more additional ISK on average (other than T2 manufacture from BPOs) with a WHOLE lot less effort needed. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:25:00 -
[692] - Quote
Akita T wrote:You have all but conclusively proven you barely know how things work with regards to T2 invention/production, and you haven't shown a lot of signs of being capable of understanding the economic implications of the things you're trying to argue, whereas people with various degrees of proven track records argue the exact opposite thing of what you're trying to imply would be better.
Oh, "you don't have degree in economics" card. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:27:00 -
[693] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Oh, "you don't have degree in economics" card. No, the "you seem to either not know how showinfo and a basic calculator work, or be really lazy and not bother using them at all" card, if you must put a label on it.
P.S. I don't have any formal education in economics either, I'm a freaking automation engineer by training, untangling game economies is just an ascended hobby. But I know how to gather data, crunch some rather simple numbers and interpret the fairly straightforward results, and I have a bit of hands-on experience with the system which you seem to almost completely lack (due to how your posts so far were worded). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:33:00 -
[694] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:You have all but conclusively proven you barely know how things work with regards to T2 invention/production, and you haven't shown a lot of signs of being capable of understanding the economic implications of the things you're trying to argue, whereas people with various degrees of proven track records argue the exact opposite thing of what you're trying to imply would be better. Oh, "you don't have degree in economics" card.
No, it's the "you don't have the first clue what you're talking about, and every claim you have yet made is demonstrably false" card.
Nobody's rebutting your claims by calling into question your credentials, we're rebutting your claims with facts.
For instance, you seem to think that you must put BPOs in a POS to copy them at the POS. That is demonstrably false. You seem to think that there is some value in copying T2 BPOs for manufacture. That is also demonstrably false.
You also seem to think that it's valid to skip right to a new claim when your last one gets trashed. That's called Moving the Goalposts. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:36:00 -
[695] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:For instance, you seem to think that you must put BPOs in a POS to copy them at the POS. That is demonstrably false.
Do you even know how long it takes to get 10.0 standing with faction, 10.0 sec status and moon in hisec? Especially with pure industry trained character with very little combat skills. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:38:00 -
[696] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:For instance, you seem to think that you must put BPOs in a POS to copy them at the POS. That is demonstrably false. Do you even know how long it takes to get 10.0 standing with faction, 10.0 sec status and moon in hisec? Especially with pure industry trained character with very little combat skills. And, for instance, you think you need 10.0 standing with faction to do any of that (or that sec status matters AT ALL), when 8.00 is the maximum useful faction standing, and 5.00 faction standing is quite sufficient to do it all by yourself. More importantly, you can actually BUY such a corp (with the necessary faction standings) without ever gaining those standings yourself (and it's rather cheap and relatively fast too). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:40:00 -
[697] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:For instance, you seem to think that you must put BPOs in a POS to copy them at the POS. That is demonstrably false. Do you even know how long it takes to get 10.0 standing with faction, 10.0 sec status and moon in hisec? Especially with pure industry trained character with very little combat skills.
1. It is impossible to get 10.0 faction standing, Impossible to get 10.0 Sec Status (it's even hard to get past 5.0).
2. You don't need 10.0 Faction standing, you need 7.0 faction standing.
3. You can easily buy a corp with 5.0 Faction standing, because anchoring a POS only requires that your Corp have a certain standing.
4. Sec status is irrelevant.
5. You still haven't admitted that you were wrong about BPOs having to go into the POS, instead, you just moved the goalpost again. -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:51:00 -
[698] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:3. You can easily buy a corp with 5.0 Faction standing, because anchoring a POS only requires that your Corp have a certain standing.
Do you even know how that standing is calculated? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:53:00 -
[699] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:3. You can easily buy a corp with 5.0 Faction standing, because anchoring a POS only requires that your Corp have a certain standing. Do you even know how that standing is calculated? Yes, he/she does, but you apparently don't. Or you do, but can't make the mental leap required to understand how to EASILY "game" that system with the aid of another person (either as a favour or in exchange for cold, hard ISK). That, and you can't be bothered to use the search function to look for trades of corps with good standings and see it all explained in a "buying corps with standings for dummies" fashion. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:00:00 -
[700] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Yes, he/she does, but you apparently don't. Or you do, but can't make the mental leap required to understand how to EASILY "game" that system with the aid of another person (either as a favour or in exchange for cold, hard ISK). That, and you can't be bothered to use the search function to look for trades of corps with good standings and see it all explained in a "buying corps with standings for dummies" fashion.
Ok...
- I buy a corp with 5.0 faction standing - I get my research alt in (let's say this character has 2.0 standing with said faction) - Corp's standing with that faction will drop. |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:02:00 -
[701] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Ok... - I buy a corp with 5.0 faction standing - I get my research alt in (let's say this character has 2.0 standing with said faction) - Corp's standing with that faction will drop. It will drop after 7 days of your alt joining, ample time to anchor any number of towers you like. Once anchored, standings are irrelevant, you can online/offline them as much as you like. Your only worry would be in case you need to unanchor the tower or if it gets destroyed. If your alt would be perfectly NEUTRAL towards that faction (same as all other members of the corp), standings would never change, and you would not have that problem at all. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:14:00 -
[702] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Ok...
- I buy a corp with 5.0 faction standing - I get my research alt in (let's say this character has 2.0 standing with said faction) - Corp's standing with that faction will drop.
maaate, I think your pedals are going to fast to see it, but it looks like they are going backwards |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:16:00 -
[703] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:maaate, I think your pedals are going to fast to see it, but it looks like they are going backwards Like I said, you need to either know a lot or very little to be as confident as he was... but now as he's getting more info, his confidence levels are rapidly dropping...
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:17:00 -
[704] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Ok...
- I buy a corp with 5.0 faction standing - I get my research alt in (let's say this character has 2.0 standing with said faction) - Corp's standing with that faction will drop.
maaate, I think your pedals are going to fast to see it, but it looks like they are going backwards
NPC factions/corps standings toward a player corporation are calculated in this way:
You take the standing (without skills included) of each corporation member (towards the NPC entity in question) on an active subscribing account, add them all up and then divide by the number of members that have the standing already in their character sheet. The ones who do not have a standing towards the entity are not taken into account. The standings will update to the avarage after every downtime.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Standings_mechanics#NPC_Faction_standings_towards_Player_corporations |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:18:00 -
[705] - Quote
You forgot a very important part: "It is also worth noting that members standings towards NPC corps do not begin to affect their global corp standing towards the relevant NPC corp until they have been a member of their current corp for at least 7 days."
That, and the fact you only need standings to ANCHOR, not operate/offline/online a POS.
P.S. You most likely missed the last post on the previous page. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:29:00 -
[706] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Ok...
- I buy a corp with 5.0 faction standing - I get my research alt in (let's say this character has 2.0 standing with said faction) - Corp's standing with that faction will drop.
maaate, I think your pedals are going to fast to see it, but it looks like they are going backwards NPC factions/corps standings toward a player corporation are calculated in this way:
You take the standing (without skills included) of each corporation member (towards the NPC entity in question) on an active subscribing account, add them all up and then divide by the number of members that have the standing already in their character sheet. The ones who do not have a standing towards the entity are not taken into account. The standings will update to the avarage after every downtime.http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Standings_mechanics#NPC_Faction_standings_towards_Player_corporations
That's not relevant at all.
Once the POS is anchored, your standings don't matter.
Tell me again how you have to put BPOs in a POS to use them? -RubyPorto
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 01:30:00 -
[707] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Ok...
- I buy a corp with 5.0 faction standing - I get my research alt in (let's say this character has 2.0 standing with said faction) - Corp's standing with that faction will drop.
maaate, I think your pedals are going to fast to see it, but it looks like they are going backwards NPC factions/corps standings toward a player corporation are calculated in this way:
You take the standing (without skills included) of each corporation member (towards the NPC entity in question) on an active subscribing account, add them all up and then divide by the number of members that have the standing already in their character sheet. The ones who do not have a standing towards the entity are not taken into account. The standings will update to the avarage after every downtime.http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Standings_mechanics#NPC_Faction_standings_towards_Player_corporations
so your denying a whole branche of faction standing services, even?^^
1. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134301&find=unread 2. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6443&find=unread 3. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=9436&find=unread 4. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=7602&find=unread
u must be trolling us... |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 14:27:00 -
[708] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:u must be trolling us... Nah, most likely he actually didn't know any better, but now he does.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 15:40:00 -
[709] - Quote
I love how those defending T2BPO just spend all day pety name calling because they have no real argument for keeping T2BPO in the game or having it in the first place.
CCP take the hit lose and these tards, remove T2BPO and let the game grow. Sure you'll lose a handfull of bitter vets who can't actually play eve with out your massive hand outs but many new players will enter the game and more importantly stay with the game once it loses it's noob crushing legacy items.
If there is nothing wrong with t2BPO please create more of them for the missing items and while you are at it destroy T3 production by dropping T3 BPO's too.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real, let the game grow and stop giving bitter vets the one up on noobs. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1171
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 16:44:00 -
[710] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I love how those defending T2BPO just spend all day pety name calling So calling somebody who's clueless a clueless person while also showing point by point why they're being called clueless is all of a sudden petty name-calling ? Huh. Remind me to change the definitions in all of the dictionaries.
Quote: because they have no real argument for keeping T2BPO in the game or having it in the first place. Is it so hard to understand we'd ALSO PREFER T2 BPOs would have never existed in the first place ? But there's a huge difference between preferring something to have never existed and wanting them removed after being there for quite a while. Just because you're incapable of seeing anything except the whitest white and the blackest black (or, at least, admitting to it) doesn't mean we also have to act as if we were blind to the existence of many different shades of gray.
Quote:CCP take the hit and loose these tards, remove T2BPO and let the game grow. Huh, talk about petty name-calling. So how exactly WOULD the game grow if T2 BPOs would be removed, in a way significantly different from the way it already does? What exactly would be OBJECTIVELY much better in order to even begin to justify removing something quite a few people worked hard to eventually obtain ?
Quote:Sure you'll lose a handfull of bitter vets who can't actually play eve with out your massive hand outs but many new players will enter the game and more importantly stay with the game once it loses it's noob crushing legacy items. And THOSE current newbs will also end up becoming vets, and faced with the KNOWLEDGE that CCP can just remove something willy-nilly whenever it becomes MILDLY INCONVENIENT, how much "brand loyalty" do you think they'll have ? You'll lose more than JUST the people with T2 BPOs (ironically, you might not even lose all of them) and people that know people with T2 BPOs, or people who were planning on buying T2 BPOs, you'll also lose (and keep losing) people far later in time that look at the way CCP would have handled this issue and lack the confidence in a fair resolution to other future potential issues.
Quote:If there is nothing wrong with t2BPO please create more of them for the missing items and while you are at it destroy T3 production by dropping T3 BPO's too. Adding more T2 BPOs is vastly different from tolerating existing ones, and you know it. Nobody is disputing the POTENTIAL of the invention and reverse engineering process of becoming better than the BPO manufacture alternative, but neither of them are quite there yet. You used to admit that you realized buffing them instead of removing T2 BPOs would be a good enough way, but you backpedaled.
To use a yucky and only partially useful analogy, if you have a bullet lodged in you that will be painful and/or dangerous to remove (but you could function fine enough for the rest of your natural life with it stuck there), while you may be opposed to yanking it out, you can be as sure as hell that you certainly don't want to get any additional ones in there. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Ginger Barbarella
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 17:06:00 -
[711] - Quote
36 pages later and I'm more baffled by the intelligent people responding to the clueless troll than the clueless troll himself.
Give it a rest people, it's over. |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 17:48:00 -
[712] - Quote
Ok, let's use T2 invul BPO again because you people like it so much.
Only 100 runs per T2 BPC. What are chances that inventor even gets 100 run T2 BPC? Usually close to 10 runs per T2 BPC. Akita T owns T2 BPO and can do as many runs as she has materials for.
Invention takes time and money just to get that 10 run BPC. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
448
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:19:00 -
[713] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Ok, let's use T2 invul BPO again because you people like it so much.
Only 100 runs per T2 BPC. What are chances that inventor even gets 100 run T2 BPC? Usually close to 10 runs per T2 BPC. Akita T owns T2 BPO and can do as many runs as she has materials for.
Invention takes time and money just to get that 10 run BPC.
It takes 500 hours to make a 100 run BPC from a T2 Invuln BPO. It would have taken ~250-300 hours to build 100 T2 Invulns from that BPO.
It takes much less than 500 hours to invent and build 100 runs of T2 Invulns, especially since you can run more than one job at a time.
Tell me again how BPOs have to be left in POSes to research and Anchoring POSes requires 10.0 Faction Standing and 10.0 Sec Status. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:32:00 -
[714] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:It takes 500 hours to make a 100 run BPC from a T2 Invuln BPO. It would have taken ~250-300 hours to build 100 T2 Invulns from that BPO.
It takes much less than 500 hours to invent and build 100 runs of T2 Invulns, especially since you can run more than one job at a time.
And you can't do that with T2 BPOs? There's like 5000 T2 invul BPOs in the game.
Pipa Porto wrote:Tell me again how BPOs have to be left in POSes to research and Anchoring POSes requires 10.0 Faction Standing and 10.0 Sec Status.
Guides. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
448
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:45:00 -
[715] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:It takes 500 hours to make a 100 run BPC from a T2 Invuln BPO. It would have taken ~250-300 hours to build 100 T2 Invulns from that BPO.
It takes much less than 500 hours to invent and build 100 runs of T2 Invulns, especially since you can run more than one job at a time. And you can't do that with T2 BPOs? There's like 5000 T2 invul BPOs in the game.
There most certainly are not 5000 of them and even if there were, making a BPC from that BPO takes 5 hours per Run, or 50 hours per 10 run BPC. An inventor can make a 10 run BPC in 12 hours working on one line with T1 BPCs purchased from the market or run off on an alt.
T2 BPOs certainly provide some advantage over inventors. None of that advantage lies in copying them.
Pipa Porto wrote:Tell me again how BPOs have to be left in POSes to research and Anchoring POSes requires 10.0 Faction Standing and 10.0 Sec Status.
Guides.[/quote]
You either found the world's most unreasonably terrible guides, or you're lying again. My bet is on the latter. Cite your sources. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:48:00 -
[716] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:You either found the world's most unreasonably terrible guides, or you're lying again. My bet is on the latter. Cite your sources.
I never said I have office in NYC.
Getting one would cost billions. Large POS already costs 1-2 billion a month to run. And that's labs offline. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:53:00 -
[717] - Quote
that, plus 5000 T2 invul BPOs in the game ade my day, thank you
btw. is around 20 BPO's per item |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:58:00 -
[718] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:that, plus 5000 T2 invul BPOs in the game ade my day, thank you
Any reason why I should use something else other than large deathstar/****star in hisec?
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:btw. is around 20 BPO's per item
Are you sure devs don't have more of them? I've heard they play this game too. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
448
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 18:59:00 -
[719] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:You either found the world's most unreasonably terrible guides, or you're lying again. My bet is on the latter. Cite your sources. I never said I have office in NYC. Getting one would cost billions. Large POS already costs 1-2 billion a month to run. And that's labs offline.
Your idiotic assessment of the cost isn't relative to the question. Tell me again how you have to put your BPOs in the POS and require 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec status to anchor.
20k ISK * 40 blocks/hr *168hrs/wk * 4 weeks per lunar month = 537 600 000 ISK EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:02:00 -
[720] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Your idiotic assessment of the cost isn't relative to the question. Tell me again how you have to put your BPOs in the POS and require 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec status to anchor.
No office in NYC = no corp hangar = BPO must be in POS. |
|
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
448
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:05:00 -
[721] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:that, plus 5000 T2 invul BPOs in the game ade my day, thank you Any reason why I should use something else other than large deathstar/****star in hisec?
That's not actually relevant, but the reason is that you have 24hrs to change from a peacetime Labs only to a wartime Guns setup.
Quote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:btw. is around 20 BPO's per item Are you sure devs don't have more of them? I've heard they play this game too.
If you have evidence of CCP Dev misconduct, please send it to CCP Sreegs so he can have a very pointy conversation with that Dev.
A while ago, someone got some information on what CCP employees did when they played. Not many of them were industrialists (probably because stopping yourself from acting on insider information would be a tricky line to walk). EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
448
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:07:00 -
[722] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Your idiotic assessment of the cost isn't relative to the question. Tell me again how you have to put your BPOs in the POS and require 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec status to anchor. No office in NYC = no corp hangar = BPO must be in POS.
When did we start talking about NYC?
An Office in a nice quiet system is like 10m ISK a month.
Just because you've decided to be an idiot doesn't mean you have to put your BPOs in the POS.
And tell me again how you need a 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec Status to anchor it. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:11:00 -
[723] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:that, plus 5000 T2 invul BPOs in the game ade my day, thank you Any reason why I should use something else other than large deathstar/****star in hisec?
How much more does a death star cost than an empty online tower and no mods would cost? what ya think?^^
its getting better and better...
and yea in High sec a death totally make sense :DDD Christ! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:14:00 -
[724] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:And tell me again how you need a 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec Status to anchor it.
In 1.0 system you need those. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
449
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:17:00 -
[725] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And tell me again how you need a 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec Status to anchor it. In 1.0 system you need those.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHA
You can't anchor POSes in a 1.0 system. Even if you could, the Sec level of the system doesn't really matter in HS because you need a wardec to reasonably kill a POS.
Tell me again how the BPOs have to go into a POS and how Sec status is at all relevant? And tell me again how copying a T2 BPO is a worthwhile idea EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:22:00 -
[726] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Tell me again how the BPOs have to go into a POS and how Sec status is at all relevant?
If POS is in system without stations or CORP DOESN'T have OFFICE in that system, BPOs must be in POS. What part of that you don't understand? |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
450
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:25:00 -
[727] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Tell me again how the BPOs have to go into a POS and how Sec status is at all relevant? If POS is in system without stations or CORP DOESN'T have OFFICE in that system, BPOs must be in POS. What part of that you don't understand? And how there's towers in 0.8 and 0.9 systems then?
The part where you'd be stupid enough to put yourself in that position.
And there aren't. .5, .6, and .7 can have towers in HS. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:37:00 -
[728] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And tell me again how you need a 10.0 Faction standing and 10.0 Sec Status to anchor it. In 1.0 system you need those. shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:and yea in High sec a death totally make sense :DDD Christ! So, small tower with two guns and as many labs and hangars as possible in 0.5. Should I put all my BPOs there for you to steal?
-Towers cant be anchored in 1.0 systems -if wardeced you unanchor it so as less stuff to unachor as better -if no wardec nobody can engage your POS without getting Concord Aggro -High sec ganking POSes doesnt exist, and if guns wouldnt do **** cause Concord does it faster anyway -Fuel Blocks dont care if modules are anchored or not, its always teh SAME DRAIN. -You have not even basic eve knowledge.
|
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:40:00 -
[729] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Tell me again how the BPOs have to go into a POS and how Sec status is at all relevant? If POS is in system without stations or CORP DOESN'T have OFFICE in that system, BPOs must be in POS. What part of that you don't understand? And how there's towers in 0.8 and 0.9 systems then?
why on earth did you put a tower in a system with no station? i just spent 10 minutes checking and i found about 14 empty moons in 0.5 and 0.6 systems with stations in them.
and as said, you cant put towers in systems higher then 0.7.
also you seem to be under the misinformed info that the number of mods you have on a tower affect the fuel cost. it doesnt anymore and havent for a while.
shesh... |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:42:00 -
[730] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Tell me again how the BPOs have to go into a POS and how Sec status is at all relevant? If POS is in system without stations or CORP DOESN'T have OFFICE in that system, BPOs must be in POS. What part of that you don't understand? And how there's towers in 0.8 and 0.9 systems then?
OMG have yo uever seen a POS in a 0.8 systems? Or did these guides tell you that?
and why would you not have a corp hangar? everyone can rent one and unless your stupid and take one in a crowded station they cost 10.000 isk per month |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:45:00 -
[731] - Quote
Lady Naween wrote:why on earth did you put a tower in a system with no station?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1653133#post1653133
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:OMG have yo uever seen a POS in a 0.8 systems? Or did these guides tell you that?
I can see all nearby towers in d-scan. I've also seen few in 0.8 and 0.9 systems just by warping around. |
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:49:00 -
[732] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Lady Naween wrote:why on earth did you put a tower in a system with no station? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1653133#post1653133shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:OMG have yo uever seen a POS in a 0.8 systems? Or did these guides tell you that? I can see all nearby towers in d-scan. I've also seen few in 0.8 and 0.9 systems just by warping around.
yes because that totally wasnt a TROLLPOST!!! and the poster even admitted it a few posts further down!
and no you havent. picture proof or STFU! unless you are talking about the NPC towers in some missions
oh and.. just for you http://xcc.xanga.com/d64f913a57135264685908/w211047782.png |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1173
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:50:00 -
[733] - Quote
You can only anchor towers in a system of up to 0.7 listed sec status. You need 5.00[..]01 faction for anchoring in 0.5, 6.00[..]01 for 0.6 and 7.00[..]01 for 0.7. YOU CAN NOT anchor one in a 1.0, 0.9 nor 0.8 sec. It just won't let you, regardless of faction standings.
You only need the faction standings to ANCHOR a tower, everything else can be done without faction standings. Security status does not matter, like almost anything else. You can buy corps setup for standings of your choosing for under 0.2 bil ISK.
NOT renting an office in whatever system you put the POS up is bordering on totally stupid, especially since (if you spend more than a few minutes looking for it) you can relatively easily find a system with empty moons, available office space AND cheap rental bills.
Ever since the switch to fuel blocks, a tower always consumes the same amount of resources regardless of what's online or offline on it. A large tower costs more like 0.6 bil ISK/month to run, not 1 bil. For copy, invention and manufacture jobs a MEDIUM tower will more than suffice for a single user (and in most circumstances be enough for quite a few extra users on "rotation" schedules), and it should only cost ~0.3 bil ISK/month to run... and even a FREAKING SMALL ONE will do just fine for an entire corp, ESPECIALLY if its main use will be manufacture of modules instead of the entire copy-invent-manufacture cycle (because you can buy T1 BPCs from contracts at quite attractive prices and run invention in NPC slots, of which there's enough available in most of highsec).
There were only a bit over 10k T2 BPOs in the entire game near the end of the lottery, and some were lost since then. There's MOST LIKELY around 40 units of Invul Field II BPOs, probably even less than that, and certainly not over 80. The total daily production from even 80 of them (which I'm completely sure do not exist) in POS rapid assembly arrays would be about 1,376 units/day. Guess how many are actually traded on a daily basis across the entire game ? Here's a hint : a lot more. Jita could maybe at best represent half of daily universal trade, probably noticeably less.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:54:00 -
[734] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Lady Naween wrote:why on earth did you put a tower in a system with no station? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1653133#post1653133shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:OMG have yo uever seen a POS in a 0.8 systems? Or did these guides tell you that? I can see all nearby towers in d-scan. I've also seen few in 0.8 and 0.9 systems just by warping around.
well how about I give you 1 billion if u find one? just give me a location...
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1174
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:57:00 -
[735] - Quote
Wouldn't it be funny if somebody actually launched a tower in a 0.9 system and just left it there thinking it's anchored and this guy flew past one without just picking it up for quick cash ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 20:00:00 -
[736] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Wouldn't it be funny if somebody actually launched a tower in a 0.9 system and just left it there thinking it's anchored and this guy flew past one without just picking it up for quick cash ?
^^ yes it would be.. hmm makes you wonder how often people do that.
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 20:02:00 -
[737] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Wouldn't it be funny if somebody actually launched a tower in a 0.9 system and just left it there thinking it's anchored and this guy flew past one without just picking it up for quick cash ?
hehe thats what I thought when i asked for the locations :p |
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 20:05:00 -
[738] - Quote
judging by his post history, all his posts are pure troll :) so our first guesses where right.. troll. but then again there are plenty of not too clever people in this game. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 20:12:00 -
[739] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1653262#post1653262
Quote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:OMG have yo uever seen a POS in a 0.8 systems? Or did these guides tell you that? I can see all nearby towers in d-scan. I've also seen few in 0.8 and 0.9 systems just by warping around.
I'll second the offer of 1b for the location of an Anchored POS in a .8 or .9 system. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 21:12:00 -
[740] - Quote
Lady Naween wrote:judging by his post history, all his posts are pure troll :) so our first guesses where right.. troll. but then again there are plenty of not too clever people in this game.
cripes...yea ur right... he was actually just playing brewlar and I feel rly dumb now for not seeing that earlier :(
well played, Jorma Morkkis |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 21:13:00 -
[741] - Quote
I'd be happy if invention was buffed beyond T2BP or if invention actually made items beyond T2 ie T2-B items that had slightly better stats or fitting requirements than current T2. This would allow bitter vets to keep their free hand out while making them irrelevant for inventors. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
49
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 21:16:00 -
[742] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'd be happy if invention was buffed beyond T2BP or if invention actually made items beyond T2 ie T2-B items that had slightly better stats or fitting requirements than current T2. This would allow bitter vets to keep their free hand out while making them irrelevant for inventors.
While we're at it...the Adrestia is too powerful and was never properly seeded in the game. It only went to AT winners. So did a large number of other ships that make my poor T2 ships OBSOLETE and not worth flying.
Let's get rid of all that stuff too.
WTB rifters with snowball launchers. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 22:07:00 -
[743] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'd be happy if invention was buffed beyond T2BP or if invention actually made items beyond T2 ie T2-B items that had slightly better stats or fitting requirements than current T2. This would allow bitter vets to keep their free hand out while making them irrelevant for inventors.
Invention is a far better investment than T2 BPOs.
Give me the 100b that a Hulk BPO costs (and the 8b of materials to produce 32 Hulks for the month) and I'll make much more than the 2.5b a month that the Hulk BPO can return (assuming ME 100, PE 50).
For instance, in the same time period, with the same capital (110b), I could run 2 characters inventing and building Hulks, making 520 Hulks for around a 14 Billion Isk profit (accounting for invention and Plex costs). (Actually, I run out of materials after 410 Hulks and a profit of 11 Billion ISK, so the month ends 5 days early)
That's 4 times the profit of the BPO.
If I owned a T2 BPO the first thing I'd do is sell it. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1174
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 22:10:00 -
[744] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:free hand out Seriously, still on with that nonsense ? Most of the current owners bought the BPOs fair and square with cold hard ISK. How exactly is any of that a free handout ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 22:11:00 -
[745] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:If I owned a T2 BPO the first thing I'd do is sell it.
Why? You would get huge profit using it. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1174
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 22:16:00 -
[746] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:If I owned a T2 BPO the first thing I'd do is sell it. Why? You would get huge profit using it. The same reason I'm not buying any T2 BPOs even if I could easily afford to buy several of those that keep constantly popping up for sale - because you would get an even greater profit with less running around required by using the amount of money the BPO is currently worth to do something else (oh, say, large-scale trading), that's why. T2 BPOs are NOT the only investments possible. In fact, T2 BPOs are amongst the worst performing investments in terms of RoI you can make in EVE right now - with breakevens in the range of 3 to 10 years (and most of them 5+), that's a paltry 0.83%-2.77% per month, while SEMI-CASUAL short-term "daytrading" can easily yield over 10% per month even at large total amounts involved. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 22:24:00 -
[747] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:If I owned a T2 BPO the first thing I'd do is sell it. Why? You would get huge profit using it.
You could try reading the rest of my post.
I could make 2.5b building 30 Hulks a month with a BPO, or I could use the same capital and make 10-15b building a few hundred through invention. Or, I could use it for even more lucrative investments.
2.5% a month is pretty crappy profit for Eve. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 23:17:00 -
[748] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:You could try reading the rest of my post.
I could make 2.5b building 30 Hulks a month with a BPO, or I could use the same capital and make 10-15b building a few hundred through invention. Or, I could use it for even more lucrative investments.
2.5% a month is pretty crappy profit for Eve.
That's same profit I get. Could be higher if I could get materials faster to build more.
You calculated it wrong. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 23:23:00 -
[749] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:You could try reading the rest of my post.
I could make 2.5b building 30 Hulks a month with a BPO, or I could use the same capital and make 10-15b building a few hundred through invention. Or, I could use it for even more lucrative investments.
2.5% a month is pretty crappy profit for Eve. That's same profit I get. Could be higher if I could get materials faster to build more. You calculated it wrong.
No, I didn't.
A T2 BPO can run through 8b worth of materials in a month producing some 30 Hulks. Total profit for 110b invested, 2.5b.
An Inventor can churn through 110b worth of materials in that same month, producing some few hundred Hulks. Total profit for 110b invested, some 11b.
Just because you're bad at something doesn't mean it's broken. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 23:25:00 -
[750] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Could be higher if I could get materials faster to build more. Here's a "novel" thought : how about buying them from the market ? If it's not profitable to buy them from the market, why do you even invent at all, just build the components and sell THOSE on the market, since apparently that's where YOU get most of the actual profit from, component manufacture. Plus, you don't need over 100 bil of ISK invested initially if you're doing invention. You're doing smaller batches anyway. You could easily get away with under 20b worth of materials. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 23:27:00 -
[751] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Could be higher if I could get materials faster to build more. Here's a "novel" thought : how about your BUY THEM FROM THE MARKET ?
Even less profit at these prices. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 23:32:00 -
[752] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Could be higher if I could get materials faster to build more. Here's a "novel" thought : how about your BUY THEM FROM THE MARKET ? Even less profit at these prices.
11b a month sounds like a pretty good profit to me. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 23:32:00 -
[753] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Even less profit at these prices. Oh, yeah, because somehow magically something that you make yourself has a lower value than the exact same thing you get from the market... that's sarcasm, by the way. If a big portion of your profit actually comes from manufacturing components, why do you even bother with invention at all to begin with and not just scale up your component production capabilities instead ? Or maybe it actually comes from trading the materials needed for the production of the components ? Then do THAT more instead.
Each step is either profitable, or it isn't, all by itself. Do whatever's the most profitable, and do it more. Then buy whatever else you actually need with the extra ISK you've made. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 01:39:00 -
[754] - Quote
Akita T wrote:If a big portion of your profit actually comes from manufacturing components, why do you even bother with invention at all to begin with and not just scale up your component production capabilities instead ?
If I want to manufacture most of the components, why I'm not allowed to do that? |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 02:15:00 -
[755] - Quote
Akita T wrote: NOT renting an office in whatever system you put the POS up is bordering on totally stupid
I'm not understanding the logic of this. How is it stupid? Someone's going to wardec me for unknown blueprints that I'm just going to move out of the system within 24 hours? pshh.....and? Is there something more that I'm missing? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 02:36:00 -
[756] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:If a big portion of your profit actually comes from manufacturing components, why do you even bother with invention at all to begin with and not just scale up your component production capabilities instead ? If I want to manufacture most of the components, why I'm not allowed to do that? Did he say your not allowed to, or anything about permission?
@Smohq Anmirorz you cant access the prints remotely when inside of a lab to begin with... also, some ppl actually do work or are not able to log every 24 hours in, so a war might not getting noticed. Not that big of a deal, true, but if u can avoid it that so easy why dont rent a offcie for 10.000 isk (if its not crowded)? I personnly share akitas opinion that a smart person would just rent that office |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 02:57:00 -
[757] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: @Smohq Anmirorz you cant access the prints remotely when inside of a lab to begin with... also, some ppl actually do work or are not able to log every 24 hours in, so a war might not getting noticed. Not that big of a deal, true, but if u can avoid it that so easy why dont rent a offcie for 10.000 isk (if its not crowded)? I personnly share akitas opinion that a smart person would just rent that office
Well, that's not stupid, then...just inconvenient. |
Katerwaul
The Scope Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 03:10:00 -
[758] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei, why are you still telling people how to build castles in their sandbox?
Who owns T2BPOs? The same types of people who have BPOs that have ME & PE research already completed on them:
1. Players who worked to get them while they were available. 2. Players who ganked them out of ships or stole them from corp while unlocked. 3. Players who have WORKED for them & purchased them from players who had them already.
Players who purchased them illegally using RMT should and do have their accounts punished for the action, just like all RMT is punished. The players who received them in an unauthorized fashion had them removed.
How do you even substantiate "They were simply handed as assets in secret to certain players by CCP" as a way that any of the t2 BPOs were seeded? Is there a reason they were handed out? (Reward for a contest? Noticed a bug in the game & determined that the players should have received the BPOs but didn't? Just felt like it?)
It's fair to say that EVERYTHING in the game is slanted so that players who have been playing longer can have an advantage...it's kind of how doing ANYTHING longer works. You are more experienced, more proficient, and more capable of doing anything you've done for an extended period of time. Working with everyone to improve New Eden -- Internet Spaceships Iz Serious Business. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 03:17:00 -
[759] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:If a big portion of your profit actually comes from manufacturing components, why do you even bother with invention at all to begin with and not just scale up your component production capabilities instead ? If I want to manufacture most of the components, why I'm not allowed to do that?
Where did Akita say you weren't allowed to? She said that it's not the most efficient use of your time. If you're not worried about the most efficient use of your time, and prefer to do things less efficiently, you don't get to complain when people reduce your profits by being more efficient than you. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 03:29:00 -
[760] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote: Well, that's not stupid, then...just inconvenient.
easy avoidable and pointless inconveniences are kindoff stupid per Definition.
|
|
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 03:54:00 -
[761] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote: Well, that's not stupid, then...just inconvenient.
easy avoidable and pointless inconveniences are kindoff stupid per Definition.
I was just trying to figure out if there was something I was missing. You're not talking about something inherently stupid, just situationally stupid. If all you're doing is copying T1 BPOs and inventing, how is there even that much risk? Copying takes a bit so if you're away for over 24 hours I suppose those might be at risk. Invention doesn't take that long and if you're successful you just take it with you. It just doesn't seem risky when, for many people, their structures are the biggest hit the owner will feel, not the few million in T1 BPO's he was working with. So for many it would seem to be pointless to worry about locking BPO's in a station just because 'everyone says so'. |
Cheeba Don
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
7
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 08:49:00 -
[762] - Quote
how the hell is this thread still going.
t2 bpos are the art collections of the internet spaceship world.
In RL, my $50,000,000 could be invested in stocks, bonds, etfs, new businesses etc but no, Im going to a buy a picasso.
T2 bpos are perfect for eve as they stand now. A seductively expensive collectors item, some of which offer decent returns on investment. |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 09:41:00 -
[763] - Quote
Cheeba Don wrote:T2 bpos are perfect for eve as they stand now. A seductively expensive collectors item, some of which offer decent returns on investment.
So, T2 BPO owners can compete against inventors after all.
I said it a long time ago... |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 11:49:00 -
[764] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote: I was just trying to figure out if there was something I was missing. You're not talking about something inherently stupid, just situationally stupid. If all you're doing is copying T1 BPOs and inventing, how is there even that much risk? Copying takes a bit so if you're away for over 24 hours I suppose those might be at risk. Invention doesn't take that long and if you're successful you just take it with you. It just doesn't seem risky when, for many people, their structures are the biggest hit the owner will feel, not the few million in T1 BPO's he was working with. So for many it would seem to be pointless to worry about locking BPO's in a station just because 'everyone says so'.
well, were we exclusivly talking about module invention? Ship invention tlakes longer than 24 hours, and depending on what you are inventing, (i.E. Marauders, Jump Frighters, Hulks) the BPO`s can have a value. Nobdoy said anything about locking the BPO`s down, just to have them stored in a station. A major reason to do so is also that oyu can access your BPO`s from elsewhere.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 12:30:00 -
[765] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:If a big portion of your profit actually comes from manufacturing components, why do you even bother with invention at all to begin with and not just scale up your component production capabilities instead ? If I want to manufacture most of the components, why I'm not allowed to do that? You ARE allowed to manufacture whatever the friggin' heck you want. You are NOT allowed to complain you're not making much profit if you build what you like not what gives you the best profit.
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Akita T wrote:NOT renting an office in whatever system you put the POS up is bordering on totally stupid I'm not understanding the logic of this. How is it stupid? Someone's going to wardec me for unknown blueprints that I'm just going to move out of the system within 24 hours? pshh.....and? Is there something more that I'm missing? Bordering on, but I guess that "totally" was indeed unwarranted. Apologies, I was up too long, tired and in the mood for hyperbole.
If you're doing just copy/invention/manufacture of modules (which have cheap T1 BPOs) in a corp that's just you and your alts, then yeah, true, the additional safety of a station is somewhat negligible. If you're handling T1 ship BPOs, depending on what ships, the blueprints themselves can have the potential of being much more expensive than the tower and structures on it (especially if you went with a small or med tower). If you're doing T2 BPO manufacture, you really don't want that one inside the tower. And if you're not the only person in the corp, you may want the non-negligible cost stuff that can be handled like that locked down in a corp office anyway.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:So, T2 BPO owners can compete against inventors after all. Define "can compete".
If you mean "more ISK from the same amount of initial investment", clearly no. If you mean "more product from the same amount of initial investment", still no. If you mean "cheaper unit manufacture cost ignoring initial investment", then yeah, sure, nobody was disputing THAT. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 14:57:00 -
[766] - Quote
CorInaXeraL wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'd be happy if invention was buffed beyond T2BP or if invention actually made items beyond T2 ie T2-B items that had slightly better stats or fitting requirements than current T2. This would allow bitter vets to keep their free hand out while making them irrelevant for inventors. While we're at it...the Adrestia is too powerful and was never properly seeded in the game. It only went to AT winners. So did a large number of other ships that make my poor T2 ships OBSOLETE and not worth flying. Let's get rid of all that stuff too. WTB rifters with snowball launchers.
Special ships can be popped/stolen/ransomed I'd be happy to fight any special ships. T2BPO how ever are pretty much indestructible as they never need to leave stations and CCP has went to a long effort insuring they are never stolen by allowing them to be used while locked. This goes for t1 bp's too . The ability to lock a blue print and still use it needs an urgent nerf in fact allowing a pos to produce from bp's inside a station is completely stupid too. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
52
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 15:12:00 -
[767] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CorInaXeraL wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I'd be happy if invention was buffed beyond T2BP or if invention actually made items beyond T2 ie T2-B items that had slightly better stats or fitting requirements than current T2. This would allow bitter vets to keep their free hand out while making them irrelevant for inventors. While we're at it...the Adrestia is too powerful and was never properly seeded in the game. It only went to AT winners. So did a large number of other ships that make my poor T2 ships OBSOLETE and not worth flying. Let's get rid of all that stuff too. WTB rifters with snowball launchers. Special ships can be popped/stolen/ransomed I'd be happy to fight any special ships. T2BPO how ever are pretty much indestructible as they never need to leave stations and CCP has went to a long effort insuring they are never stolen by allowing them to be used while locked. This goes for t1 bp's too . The ability to lock a blue print and still use it needs an urgent nerf in fact allowing a pos to produce from bp's inside a station is completely stupid too.
That Opus Luxury Yacht never leaves station either, because much like the QUAFE-edition Itty, it gets insta-gibbed by alpha-nados the moment it steps out of dock. Anyone caught flying with a T2BPO in their hold is most likely going to get treated to the same wonderful treatment of Tremor L punching them in the face.
The simple fact remains that, in this industry, Invention has surpassed T2BPO for profitability and productivity. But you'll continue to fight this until the day you cease to function in your pod because you are too dense to really listen to anything being told to you.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 18:52:00 -
[768] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The ability to lock a blue print and still use it needs an urgent nerf in fact allowing a pos to produce from bp's inside a station is completely stupid too. So, basically, you just want to remove the remote research and manufacture skills, and remove the ability to lock down stuff, and nothing else. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 19:16:00 -
[769] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Cheeba Don wrote:T2 bpos are perfect for eve as they stand now. A seductively expensive collectors item, some of which offer decent returns on investment. So, T2 BPO owners can compete against inventors after all. I said it a long time ago...
Point to one T2 BPO that offers anything like a good return on its investment. Multiple years to recoup the ISK invested is not anything like good.
Titan BPOs used to be good when the BPCs sold for 20b. Now that they sell for 8b, they're better than most T2 BPOs, but they're not really good investments (that's why you see them up for sale).
T2 BPOs used to be a great investment before invention because they were the bottleneck of the T2 manufacturing process. Now, because of invention, the Bottlenecks in the moon goo, and they're pretty terrible investments.
They may be able to compete on unit cost, but the number of ships and modules with demand low enough that that matters is tiny. Things like EAFs and T2 Plates have their prices dominated by BPO owners, but they'd not be worth inventing anyway because nobody uses them. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 19:17:00 -
[770] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The ability to lock a blue print and still use it needs an urgent nerf in fact allowing a pos to produce from bp's inside a station is completely stupid too. So, basically, you just want to remove the remote research and manufacture skills, and remove the ability to lock down stuff, and nothing else.
Brewlar hates Pie so much he wants to ban Oven Mitts so that Bakers can't do any work. Just to make sure they don't bake Pie. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 23:39:00 -
[771] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:the Bottlenecks in the moon goo, and they're pretty terrible investments.
Last time I checked Tech holders make profit from every Hulk destroyed even though they pay for it. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 23:59:00 -
[772] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:the Bottlenecks in the moon goo, and they're pretty terrible investments. Last time I checked Tech holders make profit from every Hulk destroyed even though they pay for it. The question is whether the added demand for Hulks (not very high) hikes up the price of Tech enough for that reward paid to be smaller than the added sales price (could be, or maybe not). The latest news (well, devblog) announcing technetium alchemy (from, IIRC, cobalt) in (probably) about a month from now can't do a lot of good for the price of technetium either (even at the posted low transformation rates, let alone if it gets buffed even higher later on). Then again, they also control a decent amount of cobalt moons, so, meh. Either way, the goons are having fun, so even if they don't actually make any extra cash but actually lose some by sponsoring perma-Hulkageddon, no major biggie.
With cheaper reaction products, T2 BPOs become LESS VALUABLE, so this latest devblog announcement is actually a further nerf to T2 BPOs (at least, for any of them using technetium, which is all ships and quite a few modules) and a (relative) buff to invention (of the same things) because demand is likely to pick a bit up - cheaper T2 ships, more T2 ship inventors, less profit per unit for T2 ship BPOs. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:35:00 -
[773] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:the Bottlenecks in the moon goo, and they're pretty terrible investments. Last time I checked Tech holders make profit from every Hulk destroyed even though they pay for it.
This is a T2 BPO whine thread, not an OTEC whine thread. Keep your goalpost moving on topic.
The possibility that players might have a financial motive to put a bounty on a class of ship isn't relevant to the fact that T2 BPOs are horrible investments.
If you think they're too profitable, then there's an easy way to deal with it. Buy one and get rich. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:38:00 -
[774] - Quote
Isn't it funny that CCP just FINALLY announced the much-expected nerf to moongoo (i.e. primarily tech) which hits T2 BPOs (their likely profits) in the balls badly ? :p And we just waited, oh, over two years for that... http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:41:00 -
[775] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:This is a T2 BPO whine thread, not an OTEC whine thread. Keep your goalpost moving on topic.
The possibility that players might have a financial motive to put a bounty on a class of ship isn't relevant to the fact that T2 BPOs are horrible investments.
If you think they're too profitable, then there's an easy way to deal with it. Buy one and get rich.
Most important reason for Hulkageddon was to create those profits to Hulk BPO owners. It's very likely that Helicity and Goons owns most of the Hulk BPOs. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:44:00 -
[776] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:This is a T2 BPO whine thread, not an OTEC whine thread. Keep your goalpost moving on topic.
The possibility that players might have a financial motive to put a bounty on a class of ship isn't relevant to the fact that T2 BPOs are horrible investments.
If you think they're too profitable, then there's an easy way to deal with it. Buy one and get rich. Most important reason for Hulkageddon was to create those profits to Hulk BPO owners. It's very likely that Heicity and Goons owns most of the Hulk BPOs.
You tried this stupid argument before. A Hulk BPO is a terrible investment. It earns maybe 3b ISK a month on over 100b ISK of capital. Besides that, Hulk pricing is totally dominated by inventors, not BPO owners.
If you think T2 BPOs are too profitable and easy, why haven't you bought one? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:45:00 -
[777] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:You tried this stupid argument before. A Hulk BPO is a terrible investment. It earns maybe 3b ISK a month on over 100b ISK of capital. Besides that, Hulk pricing is totally dominated by inventors, not BPO owners.
Not if you own like 10 of them. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:46:00 -
[778] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Most important reason for Hulkageddon was to create those profits to Hulk BPO owners. Can you make up your mind ? Was it Hulk BPOs or tech moons ? Because the INCOME from a single tech moon overshadows the PROFIT of a single Hulk BPO, badly. And there's hundreds of tech moons but only dozens of Hulk BPOs.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Not if you own like 10 of them. Even if you own ALL of them.
Total monthly income from all tech moons as about a month ago : between 3.5 and 5 trillion ISK, give or take a trillion. Total monthly profit from all Hulk BPOs : under 0.1 trillion ISK. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:49:00 -
[779] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:You tried this stupid argument before. A Hulk BPO is a terrible investment. It earns maybe 3b ISK a month on over 100b ISK of capital. Besides that, Hulk pricing is totally dominated by inventors, not BPO owners. Not if you own like 10 of them.
Ok, 30b ISK a month on 1 Trillion Isk of Capital.
And that produces 300 Hulks a month to Jita's consumption of ~2500 Hulks a month. Still dominated by Inventors. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:50:00 -
[780] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Can you make up your mind ? Was it Hulk BPOs or tech moons ? Because the INCOME from a single tech moon overshadows the PROFIT of a single Hulk BPO, badly. And there's hundreds of tech moons but only dozens of Hulk BPOs.
Clueless as always? Goonies own all Tech moons and most of the Hulk BPOs. 1 + 1 = 2? |
|
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:51:00 -
[781] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:Can you make up your mind ? Was it Hulk BPOs or tech moons ? Because the INCOME from a single tech moon overshadows the PROFIT of a single Hulk BPO, badly. And there's hundreds of tech moons but only dozens of Hulk BPOs. Clueless as always? Goonies own all Tech moons and most of the Hulk BPOs. 1 + 1 = 2?
Why in the world would you want to tie up 100 Billion is in a Hulk BPO when you have a Tech moon? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:51:00 -
[782] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Ok, 30b ISK a month on 1 Trillion Isk of Capital still terrible.
They get trillion from their moons every month. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1175
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:52:00 -
[783] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Clueless as always? Goonies own all Tech moons and most of the Hulk BPOs. 1 + 1 = 2? Compare something between 3.5-5 trilion to 0.1 trilion. Guess which one is higher. And by how much. I'll wait.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:53:00 -
[784] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Ok, 30b ISK a month on 1 Trillion Isk of Capital still terrible. They get trillion from their moons every month.
Yes. And what in that Trillion Isk a month income would that make them take stupid pills and invest in Hulk BPOs instead of preparing for a future Tech nerf? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:55:00 -
[785] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Yes. And what in that Trillion Isk a month income would that make them take stupid pills and invest in Hulk BPOs instead of preparing for a future Tech nerf?
They're planning on taking all Cobalt moons. They already own some of them. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1176
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:55:00 -
[786] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:future Tech nerf? More like next month's tech nerf And they were prepared. They took over Cobalt moons galore. Allegedly.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:They're planning on taking all Cobalt moons. They already own some of them. I'm guessing they didn't bother buying T2 BPOs when they could use those ISK for ships to control new better sources of income. Yarr. Or checkmate. Or yarrmate. Whatever.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 00:57:00 -
[787] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Yes. And what in that Trillion Isk a month income would that make them take stupid pills and invest in Hulk BPOs instead of preparing for a future Tech nerf? They're planning on taking all Cobalt moons. They already own some of them.
That's not an answer to my question. What in their Trillion Isk a month income would make them decide to invest in Hulk BPOs? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:05:00 -
[788] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:That's not an answer to my question. What in their Trillion Isk a month income would make them decide to invest in Hulk BPOs?
They've known about the nerf a month or two. You asked why they would buy T2 BPOs they already own instead of taking all Cobalt moons from other alliances.
First: they don't need to buy those BPOs because they already own them. Second: they are already taking all Cobalt moons from other alliances and have been doing quite some time.
But of course you should know about this or you're clueless about what your alliance is doing. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1177
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:08:00 -
[789] - Quote
If they KNEW about the nerf, since they're not completely clueless about EVE economics (at least some near the top know what they're doing), it means they ALSO knew that T2 BPOs will lose value BECAUSE of the moongoo//tech nerf, so they should have SOLD those BPOs while people were still valuing them much more highly. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:20:00 -
[790] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:That's not an answer to my question. What in their Trillion Isk a month income would make them decide to invest in Hulk BPOs? They've known about the nerf a month or two. You asked why they would buy T2 BPOs they already own instead of taking all Cobalt moons from other alliances. First: they don't need to buy those BPOs because they already own them. Second: they are already taking all Cobalt moons from other alliances and have been doing quite some time. But of course you should know about this or you're clueless about what your alliance is doing.
1. You keep confusing Sniggwaffe (Alliance: Your Votes Don't Count) with other alliances.
2. Do you understand what opportunity cost is? The 100 Billion Isk each Hulk BPO represents is better invested in any number of other things. Why would they keep it invested in T2 BPOs?
3. If you have any evidence to suggest that Devs have leaked information inappropriately to anyone, please send that information to CCP's IA department. Otherwise baseless accusations of misconduct are annoying. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
|
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
34
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:26:00 -
[791] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:Can you make up your mind ? Was it Hulk BPOs or tech moons ? Because the INCOME from a single tech moon overshadows the PROFIT of a single Hulk BPO, badly. And there's hundreds of tech moons but only dozens of Hulk BPOs. Clueless as always? Goonies own all Tech moons and most of the Hulk BPOs. 1 + 1 = 2?
before you claimed Helicity owns the hulk bpos, now it is goons?
you are aware that helicity is in Shadow Cartel and we are NOT blue to goons.
so. which is it? :)
and i can assure you helicity doesnt have hulk bpos, we gank hulks because it is fun. |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:27:00 -
[792] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:3. If you have any evidence to suggest that Devs have leaked information inappropriately to anyone, please send that information to CCP's IA department. Otherwise baseless accusations of misconduct are annoying.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1655270#post1655270
Lady Naween wrote:you are aware that helicity is in Shadow Cartel and we are NOT blue to goons.
Helicity is friend of Goons = Shadow Cartel is friend of Goons. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
457
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:35:00 -
[793] - Quote
I believe that they're referring to knowing that Tech would be nerfed at some point in the future. Some people made some educated guesses about what the nerf would look like. Those guesses being right doesn't mean that they knew anything.
This still doesn't explain why they'd ever bother to invest in T2 BPOs. Stop trying to drive the goalposts away from the topic into your insane conspiratorial ramblings. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1177
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:35:00 -
[794] - Quote
Dude, start recognizing highly transparent lies for the purposes of trolling and/or empty bragging based on common knowledge claimed to be insider info. You're embarrassing yourself and you don't even realize it.
Also, again, if they REALLY KNEW that tech would be nerfed, what do you think would be the convoluted thinking of NOT getting rid of as many T2 BPOs as possible ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Lady Naween
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
34
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:39:00 -
[795] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Helicity is friend of Goons = Shadow Cartel is friend of Goons.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
of course.. hey i got some more tinfoil for you, i think you need it
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:55:00 -
[796] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote: Death star needs more Fuel than unfit towers, there exist 5000 T2 BPOs of each type, BPO`s have to be in the labs, logic is stupid, ...Guides
Goons dont have any Hulk BPO`s
|
Doktor Malinowka
420 Enterprises Paradigm Defence
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 01:57:00 -
[797] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:stuff.
trolling of unfunny ppl reimains unfunny |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 15:25:00 -
[798] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The ability to lock a blue print and still use it needs an urgent nerf in fact allowing a pos to produce from bp's inside a station is completely stupid too. So, basically, you just want to remove the remote research and manufacture skills, and remove the ability to lock down stuff, and nothing else.
Removing BPO ability to be used while lock would be a good start to nerfing T2BPO's alongside a buff to inventions ME. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 15:27:00 -
[799] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:This is a T2 BPO whine thread, not an OTEC whine thread. Keep your goalpost moving on topic.
The possibility that players might have a financial motive to put a bounty on a class of ship isn't relevant to the fact that T2 BPOs are horrible investments.
If you think they're too profitable, then there's an easy way to deal with it. Buy one and get rich. Most important reason for Hulkageddon was to create those profits to Hulk BPO owners. It's very likely that Heicity and Goons owns most of the Hulk BPOs. You tried this stupid argument before. A Hulk BPO is a terrible investment. It earns maybe 3b ISK a month on over 100b ISK of capital. Besides that, Hulk pricing is totally dominated by inventors, not BPO owners. If you think T2 BPOs are too profitable and easy, why haven't you bought one?
I don't care if a T2BPO is worth billions I'd like to trade in my RP for one please. No body would moan if CCP sold T2BPO's for 100 billion isk the reason T2BPO were moronic was because they are a highly valuable item that was made available for very little effort which undermined the whole eve economy.
Make Eve real remove T2BPO. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 16:07:00 -
[800] - Quote
Brewlar the Brain wrote: I don't care if a T2BPO is worth billions I'd like to trade in my RP for one please. No body would moan if CCP sold T2BPO's for
1. again, that was never the case in eve, you could only particpate in a lottery, never be sure you would get the print, just a very small chance. 2. lol... YOU are the only one really moaning here, just you, a single guy and his alts.
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1183
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 17:22:00 -
[801] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:No body would moan if CCP sold T2BPO's for 100 billion isk You mean, other than just about any active inventor, which are the people you're supposedly claiming you're trying to aid ?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 17:25:00 -
[802] - Quote
I don't post on forums with alts as that is sad. T2BPO's are disliked by the majority of EVE players and there have been several threads across this years many of which were deleted by CCP. So I don't need alts to keep this at the top of the forum, other players will do that for me particularly new players to invention who can see the overwhelming unfairness that T2BPO's provide bitter vets. In fact I might create a poll to run along side Akita's in the communication forum.
I was a little surprised to see this still very active thread because I stopped posting as I was concentrating on getting my Serenity alt into concentrated ISK making. I do hope they combine the servers one day as I will have a lot of Serenity wealth to cross over.
By the way can you please list my alts for me, I'm just interested in seeing which chars I supposedly own. By the way I have two tranquillity accounts so please limit your choice to six. (In reality I only ever post on this char.) but entertain me. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1183
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 17:26:00 -
[803] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO's are disliked by the majority of EVE players Anecdotal evidence, hearsay, unsubstantiated claim.
Quote: In fact I might create a poll to run along side Akita's in the communication forum. Be my guest. The other poll shows more pro-T2 BPO than anti-T2 BPO people active.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I do hope they combine the servers one day Link somehow, to some degree, maybe. Merge, no snowball's chance in red hot lava. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 17:29:00 -
[804] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:No body would moan if CCP sold T2BPO's for 100 billion isk You mean, other than just about any active inventor, which are the people you're supposedly claiming you're trying to aid ? You're kind of contradicting yourself. Every additional T2 BPO lowers inventor market share, down to the point where no invention would be profitable anymore, and eventually even T2 BPO ownership would barely be worth more than T1 BPO ownership.
I was talking about originally instead of the lottery not now. Introducing more T2BPO's would be stupid. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1183
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 17:35:00 -
[805] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I was talking about originally instead of the lottery not now.
So how exactly would that change anything from the way it is now if most of those T2 BPOs would have already changed more than one pair of hands ? Answer - it would be the exact same situation we have now. Possibly worse if they would not have capped the number of T2 BPOs.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Introducing more T2BPO's would be stupid.
The same way removing all existing ones FORCEFULLY would be equally stupid for many other reasons already explained in detail multiple times.
The best alternative would be a time machine to stop them from ever having existed, but we can't have that yet, as far as we know, given current human technology level.
NOT changing the current BPO situation but buffing invention instead is the overall least damaging alternative REALISTICALLY POSSIBLE for now. CCP are continuously and slowly buffing invention either directly or indirectly. One of the largest buffs to invention (which is also an indirect significant nerf to T2 BPO value) was just devblogged about days ago.
You should be freaking ecstatic about it, yet you keep on repeating the same old unfeasible mantra. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 19:37:00 -
[806] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: T2BPO's are disliked by the majority of EVE players how do you get that? Havent you noticed that even in this T2 BPO-hate thread the big majority dont seem to share your opinion? is that some kind of subconscious-selfprotection wich doesnt let you see all these posts??
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I was a little surprised to see this still very active thread because I stopped posting
guess why? See that as a prove that the most discusion happend due you very special and unique kind of argumentation, not the actuall topic. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
459
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 19:38:00 -
[807] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Akita T wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:No body would moan if CCP sold T2BPO's for 100 billion isk You mean, other than just about any active inventor, which are the people you're supposedly claiming you're trying to aid ? You're kind of contradicting yourself. Every additional T2 BPO lowers inventor market share, down to the point where no invention would be profitable anymore, and eventually even T2 BPO ownership would barely be worth more than T1 BPO ownership. I was talking about originally instead of the lottery not now. Introducing more T2BPO's would be stupid.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I don't care if a T2BPO is worth billions I'd like to trade in my RP for one please.
Which is it? Are you moaning about not being able to "Trade in" your RP for a BPO (in a way that was never possible in the first place)? Or are you moaning that you didn't start playing EVE early enough.
If you think T2 BPOs are overpowered, why haven't you bought any? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Uris Vitgar
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 20:45:00 -
[808] - Quote
T2 BPOs obviously don't belong in the current system, frankly I'm amazed that there is any support for their continued existence at all. They are a relic of a bygone age. The problem is not "should T2 BPOs be removed", it's how- bear in mind CCP's general policy of not taking away what they have given |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1183
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 21:22:00 -
[809] - Quote
Uris Vitgar wrote:T2 BPOs obviously don't belong in the current system, frankly I'm amazed that there is any support for their continued existence at all. They are a relic of a bygone age. The problem is not "should T2 BPOs be removed", it's how- bear in mind CCP's general policy of not taking away what they have given Or, in other words, you CAN'T remove them, so the only reasonable alternative is to make them be worth less, earn less profits, and be less advantageous compared to invention. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
459
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 21:49:00 -
[810] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Uris Vitgar wrote:T2 BPOs obviously don't belong in the current system, frankly I'm amazed that there is any support for their continued existence at all. They are a relic of a bygone age. The problem is not "should T2 BPOs be removed", it's how- bear in mind CCP's general policy of not taking away what they have given Or, in other words, you CAN'T remove them, so the only reasonable alternative is to make them be worth less, earn less profits, and be less advantageous compared to invention.
Happily, CCP just announced a buff to Invention compared to BPOs by introducing Tech alchemy. They're also planning on giving underused T2 Items a reason to be used (T2 Plates), reducing the number of items that BPOs control the price. Hopefully they'll buff it again soon by reducing the click festival. After that, I don't think there are any more low hanging fruits, but then, BPOs do still serve a useful purpose by providing a supply of those items that have little demand at prices lower than what inventors would have to charge to account for the slow sales. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
|
Niclin
ExoNova Solutions
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.21 21:50:00 -
[811] - Quote
I've played this game on an off for quite a few years now. I was around when they seeded T2 BPO's etc...
I have not ever been an industrialist, scientist or anything at all along those lines. I was idly browsing this forum because I was bored at work, and was curious about mining and such. I barely have any of those skills trained at all.
Although I can't weigh in on the argument from an industrialist point of view, I really hope those that would like T2 BPO's removed from the game have a far better advocate than the OP and his supporters in this thread.
The entire argument reads like bad headlines from a trashy tabloid newspaper. Not a single reasoned, logical argument, backed up with evidence in this thread from those wanting the BPO's removed.
It is shocking. I am surprised the devs even read these forums these days, but if they do, I hope they do not take seriously such drivel as this.
Given the number of threads the OP is making on this subject, it smells more like a witch hunt than any genuine concern for game balance.
The only thing I would like to refute is the assertion that the T2 BPO situation drives new players away from the game.
Personally I would say by the time a new player had even got to the stage of being aware of T2 BPO's, they would have already quit the game because of the numerous other (extremely high) hurdles EVE puts in your path, or would be here to stay and using their initiative to make ISK the way they choose.
I highly doubt many (if any) new players will sit at their desk saying, " damn man years ago CCP gave some people some free stuff that has some affect on the market." /ragequit.
No... just.. no.
Nic
|
Uris Vitgar
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 10:13:00 -
[812] - Quote
Akita T wrote: Or, in other words, you CAN'T remove them
Sure you can. If it were up to me I would just convert all the t2 BPOs to BPCs with about 10 times the usual maximum number of runs- perhaps you could give a description in the item saying the data crystals corrupted or something. That gives the owners plenty of time to find a new source of income. You could even apply this to t1 BPOs to make it fair, say that they begin to decay after a certain numer of years.
Would CCP do something as bold as that? I don't know. Probably not, but it's always an option. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 10:17:00 -
[813] - Quote
One. My arguments are sound. The supporters of T2BPO just make petty personal attacks except Akita who makes valid points. My other post
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=135359
had 7 people opposing T2BPO's before an over zealous ISD closed the topic, I expect it will be re-opened shortly, after all this topic was once locked too :).
T2BPO's do drive people out of the game and there have been plenty of forum rage quits over the matter, bans for complaining about T2BPO's and T20.
''Given the number of threads the OP is making on this subject, it smells more like a witch hunt than any genuine concern for game balance.''
I have made one other thread and the only other reason I'd open another is when ISD unfairly block them but then that just spawns 5 separate threads across the forums. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 10:24:00 -
[814] - Quote
Ways of keeping T2BPO's and just making them irreverent.
1. Allow invention to have a natural 100% ME and PE instead of the -10%.
2. Prevent locked BP's from being used in manufacture, only allow unlocked BP's to manufacture.
3. Stop remote BP manufacturing if BP's want to produce from POS make them put their assets at risk inside a pos structure.
These or a combination would be an excellent nerf to the T2BPO. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 10:43:00 -
[815] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Or, in other words, you CAN'T remove them
The fact that you don't want them removed doesn't mean it can't be done.
Pipa Porto wrote:Happily, CCP just announced a buff to Invention compared to BPOs by introducing Tech alchemy.
No, that will be buff for T2 BPO owners. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 11:09:00 -
[816] - Quote
wow, why would you show us such an embarrassing thread? You got trolled to f*** because your initial post was simply stupid, thats why it got locked.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: 1. Allow invention to have a natural 100% ME and PE instead of the -10%.
2. Prevent locked BP's from being used in manufacture, only allow unlocked BP's to manufacture.
3. Stop remote BP manufacturing if owners want to produce from POS make them put their assets at risk inside a pos structure.
1. AGAIN it would not help Inventors, wich got explained 100 of times itt 2/3.that would infact hit inventors, t1 Producers, Capital Producers so much more than a T2 BPO owner who only deals with his BPOs once mer month.
@uris that idea of converted BPC`s got brought up and dropped so many times already...if CCP would do that and flood the players with T2 BPC`s the T2 market would simply crash down |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 11:17:00 -
[817] - Quote
ehm no.
As T2 production costs isk in materials so no it could not crash or people would simply reprocess items for materials. T2BPO owners had several years of unopposed ISK making manufacture. It is time for CCP to remove T2BPO and let Tranquillity server grow.
Remove or nerf T2BPO, make EVE real and let it grow. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 11:51:00 -
[818] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO owners had several years of unopposed ISK making manufacture. yep and there will be many years of unopposed ISK making coming, just deal with it and stop crying, you wont change things anyways |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 11:55:00 -
[819] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:T2BPO owners had several years of unopposed ISK making manufacture. yep and there will be many years of unopposed ISK making coming, just deal with it and stop crying, you wont change things anyways
I agree it's highly unlikely that CCP will stop handing out massive advantages to pet players and I really think that this point is EVE's biggest draw back. This game would be far better if it as a sandbox and player driven game unlike the scripted trash that it is now. I like EVE online but I hate the poor decisions that CCP often make and that is why I'm playing on Serenity and Tin City EVE online which is superior to CCP's although I do not doubt that tin city will ruin their version by introducing game breaking content at some point to. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 13:17:00 -
[820] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:[quote=shar'ra matcevsovski] I'm playing on Serenity and Tin City EVE online which is superior to CCP's although I do not doubt that tin city will ruin their version by introducing game breaking content at some point to.
sounds like Serenity needs some T2 BPO`s seeded by a "lottery" to fix that problem...challenge accepted
|
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 15:54:00 -
[821] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:[quote=shar'ra matcevsovski] I'm playing on Serenity and Tin City EVE online which is superior to CCP's although I do not doubt that tin city will ruin their version by introducing game breaking content at some point to. sounds like Serenity needs some T2 BPO`s seeded by a "lottery" to fix that problem...challenge accepted
LOL they are not that dumb. Serenity will out grow tranquillity for this reason as soon as Tin City launch a full English client instead of asking English players use a half modded client. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 18:53:00 -
[822] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:Or, in other words, you CAN'T remove them The fact that you don't want them removed doesn't mean it can't be done.
Context, it matters.
Uris Vitgar wrote:bear in mind CCP's general policy of not taking away what they have given
Quote:Pipa Porto wrote:Happily, CCP just announced a buff to Invention compared to BPOs by introducing Tech alchemy. No, that will be buff for T2 BPO owners.
BPO owners have an advantage on material costs. When material costs decrease, that advantage decreases. Cheap inputs reduce the advantage that waste conscious manufacturers (BPO owners) have over wasteful manufacturers (Inventors).
Reducing the price of inputs is a relative buff to inventors. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 19:00:00 -
[823] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I agree it's highly unlikely that CCP will stop handing out massive advantages to pet players.
Got any evidence of Dev misconduct, please send it to CCP's IA department. If you have and they haven't dealt with it, you might try the media.
T2 BPOs stopped being seeded like 5 years ago, and you have, as yet, provided no evidence to suggest that the Lottery was performed unfairly. You've also failed to show how T2 BPOs are a "massive advantage" since they represent an enormous amount of capital investment (no matter how they were acquired, the opportunity cost of not selling them is functionally equivalent to the opportunity cost of buying them) for a piddling little profit.
T2 BPOs used to be massively OP, allowing organizations to easily monopolize T2 items. Then invention came, and T2 BPOs have been marginalized to the point that they only affect the markets of those few items so unpopular that BPOs can fill the demand. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 19:04:00 -
[824] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:As T2 production costs isk in materials so no it could not crash or people would simply reprocess items for materials.
Yes, reprocessing your T2 stuff for the Morphite content. You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
The BPC idea (depending on how it was implemented) could easily crash the T2 markets by allowing former BPO owners to essentially run their BPO in parallel, which would give them an enormous advantage over Inventors until the BPCs run out, flooding the market with T2 items at low prices. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 19:34:00 -
[825] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:BPO owners have an advantage on material costs. When material costs decrease, that advantage decreases. Cheap inputs reduce the advantage that waste conscious manufacturers (BPO owners) have over wasteful manufacturers (Inventors).
Reducing the price of inputs is a relative buff to inventors.
It will help T2 BPO owners more. CCP is going to remove only disadvantage from T2 BPO.
T2 BPO owners will get more profit because material costs will be reduced. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 19:53:00 -
[826] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:BPO owners have an advantage on material costs. When material costs decrease, that advantage decreases. Cheap inputs reduce the advantage that waste conscious manufacturers (BPO owners) have over wasteful manufacturers (Inventors).
Reducing the price of inputs is a relative buff to inventors. It will help T2 BPO owners more. CCP is going to remove only disadvantage from T2 BPO. T2 BPO owners will get more profit because material costs will be reduced.
T2 BPOs disadvantages are their immense capital cost and their inability to run in parallel. This doesn't touch those.
It reduces the value of their efficiency advantage, since the material cost will represent a smaller proportion of the invention dominated price (and prices will be lower).
If you believe otherwise, show your reasoning and prove it. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 21:03:00 -
[827] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:It reduces the value of their efficiency advantage, since the material cost will represent a smaller proportion of the invention dominated price (and prices will be lower).
Why only invention dominated prices? Why it doesn't affect material costs for T2 BPO owners? |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
461
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 21:13:00 -
[828] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:It reduces the value of their efficiency advantage, since the material cost will represent a smaller proportion of the invention dominated price (and prices will be lower). Why only invention dominated prices? Why it doesn't affect material costs for T2 BPO owners?
The pricing of most T2 items is determined by invention costs. That's what it means for the price to be dominated by inventors.
It does, but since they use less, they get less benefit from material cost going down than inventors. Lower material prices reduce the difference in production costs between inventors and BPO owners. Since that difference is the entire economic value of a BPO, reducing the difference reduces the value of that BPO.
For items whose market is dominated by BPOs (the ****** ones that nobody would bother inventing in the first place because there's no demand), prices will simply drop and BPOs will loose a little bit of ground to inventors, since lower prices often leads to increased demand.
If you think Tech Alchemy helps BPO owners more than Inventors, please, show your reasoning. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 21:26:00 -
[829] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:It does, but since they use less, they get less benefit from material cost going down than inventors. Lower material prices reduce the difference in production costs between inventors and BPO owners. Since that difference is the entire economic value of a BPO, reducing the difference reduces the value of that BPO.
Why you keep mentioning the cost of BPO on every post? Like it's very difficult to get billions for nullbears. For example there was one big alliance that got 15 trillion (or something like that) removed from them not that long ago.
If BPO owners need less materials / module or ship they will get really big bonus to their profit. |
Pipa Porto
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
462
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 21:50:00 -
[830] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:It does, but since they use less, they get less benefit from material cost going down than inventors. Lower material prices reduce the difference in production costs between inventors and BPO owners. Since that difference is the entire economic value of a BPO, reducing the difference reduces the value of that BPO. Why you keep mentioning the cost of BPO on every post? Like it's very difficult to get billions for nullbears. For example there was one big alliance that got 15 trillion (or something like that) removed from them not that long ago. If BPO owners need less materials / module or ship they will get really big bonus to their profit.
Because having lots of money doesn't mean you're stupid. Opportunity cost is opportunity cost no matter how much money you have.
BPO owners materials cost decreases, sure. But inventors material cost decreases more, shrinking the gap between BPOs and invention. Since that Gap is the entire value of the BPO, that means the BPOs are worth less than they were before.
In other words, the BPO owners cost to produce drops, but the price of the item drops by a larger amount (because the price is set by inventors), reducing the BPO's profits. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 22:35:00 -
[831] - Quote
The cost of obtaining a BPO was 0 isk to a couple of billion ISK in RP. Never forget this fact. If T2BPO's were introduced at the cost of billions of isk and were sold at a set rate by CCP there would be no complaints.
CCP has removed all worth out of the EVE economy by introducing items that are worth billions of ISK with out billions of isk worth of effort being expanded by the players. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
117
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 22:39:00 -
[832] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:In other words, the BPO owners cost to produce drops, but the price of the item drops by a larger amount (because the price is set by inventors), reducing the BPO's profits.
T2 invuls for 50k? Yeah, not going to happen. |
Pipa Porto
462
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 22:52:00 -
[833] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:In other words, the BPO owners cost to produce drops, but the price of the item drops by a larger amount (because the price is set by inventors), reducing the BPO's profits. T2 invuls for 50k? Yeah, not going to happen.
What the hell are you talking about?
If you think that Tech alchemy will help BPO owners more than inventors, show exactly how. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Pipa Porto
462
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 22:55:00 -
[834] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The cost of obtaining a BPO was 0 isk to a couple of billion ISK in RP. Never forget this fact. If T2BPO's were introduced at the cost of billions of isk and were sold at a set rate by CCP there would be no complaints.
CCP has removed all worth out of the EVE economy by introducing items that are worth billions of ISK with out billions of isk worth of effort being expanded by the players.
Then quit. Goodbye.
The lottery isn't relevant to the discussion of removing BPOs unless you have a time machine. They're commodities on the market just like any other, and they have a pretty terrible rate of return.
If you think they're overpowered now, put your money where your mouth is and Buy one to prove it. If you're still complaining about a game mechanic that stopped existing 5 YEARS ago, shut up and leave. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:01:00 -
[835] - Quote
Why is there a time limit on correcting an error? CCP was wrong about T2BPO's 5 years ago and they are wrong now. Fix the error or hear about it till EVE dies. Even if I do leave the game someone else will just notice the unavoidable problems about T2BPO's like all the anti T2BPO martyrs before me.
Well that is unless CCP start banning people again over their T2BPO stupidity. T2BPO threads have existed since T2BPO's were introduced and they will continue until T2 BPO's are removed or nerfed so that invention can under cut T2 BPO's in ME.
Remove T2BPO make EVE real. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
117
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:05:00 -
[836] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:What the hell are you talking about?
You mentioned that price of T2 modules/ships will drop a lot...
Pipa Porto wrote:If you think that Tech alchemy will help BPO owners more than inventors, show exactly how.
First of all, you don't have to invent anything. That's already huge advantage. Second, price of moon materials will drop noticeably. (Needed for T2 production). Third, T2 BPO owners need less materials to produce T2 module/ship. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1185
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:10:00 -
[837] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The cost of obtaining a BPO was 0 isk to a couple of billion ISK in RP. Never forget this fact. Nobody is forgetting that. It is however wholly irrelevant at this point in time. Also, you can bet your sweet behind that there have been at least 0.5 billion if not over 5 billion RP consumed in order to obtain those BPOs. At a minimalistic rate of just 2k ISK per RP (most fields are worth noticeably more today), that's 1 trillion to 10 trillion ISK's worth if those RPs would have been carried over to this day, and actually a whole lot more if turned in near the start of invention. That's trillion with a T, not with a B. And if you make the price conversion in terms of ISK-to-GTC back in the day, it's more like 5 to 50 trillion ISK. With a T.
Quote:If T2BPO's were introduced at the cost of billions of isk and were sold at a set rate by CCP there would be no complaints. Yes, there would be. PLENTY. If limited amounts, what would have been the way to get one ? Accusation of favoritism for those NOT getting one in time. The main reason the lottery was scratched. If NOT limited amounts, value would quickly drop below "new purchase" price (due to some people buying some for convenience and eventually selling them cheaper, with supply of BPOs over demand of BPOs) and invention would become POINTLESS, with T2 items selling for not much over manufacture cost plus minimal income over many years of ownership.
Quote:CCP has removed all worth out of the EVE economy by introducing items that are worth billions of ISK with out billions of isk worth of effort being expanded by the players. That line of reasoning is not really that accurate nor very useful. The economy works by a system of sinks and faucets of ISK combined with heavy-duty trading of goods. The amount of assets is almost completely decoupled from the amount of ISK in the economy at any given time.
Officer items worth trillions of ISK also keep being introduced without proportional effort being expended by the players - the effort is hardly much higher than hunting similar NPCs, but the reward is many orders of magnitude higher for the lucky few. Tournament rewards also arguably sell for much over the likely expended effort. Minerals, PI products and various other steady drops (other than officer loot) are "created" by expending some effort indeed, but most of them do not "eat up" much ISK to be generated, if they do, it's usually well under their value.
You should be far more worried about things like too rewarding L4 highsec missions or incursions, 0.0 NPC bounties, the ship insurance system, removing the drone poo drops with bounties, and so on ond so forth, which combined create way more ISK than it's being destroyed (to the tune of ONE TRILLION ISK PER DAY not so long ago, while less than a fifth is being taken out). In the past 5 years since T2 BPOs have no longer been seeded, there has most likely been SEVERAL TIMES MORE ISK added to the EVE economy from various faucets unmatched by sinks than what the entirety of T2 BPOs are likely valued at NOWADAYS, let alone what they might have been valued at back 5 years ago, shortly after invention was introduced.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:15:00 -
[838] - Quote
BrewlardGÇÖArc wrote:. Even if I do leave the game someone else will just notice the unavoidable problems about T2BPO's like all the anti T2BPO martyrs before me.
Do you know that this is not a movie and you are most certainly not a martyr? What is wrong with you poor man |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1185
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:19:00 -
[839] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:If you think that Tech alchemy will help BPO owners more than inventors, show exactly how. First of all, you don't have to invent anything. That's already huge advantage. Second, price of moon materials will drop noticeably. (Needed for T2 production). Third, T2 BPO owners need less materials to produce T2 module/ship. Say a hypothetical T2 BPO can produce 100 units per month per blueprint, but with whatever's the optimal invention process for minimal cost you can only make 60 per manufacture line (up to 660 units per month per fully skilled manufacturer). The current T2 BPO cost of one unit is 100 mil ISK (out of which 50 mil technetium), while the invented unit costs 160 mil ISK (out of which 70 mil technetium) and the market price is 170 mil ISK. T2 BPO profit is 7 bil ISK/month, inventor profit per line is 0.6 bil, but can be scaled up to 6.6 bil ISK/month via multiple lines (and a lot more effort). Now, technetium price gets slashed in half. T2 BPO production costs fall to 75 mil ISK (out of which 25 mil tech) while invented units cost 125 mil ISK (35 mil technetium). The market price will most likely settle at around 135 mil ISK, maybe a tad bit higher. T2 BPO profit is now 6 bil ISK/month (1 bil ISK less), while the inventor profit remains the same or even goes up a little bit.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
462
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:19:00 -
[840] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:What the hell are you talking about? You mentioned that price of T2 modules/ships will drop a lot... Pipa Porto wrote:If you think that Tech alchemy will help BPO owners more than inventors, show exactly how. First of all, you don't have to invent anything. That's already huge advantage. Second, price of moon materials will drop noticeably. (Needed for T2 production). Third, T2 BPO owners need less materials to produce T2 module/ship.
I said that the price would drop by a larger amount than the drop in the BPO owner's material's cost would drop. This is because the material costs of Inventors, who use more materials per run, will drop by a larger amount than the BPO owner's material costs will drop, and since inventors set the market, the price will drop by the amount that inventor's costs drop, not by the amount BPO owner's material costs drop.
Not having to invent is a convenience, since the invention costs are already figured into the final price, because supply is dominated by inventors. This is more than outweighed by the fact that a BPOs have a tiny production volume. Yes, Tech prices will drop slightly (Akita T did an analysis in another thread). That will benefit Inventors more than it will benefit BPO owners. Yes, they do, so material cost changes affect them less than Inventors. This means that they benefit less from material cost decreases than Inventors do. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
117
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:30:00 -
[841] - Quote
Akita T wrote:The current T2 BPO cost of one unit is 100 mil ISK (out of which 50 mil technetium), while the invented unit costs 160 mil ISK (out of which 70 mil technetium) and the market price is 170 mil ISK. T2 BPO profit is 7 bil ISK/month, inventor profit per line is 0.6 bil, but can be scaled up to 6.6 bil ISK/month via multiple lines (and a lot more effort). Now, technetium price gets slashed in half. T2 BPO production costs fall to 75 mil ISK (out of which 25 mil tech) while invented units cost 125 mil ISK (35 mil technetium). The market price will most likely settle at around 135 mil ISK, maybe a tad bit higher. T2 BPO profit is now 6 bil ISK/month (1 bil ISK less), while the inventor profit remains the same or even goes up a little bit.
I already know profit for T2 BPO owner is bigger than for inventor.
T2 BPO profit will go up after the buff. It can't drop if production costs drop and everything else stays the same. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1185
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:33:00 -
[842] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:That will benefit Inventors more than it will benefit BPO owners. Actually, prices are generally set by invention, so the most likely scenario is that inventor profit will not be altered much. Since decreased prices for T2 items doesn't make demand for them go up as much as for similar cheaper items, inventor profits, f they are affected at all, they will ever so slightly go UP, because more inventors will be needed, so inventors that would desire a bit more profit need to be added to the mix to match demand. Also, for the exact same initial reason, that for all "in demand" items invention actually sets prices, T2 BPO profits will go down with absolute certainty, with no chance whatsoever to go up - the fall in unit sales price will necessarily be greater than the fall in BPO manufacture material costs.
To recap : cheaper T2 components means BPO profit down, invention profit same or slightly up.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:T2 BPO profit will go up after the buff. It can't drop if production costs drop and everything else stays the same. Everything else DOES NOT stay the same.
In the hypothetical example before, technetium price was halfed, so T2 components that use technetium are cheaper, so price of the T2 item in question drops 35 mil (or a bit less), almost the very same amount by which invention manufacture costs go down because tech is cheaper. T2 item sell price HAS to go down, because if it doesn't, that's a huge extra profit per inventor, so more will flock in. The end balance will be either the same or slightly higher profit per inventor, NOT a lot more profit for inventor.
At the same time, while sales price per T2 item drops by roughly 35 mil, T2 BPO manufacture costs go down only by 25 mil, so the BPO owner makes 10 mil ISK less profit per unit compared to before, when tech was twice as expensive, earning 1 bil ISK per month LESS because of it.
Again : cheaper T2 components means BPO profit down, invention profit same or slightly up. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
462
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 23:38:00 -
[843] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:The current T2 BPO cost of one unit is 100 mil ISK (out of which 50 mil technetium), while the invented unit costs 160 mil ISK (out of which 70 mil technetium) and the market price is 170 mil ISK. T2 BPO profit is 7 bil ISK/month, inventor profit per line is 0.6 bil, but can be scaled up to 6.6 bil ISK/month via multiple lines (and a lot more effort). Now, technetium price gets slashed in half. T2 BPO production costs fall to 75 mil ISK (out of which 25 mil tech) while invented units cost 125 mil ISK (35 mil technetium). The market price will most likely settle at around 135 mil ISK, maybe a tad bit higher. T2 BPO profit is now 6 bil ISK/month (1 bil ISK less), while the inventor profit remains the same or even goes up a little bit.
I already know profit for T2 BPO owner is bigger than for inventor. T2 BPO profit will go up after the buff. It can't drop if production costs drop and everything else stays the same.
Well, see, that's where you're an idiot. You're forgetting that this is a competitive market, so the end product price will drop. It will drop by more than the amount that the BPO owner's cost to manufacture will drop, reducing the BPO owner's profits.
Akita just showed you exactly how it works. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
117
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 00:51:00 -
[844] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Well, see, that's where you're an idiot. You're forgetting that this is a competitive market, so the end product price will drop. It will drop by more than the amount that the BPO owner's cost to manufacture will drop, reducing the BPO owner's profits.
Akita just showed you exactly how it works.
Competitive market? Selling at a loss? What? |
Pipa Porto
462
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 01:20:00 -
[845] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Well, see, that's where you're an idiot. You're forgetting that this is a competitive market, so the end product price will drop. It will drop by more than the amount that the BPO owner's cost to manufacture will drop, reducing the BPO owner's profits.
Akita just showed you exactly how it works. Competitive market? Selling at a loss? What?
When did I say anyone would be selling at a loss? You're being intentionally (I hope) stupid by trying to suggest that I did.
The end product price will drop. That drop will be far larger than the drop in the BPO owner's manufacturing cost because the drop in final product price is determined by the drop in an Inventor's manufacturing cost. Akita T explained pretty clearly exactly how that works. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Pleiades Borealis
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 07:47:00 -
[846] - Quote
Shaking my big soapy and firm boobs. |
shredgod
Cyberdust Industries
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 08:31:00 -
[847] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: Q D) How should they be removed?
1. Immediately by returning spent RP and taking the BPO out of game
2. If owning player paid ISK for them the trade should be reverted and ISK returned while original owner is reimbursed with research points
Yeah that's a good idea.....not.
How do you suggest reverting the trade if the person they traded the BPO with no longer has the isk? Should they be put into a negative isk value because of it?
What if there have been two or more trades since then? What then?
I'm sorry but you've not thought this through at all. T2 BPOs are here to stay, like it or not. There's always a thread where people whine about T2 BPOs and I bet it's because they don't own one. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 09:53:00 -
[848] - Quote
Who cares if there were more than 2 traders just follow the transaction trail applying negative balances if needs be. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
475
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 09:58:00 -
[849] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Who cares if there were more than 2 traders just follow the transaction trail applying negative balances if needs be.
So create ISK out of nowhere on a massive scale. I thought that was what you were pissed about. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:52:00 -
[850] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Who cares if there were more than 2 traders just follow the transaction trail applying negative balances if needs be.
true, but on the other hand who honestly cares about your baby-like moaning?
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1192
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 20:29:00 -
[851] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Who cares if there were more than 2 traders just follow the transaction trail applying negative balances if needs be. To put it simply, that is borderline impossible to do (huge amounts of ancient logs, not all trades are standard so some of them are a lot more difficult to even realize they happened, let alone determine how high the transaction fee was, if it was even ISK), and even if it wasn't, throwing huge negative ISK balances around (of which you can be sure the MAJORITY of people who handled T2 BPOs will end up having, and that's not a negligible number of players) is an extremely bad thing to do - you might as well claim you want a 25% chance to biomass all characters ever involved with a T2 BPO, because the end result would be pretty much the same. And there would also be a HUGE amount of ISK created out of nowhere equal in total to the sum of negative balances that have been applied.
There is no redeeming quality to this idea. It's unreasonably hard to implement, and its implementation would result in a lot of bad things. In other words, not going to happen, absolutely no chance whatsoever. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
118
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 21:13:00 -
[852] - Quote
Ore Bunny wrote:true, but on the other hand who honestly cares about your baby-like moaning?
Oh nice... More T2 BPO owners.
Hulk, Mackinaw and Skiff BPOs will be very good items to have. A lot of profit after Inferno 1.2 hits TQ.
CCP should give more free T2 BPOs. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1192
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:02:00 -
[853] - Quote
Are you intentionally playing the village idiot right now ? I refuse to believe somebody could have the ability to properly write without being able to comprehend something explained in a way that an average smarts tween should be able to understand. Especially after being given concrete examples with simple numbers.
Technetium alchemy means cheaper tech, which means cheaper T2 components that use tech, which means price of T2 items that use tech goes down by however much the INVENTION manufacture cost goes down, but BPO manufacture cost goes down less than that, which means BPO owners make less profit.
Also, not only are T2 ship BPOs negatively affected profit-wise, BUT ALSO there will be a revamp of mining vessels which actually makes T1 ones more attractive compared to the current situation, so that would also hurt Hulk/Mack/Skiff BPO owners additionally.
So, no, those would not be good items to have. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
540
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:07:00 -
[854] - Quote
Just report the troll OP, please, don't feed it In irae, veritas. |
Pipa Porto
485
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:54:00 -
[855] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:true, but on the other hand who honestly cares about your baby-like moaning?
Oh nice... More T2 BPO owners. Hulk, Mackinaw and Skiff BPOs will be very good items to have. A lot of profit after Inferno 1.2 hits TQ. CCP should give more free T2 BPOs.
If you think they're so great, then buy one.
At the moment, a Hulk BPO earns about 3b in profit a month. (a Scimi BPO, which has a similar profit, is selling for ~190b or 290b). Even assuming the Hulk BPO is worth only 100b on the open market, 3% a month is a terrible return on your 100b ISK investment.
T2 BPOs have never been free. Stop drinking Kuvakei's Kool-Aide. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
119
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:04:00 -
[856] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:T2 BPOs have never been free. Stop drinking Kuvakei's Kool-Aide.
Yes they were. Maybe some RP, but that has been easy, no effort income for years until CCP nerfed it recently. |
Pipa Porto
487
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:15:00 -
[857] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:T2 BPOs have never been free. Stop drinking Kuvakei's Kool-Aide. Yes they were. Maybe some RP, but that has been easy, no effort income for years until CCP nerfed it recently.
1. Standings weren't as easy to grind then as they are now. 2. Research Agents didn't work the way they do now. 3. They weren't an income source during the Lottery, they were lottery tickets. 4. You don't seem to have any idea how the Lottery worked.
http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=BPC#Historical:_Blueprint_lottery "In the past, research points were like lottery tickets. So the more research points you had the bigger chance you had of getting some T2 BPO from your research agent. You got more research points for each mission if the skill that is necessary for doing missions was trained higher."
http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Research_agents "Previously, the primary use for RPs was the GÇ£T2 lottery.GÇ¥ When CCP released a new GÇ£batchGÇ¥ of T2 BPOs, every GÇ£activeGÇ¥ research point in the lottery was a GÇ£ticketGÇ¥ into the lottery. The more tickets you had, the better chance you had to win a T2 BPO. There was some debate as to how the winner was chosen. Argue among yourselves. You lost all your RP when you accepted a BPO, and had to talk to the agent again and restart your research. You only lost the RP from the agent that made you the offer; others were not affected." EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
119
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:28:00 -
[858] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:1. Standings weren't as easy to grind then as they are now.
Yes, they were easy to get.
Pipa Porto wrote:2. Research Agents didn't work the way they do now.
Go to agent -> accept research project and log off. It has been like that from beginning.
Pipa Porto wrote:3. They weren't an income source during the Lottery, they were lottery tickets.
And more alts you got more likely you got T2 BPOs.
Pipa Porto wrote:4. You don't seem to have any idea how the Lottery worked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY |
Pipa Porto
487
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:38:00 -
[859] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:1. Standings weren't as easy to grind then as they are now. Yes, they were easy to get. Pipa Porto wrote:2. Research Agents didn't work the way they do now. Go to agent -> accept research project and log off. It has been like that from beginning. Pipa Porto wrote:3. They weren't an income source during the Lottery, they were lottery tickets. And more alts you got more likely you got T2 BPOs. Pipa Porto wrote:4. You don't seem to have any idea how the Lottery worked. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY
Again, nope, and not Relevant anyway. I'm tired of following you down every little tangent your addled mind takes you to in an attempt to keep the goalposts moving.
If they're too good and should be removed, why haven't you purchased one?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134122&find=unread 20b, Earns 255m Isk/Month profit if fed.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=136667&find=unread 7b, Earns 280m ISK/Month profit if fed.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=135167&find=unread 13b, Loses 42m Isk/Month if fed. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
105
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:07:00 -
[860] - Quote
He says he wants to purchase them with research points not isk. Anyway I call upon CCP to destroy tech 3 manufacture by seeding t3bpo's.
Anyone who defends t2bpo either has access to it's overpowered manufacturing ability or is just plain dumb.
CCP please ruin T3 by seeding T3BPO's. Please destroy Serenity server by dropping gifted items there too. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
|
Pipa Porto
488
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:16:00 -
[861] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:He says he wants to purchase them with research points not isk. Anyway I call upon CCP to destroy tech 3 manufacture by seeding t3bpo's.
Anyone who defends t2bpo either has access to it's overpowered manufacturing ability or is just plain dumb.
CCP please ruin T3 by seeding T3BPO's. Please destroy Serenity server by dropping gifted items there too.
If they're Overpowered, why haven't you purchased any?
If you want to buy them with RP, go ahead and get in your time machine and do so. You'll be sad to find that that's not how the lottery worked. Anyway, the lottery's been over for 5 years. It's not relevant.
If they're so overpowered that they're ruining inventors, why are inventors making more Isk with less capital investment? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
119
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:21:00 -
[862] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:If you want to buy them with RP, go ahead and get in your time machine and do so. You'll be sad to find that that's not how the lottery worked.
So, how it worked if RP wasn't any part of it? |
Ore Bunny
Perkone Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:28:00 -
[863] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Ore Bunny wrote:true, but on the other hand who honestly cares about your baby-like moaning?
Oh nice... More T2 BPO owners.
Hello there!
how do you feel about that now?
|
Pipa Porto
488
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:29:00 -
[864] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:If you want to buy them with RP, go ahead and get in your time machine and do so. You'll be sad to find that that's not how the lottery worked. So, how it worked if RP wasn't any part of it?
1. Please, go to your Junior High English teacher and tell them that they badly failed you and that you would like remedial lessons in sentence parsing.
2. You did not buy BPOs with RP, each RP was a lottery ticket and if one of yours won, you had the option of accepting the offer (wiping your RP with the agent), or hoping for a better BPO.
3. Still not relevant unless you have a time machine. You and Brewlar have as yet shown nothing to suggest that T2 BPOs cause any trouble for Inventors or the game as a whole. You claim that they're overpowered, but when asked why you haven't gotten a piece of that sweet, sweet, overpowered Isk, you whine that you want CCP to give you a time machine instead. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
119
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 12:53:00 -
[865] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:1. Please, go to your Junior High English teacher and tell them that they badly failed you and that you would like remedial lessons in sentence parsing.
English isn't the only language in the world.
You do that just to move goalpost. We all know that you own T2 BPOs. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1195
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 21:39:00 -
[866] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis, Brewlar Kuvakei, you've both kind of given up even trying to sound rational, intentionally "forget" or outright ignore clear-cut comments that directly demolish your arguments and just keep repeating the same things that have been debunked multiple times, and so on and so forth. I refuse to believe you're idiots with anterograde amnesia, so I'll have to assume you've simply giving up on decently thought-out trolling and reverted to low-class low-effort irrational trolling. This discussion is no longer useful, because it ceased being a discussion quite a while ago.
We can resume talks as soon as you actually address the issues that maul your opinions in a logical manner. It CAN be done, to some degree, but I won't do your work for you. Become smarter trolls that are interesting to verbally spar with, or simply buzz off already. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
491
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 21:44:00 -
[867] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:1. Please, go to your Junior High English teacher and tell them that they badly failed you and that you would like remedial lessons in sentence parsing. English isn't the only language in the world. You do that just to move goalpost. We all know that you own T2 BPOs.
If I owned a T2 BPO, I'd have sold it already. Know why? Because they're terrible investments.
If you think T2 BPOs are overpowered at this point in time, why haven't you bought any? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:10:00 -
[868] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:[quote=Pipa Porto] We all know that you own T2 BPOs.
and we all know that you two DONT own one, nor can afford one, otherwie you wouldnt have this discussion.
I dont believe its a coincidence that its only non-industrialists and kinda bitter new players who see the issues on T2 BPO`s, if you want to talk about prejudices ;) |
Pipa Porto
494
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 02:23:00 -
[869] - Quote
@Jorma and Brewlar,
If you think T2 BPOs are overpowered at this point in time, why haven't you bought any?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=136821&find=unread 70b-120b, 700m ISK/Month profit if Fed. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 06:08:00 -
[870] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Sentence parsing is a useful skill in any language.
Oh... we have expert here.
I'd be ready to bet that you can't complete one single sentence in Finnish or Swedish
Pipa Porto wrote:If I owned a T2 BPO, I'd have sold it already. Know why? Because they're terrible investments.
If T2 BPOs are terrible investments then why do they still exists in-game? Obviously there's something good in them.
- Profit - Owner dominates market. |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 06:22:00 -
[871] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Sentence parsing is a useful skill in any language. Oh... we have expert here. I'd be ready to bet that you can't complete one single sentence in Finnish or Swedish
How fastcinating, a non native english speaker! Look, english is not my primary language (not even secondary, to be exact) either, but its the only spoken langauge in this forum. So if you want to know everything better in said Forum, its a very lame excuse to bring, that its not your native language.
Jorma Morkkis wrote: If T2 BPOs are terrible investments then why do they still exists in-game?
what kind of backpedalling-logic is that?... is there a rule that every single existing item in the game must be a good investment or profitable at some point? My male (huray!) exotic Dancer isnt profitable or very usefull either, should he get removed too? |
Pipa Porto
498
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 06:23:00 -
[872] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Sentence parsing is a useful skill in any language. Oh... we have expert here. I'd be ready to bet that you can't complete one single sentence in Finnish or Swedish
Give me a dictionary and a sentence structure guide, and I bet I could parse it.
Anyway, I learned Latin in school, and French at home, not Finnish or Swetish. Not everybody has to speak English, but learning how to figure out what sentences actually say is kind of important when speaking in any language.
Quote:Pipa Porto wrote:If I owned a T2 BPO, I'd have sold it already. Know why? Because they're terrible investments. If T2 BPOs are terrible investments then why do they still exists in-game? Obviously there's something good in them. - Profit - Owner dominates market.
Being terrible investments is not an argument to remove them. Titan and Supercap BPOs are terrible investments right now. No reason to remove those.
They're collectors items, and the premium that they command over their rational value is proof of that.
-They provide a terrible income for their capital investment. -They do no such thing. A Hulk BPO produces 30 Hulks a month. Jita alone consumes 2000+. HAG killed 9,000 in like 3 months. There are maybe 5-10 Hulk BPOs. That's at most 300 Hulks from BPOs a month when at least 3,000 a month were needed just for replacement.
Again, if T2 BPOs are so good, why haven't you bought one? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134773&find=unread 17b, 38m Isk LOSS per month. (But wait, I thought they were overpowered and ruled the market?) EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:02:00 -
[873] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:-They provide a terrible income for their capital investment. -They do no such thing. A Hulk BPO produces 30 Hulks a month. Jita alone consumes 2000+. HAG killed 9,000 in like 3 months. There are maybe 5-10 Hulk BPOs. That's at most 300 Hulks from BPOs a month when at least 3,000 a month were needed just for replacement.
What is better investment? Invention is one of the worst ways to earn isk.
Why you link these terrible ones? There's better BPOs out there. |
Pipa Porto
498
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:08:00 -
[874] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:-They provide a terrible income for their capital investment. -They do no such thing. A Hulk BPO produces 30 Hulks a month. Jita alone consumes 2000+. HAG killed 9,000 in like 3 months. There are maybe 5-10 Hulk BPOs. That's at most 300 Hulks from BPOs a month when at least 3,000 a month were needed just for replacement. What is better investment? Invention is one of the worst ways to earn isk.
You clearly have no idea how to do invention. You can pretty easily break 2m ISK/hr/line doing invention. You could use the Isk you would have invested in a T2 BPO on market manip. You could run a reaction farm. You could invest in collateralized loans (most pay ~5%-8%).
Quote:Why you link these terrible ones? There's better BPOs out there.
These are the ones currently on sale. I don't normally look for T2 BPO sales because I don't want one because I don't throw my money away on expensive collectors items).
I also linked the Scimitar BPO. That's one of the better ones (as it's also profitable to invent), and that makes ~3b a month and costs 290b.
That's a 1% monthly rate of return.
Copying Titan BPOs does better than that, and that market's crashed into the dirt. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:16:00 -
[875] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:You clearly have no idea how to do invention. You can pretty easily break 2m ISK/hr/line doing invention.
I know how to do invention. Just not worth it. Nobody buys T2 BPCs. Or I would have to wait months to sell one. |
Pipa Porto
498
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:19:00 -
[876] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:You clearly have no idea how to do invention. You can pretty easily break 2m ISK/hr/line doing invention. I know how to do invention. Just not worth it. Nobody buys T2 BPCs. Or I would have to wait months to sell one.
That's because everyone does the smart thing with their invented BPCs so nobody bothers looking on contracts. You have to actually build the thing.
And again, all of those other things make a better return on investment than BPOs.
You know how big a reactor farm you could set up with the 290b Isk you'd otherwise have tied up in a Scimi BPO? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:29:00 -
[877] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:That's because everyone does the smart thing with their invented BPCs so nobody bothers looking on contracts. You have to actually build the thing.
That's what I thought, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.
I would have to build few specific modules/ships to get decent profit. Otherwise I would get very small profit or actually lose money:
Akita T wrote:You ARE allowed to manufacture whatever the friggin' heck you want. You are NOT allowed to complain you're not making much profit if you build what you like not what gives you the best profit. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:51:00 -
[878] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:That's because everyone does the smart thing with their invented BPCs so nobody bothers looking on contracts. You have to actually build the thing. That's what I thought, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.
its exactly how it works, but as you said, you dont know how to Invent profitable
Jorma Morkkis wrote: I would have to build few specific modules/ships to get decent profit. Otherwise I would get very small profit or actually lose money:
so? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:02:00 -
[879] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:so?
Building only Basis, Scimis, T2 invuls, T2 LSEs and T2 HMLs starts to get boring at some point. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:05:00 -
[880] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Building only Basis, Scimis, T2 invuls, T2 LSEs and T2 HMLs starts to get boring at some point. Your claimed boredom is of absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand. Also, there's plenty more that make a decent profit other than just those. The only time you would be justified in complaining would be if you could not find any items whatsoever where you could make a decent profit. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:09:00 -
[881] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Your claimed boredom is of absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand. Also, there's plenty more that make a decent profit other than just those. The only time you would be justified in complaining would be if you could not find any items whatsoever where you could make a decent profit.
You don't get it?
Only items I would get decent profit are Basis and Scimis. For example I would have to build 1M units of T2 HMLs to get decent profit. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:10:00 -
[882] - Quote
So now you want to sit there and say that you can't make a decent profit inventing Hulks ? Then either you're screwing up calculations, or your skills are junk, or you're using the wrong decryptors. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:13:00 -
[883] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Then either you're screwing up calculations, or your skills are junk, or you're using the wrong decryptors.
50k isk profit / T2 HML
Most of build cost is in components. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:17:00 -
[884] - Quote
HULK, not HML, you spaz. As in, the damn friggin' exhumer. The ship. The one you fly in. To mine ore. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:24:00 -
[885] - Quote
Akita T wrote:HULK, not HML, you spaz. As in, the damn friggin' exhumer. The ship. The one you fly in. To mine ore.
Not Hulk, the HML. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:27:00 -
[886] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Only items I would get decent profit are Basis and Scimis. So now you want to sit there and say that you can't make a decent profit inventing Hulks ? Not Hulk, the HML. Comprehension problems ?
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Hulk, Mackinaw and Skiff BPOs will be very good items to have. A lot of profit after Inferno 1.2 hits TQ.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Demand for Hulks will drop after Inferno 1.2 is released. Not much profit in there. Contradicting yourself much too ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:33:00 -
[887] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Contradicting yourself much too ?
I thought you all think that invention is better than T2 BOP.
First you have to buy Covetor BPO for 20b and then research it (takes a year or two). Successfully inventing Hulk BPC is very rare. When you have that BPC you have to spend billions to get components. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:40:00 -
[888] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:I thought you all think that invention is better than T2 BOP. Better at some things, worse at others. Better at total potential profit, worse at per-unit profit. I know the concept of "better at this, worse at that" might be too advanced for you to grasp, but do try to keep up.
Quote:First you have to buy Covetor BPO for 20b and then research it (takes a year or two). Successfully inventing Hulk BPC is very rare. When you have that BPC you have to spend billions to get components.
You don't need to research a Covetor BPO at all to invent from it. ME:0 PE:0 T1 BPCs work exactly as well as ME:999 PE:999 T1 BPCs. There is absolutely no difference when you use them in invention. You don't even need to own a Covetor BPO in the first place, you can just as well buy BPCs of it, for slightly less profit. And also buy the damn Covetors themselves. Even with both of those purchased instead of self-made you still turn a damn good profit. Inventing a Hulk BPC is NOT very rare at all. Especially when you use the right decryptors and your skills are halfway decent. And run enough batches to ride out any strings of odd luck. The cost of components is irrelevant as long as you can sell the product for more than it costs to invent and build it. And if there's more profit to be had in making the components, stop bothering with invention and just manufacture and sell components.
If you would actually run ship invention at any halfway respectable level (as opposed to just PRETEND to do it), then you should know all of that already. Well, that, or maybe you're pathetic at calculating your own profits and where they really come from. Or still trolling badly (as in, poorly). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:44:00 -
[889] - Quote
Akita T wrote:You don't need to research a Covetor BPO at all to invent from it.
I have to research it because I have to build Covetors. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:46:00 -
[890] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:I have to research it because I have to build Covetors. Wrong. How about you actually read the next couple of sentences after the one you just quoted.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:52:00 -
[891] - Quote
Here's a novel concept for you to try and start understanding.
The following are completely separate processes which are either profitable or not, and have varying degrees of profitability. - creating Covetor BPCs - manufacturing Covetors from a BPO - inventing Hulk BPCs from Covetor BPCs - manufacturing Hulks from Hulk BPCs - manufacturing T2 components needed for a Hulk from component BPOs
Each one of those steps is independent of eachother. You don't HAVE to do all of them. You CAN do either one or either combinations of the above, up to all of them. But you don't HAVE to. And you really don't WANT to do any of the above that's not profitable by itself. You can buy all needed ingredients for any step or sell all results of a step via the market or contracts. Some are easier to buy, others are easier to sell. You want to do as much as possible from that one step that's the most profitable of them all for any particular line (manufacture or research). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:53:00 -
[892] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:I have to research it because I have to build Covetors. Wrong. How about you actually read the next couple of sentences after the one you just quoted.
But I need T1 version of Hulk, that's Covetor btw, to build one. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:53:00 -
[893] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:But I need T1 version of Hulk, that's Covetor btw, to build one. Great news for you, dear grand-grand-grand-...-grand-nephew Fry, you can now all of a sudden buy those from the market, as if by magic ! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:58:00 -
[894] - Quote
Yeah bpc1 quality does not matter as long as it has full runs for invention. For sure most lines of T2 are not profitable but there is a small amount of items and ships left over for inventors including the entire rig market, yeah.
CCP should just give an invented t2 bpc 100% me and pe that would be an easy fix. Or grow some balls and remove their gifted T2BPO's. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 09:09:00 -
[895] - Quote
Even giving invented T2 BPCs a base of ME:0/PE:0 and slightly buffing decryptors would already be a huge improvement. There's a TRUCKLOAD more of a difference in profit from ME:-3 to ME:-2 than from ME:2 to ME:3, for instance.
And there were no gifted T2 BPOs that are of even remote relevance that still exist today. The only ones that matter are those actually earned, then passed on though many hands for cold, hard ISK to their current owners. Removing them is not a test of testicular fortitude, but one of utter ignorance towards the emergent situation. Nerfing them into borderline but not quite complete uselessness however, that's what needs balls of steel and is actually desirable. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 11:25:00 -
[896] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:Contradicting yourself much too ? First you have to buy Covetor BPO for 20b and then research it (takes a year or two). .
lmao this man has the knowledge...
I sell you one for 15bn that I researched in 3 month, deal? not a troll!
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 12:57:00 -
[897] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:I sell you one for 15bn that I researched in 3 month, deal? not a troll!
Did you research it on NPC station?
No, you didn't. |
Pipa Porto
501
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 13:19:00 -
[898] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:I sell you one for 15bn that I researched in 3 month, deal? not a troll!
Did you research it on NPC station? No, you didn't.
For the past page, you've been complaining that you can't make a profit when you take the least efficient path to build something POSSIBLE.
Here's how you invent Hulks profitably.
Buy a Stack of Covetor BPCs. Buy your invention materials. Invent all your BPCs. You now know how many Hulks you're gonna build. Buy that many Covetors. Buy the appropriate amount of componants (or build them). Build your Hulks.
PROFIT. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 13:29:00 -
[899] - Quote
Not anymore since now everyone knows... |
Pipa Porto
501
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 13:43:00 -
[900] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Not anymore since now everyone knows...
Wow.
My god, what have I done. I've shared the ancient secret, passed down over generations, of buying things off the market. Whatever shall I do.
Anyway, when one item becomes unprofitable (or not profitable enough), switch to another item.
Inventors can do that, BPO owners can't. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
371
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 13:50:00 -
[901] - Quote
Hulks look pretty good actually. Maybe I should make some.
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3638/hulks726.jpg Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
P3po
Treasures Collectors Solar Citizens
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 14:24:00 -
[902] - Quote
This guy is horrible and have no idea what he is talking about.
Covetor BPO cost 2B in NPC station.
You can research it to ME12 in less than month i believe, thats all you need for prouction of covetor, the further research is just not worth it.
..... and thats it basicly.
Even if you run invention without decryptors with lvl 4 skills you have 25% chance of success ..... just pls stop being terrible and read something about the problem before going on forums and make idiot of yourself. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 14:51:00 -
[903] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:I sell you one for 15bn that I researched in 3 month, deal? not a troll!
Did you research it on NPC station? No, you didn't.
I dont even own a BPO ;) I would have just bought the BPO of contracts for like ~2bn to resell it to you for 15 beacuse they are aparently worth that much ;) Also you can research the BPO within 2 Month to a perfect level on a NPC station, no issue at all.
I want to take back my assumption that you dont own any T2 BPO, infact you must have a lot because with your straight back backpedalling and invalidating any removal reasons it makes only sense to save your BPO`s!
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 14:57:00 -
[904] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Not anymore since now everyone knows... Everyone but you already knew. Here's also something most people also know that you don't seem to know either : at least 9 out of 10 Hulks is produced via invention, not from a BPO. And you'll probably want to start using something like this : http://sourceforge.net/projects/eveiph/files Probably not that one, but something similar. There's a few.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
MR rockafella
Santa's Factory
36
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:35:00 -
[905] - Quote
i think t2 bpc should be nerfed, they are destroying the t2bpo's. invention needs to be nerfed and made much harder so my t2bpo's becomes more valueble.
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
111
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 21:40:00 -
[906] - Quote
MR rockafella wrote:i think t2 bpc should be nerfed, they are destroying the t2bpo's. invention needs to be nerfed and made much harder so my t2bpo's becomes more valueble.
word |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 21:47:00 -
[907] - Quote
Akita T wrote:HULK, not HML, you spaz. As in, the damn friggin' exhumer. The ship. The one you fly in. To mine ore.
Yay! You finally almost got angry at the absolute ridiculousness.
Hint: math and facts haven't worked worth a damn; please shift tactics to insisting that everyone else is an exotic bird and birds don't need spaceships anyway. |
Ginger Barbarella
State War Academy Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:35:00 -
[908] - Quote
46 pages later, and you guys are STILL feeding the trolls. Amazing. |
Pipa Porto
512
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:17:00 -
[909] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:46 pages later, and you guys are STILL feeding the trolls. Amazing.
It's pretty clear to me that both Jorma and Brewlar honestly believe what they're saying even after every point they've tried to make has been discredited. Which makes them fanatics, not trolls. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 18:25:00 -
[910] - Quote
Still waiting for CCP to destroy the T3 manufacture by seeding T3BPO's. After all ''BPO's have no market effect'' said by a douche at ccp, so why should they not seed more BPO's both t2 and t3?
CCP grow some balls and fix your mistakes other wise follow through with them. Don't just stop at being half a tard either go full on tard by seeding more BPO's for t2 and t3 or actually gain some intelligence and remove T2BPO's. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
|
Pipa Porto
536
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 18:41:00 -
[911] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Still waiting for CCP to destroy the T3 manufacture by seeding T3BPO's. After all ''BPO's have no market effect'' said by a douche at ccp, so why should they not seed more BPO's both t2 and t3?
CCP grow some balls and fix your mistakes other wise follow through with them. Don't just stop at being half a tard either go full on tard by seeding more BPO's for t2 and t3 or actually gain some intelligence and remove T2BPO's.
So, what you're saying is that you are no longer willing to address the points others have made and thus concede the argument. Gotcha.
/thread EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1196
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 20:56:00 -
[912] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:After all ''BPO's have no market effect'' said by a douche at ccp Except for the small inconvenient fact that it's not actually what he said. A more accurate paraphrasing of what he really said would be that in markets of "in demand" items, T2 BPOs don't really affect prices by any noteworthy amount, which was obvious since well before he actually said it. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
473
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:37:00 -
[913] - Quote
I'm sorry, the t2 BPO's were seeded YEARS ago....
T2 BPO's do NOT need to be removed from the game.... While I'm open to new invention/production mechanics that allow the production of t2 items at better ME levels, I vehemently demand these requires lowsec/nullsec production.
T2 BPO's allow players to produce all t2 items profitably compared to invention (that is, when you ignore the cost of acquiring the t2 BPO). But so what....
In March 2012, the percentage of modules produce from invention:
93.95% of T2 Gyrostabilizers, 89.77% of 1400mm II, 87.34% of 425mm Rail II, 82.00% of Tachyon II, 74.23% of Torpedo Launcher II.
In March 2012, the percentage of ships produce from invention:
90.23% of Hulks, 67.85% of Sabres 65.01% of Wolves 22.16% of Pilgrims 6.00% of Eagles
Source Summary Direct Source
There are a lot more stats, but I cba to list them all... Here's the point: Modules and Ammo are primarily produced through invention, so removal of those BPO's wont do anything but HURT the BPO holder.... These producers wont see more profit, and the consumers wont get any items cheaper.... Considering the work most BPO holders put in to acquire their BPO, this is just cruel and wrong to do!!!! Now, Ship production is often dominated by t2 BPO holders... however these items move slowly, and typically priced BELOW the invention production cost.... so removing these BPO's would result in HIGHER PRICES for people that want to buy these ships.... How is that good???? Sure, it means people that want to produce Eagles via invention could then make a profit, but who wants to reward the idiotic fool that is trying to produce slow moving T2 Ships for profit by paying more for those ships????
I have few more points: 1.) Many serious produces secure moongoo and minerals at BELOW MARKET VALUE. If you are competing against them, you're just going to lose.... Should this be fixed too? I think not, I like getting cheaper items....
2.) I'm not opposed to giving a boon to t2 production at POS's, such that we can produce t2 items at high-ME levels (which won't really alter module production all that much, but will ammo & ship production). The caveat.... this new POS production module can ONLY be done in LOWSEC or NULLSEC....
3.) I'd like there to be more risk to using ALL BPOs.... Having a BPO safely locked away in a station where it's at extremely low risk seems broken to me.... I realize we can't force expensive BPOs to be used AT THE POS until POS's have been revamped so players can have secure-able POS hangars, but implementing something like this would be awesome!!
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
390
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:47:00 -
[914] - Quote
Damit Gizznitt Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
195
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:36:00 -
[915] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Ginger Barbarella wrote:46 pages later, and you guys are STILL feeding the trolls. Amazing. It's pretty clear to me that both Jorma and Brewlar honestly believe what they're saying even after every point they've tried to make has been discredited. Which makes them fanatics, not trolls.
Indeed, they believe in doing the right thing, while the Goons behind most of the profits in this game believe the complete apposite. |
Tarendar
Sparkle Pony Inc Twilight Military Industrial Complex Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:46:00 -
[916] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
In March 2012, the percentage of ships produce from invention:
90.23% of Hulks, 67.85% of Sabres 65.01% of Wolves 22.16% of Pilgrims 6.00% of Eagles
Now, THAT is actually an interesting bit of data... and a strong argument for killing T2 BPOs, the first one I've seen.
I've been building T2 hulls for a couple of years now. In particular, Hulks and Mackinaws. Why only barges? Because combat T2 hulls aren't profitable. Never have been. (1) We're talking maybe five percent margins most of the time, at which point there's no reason to go into the market. And I've always wondered who these idiots are, who keep the prices on T2 hulls below cost so much of the time. Now I know.
T2 ammo, drone, and module BPOs aren't a significant barrier to entry for new players looking to go industrialist. I know that, I've competed successfully against BPO holders in those markets, and I've talked about it on this forum. However, it is apparent that T2 hull BPOs are such a barrier.
-t is data-driven
1) There's actually a weird price spike going on with a particular subset of combat hulls in a particular place during the past couple of months... I won't say which ones or where, because I'm exploiting it as fast as I can invent. If anybody wants to ask me, the trend on prices on that set of hulls shows them being back down to 0% margin in about a month and I'll talk about it then :) |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
628
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:56:00 -
[917] - Quote
Tarendar wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
In March 2012, the percentage of ships produce from invention:
90.23% of Hulks, 67.85% of Sabres 65.01% of Wolves 22.16% of Pilgrims 6.00% of Eagles
Now, THAT is actually an interesting bit of data... and a strong argument for killing T2 BPOs, the first one I've seen. I've been building T2 hulls for a couple of years now. In particular, Hulks and Mackinaws. Why only barges? Because combat T2 hulls aren't profitable. Never have been. (1) We're talking maybe five percent margins most of the time, at which point there's no reason to go into the market. And I've always wondered who these idiots are, who keep the prices on T2 hulls below cost so much of the time. Now I know. T2 ammo, drone, and module BPOs aren't a significant barrier to entry for new players looking to go industrialist. I know that, I've competed successfully against BPO holders in those markets, and I've talked about it on this forum. However, it is apparent that T2 hull BPOs are such a barrier. -t is data-driven 1) There's actually a weird price spike going on with a particular subset of combat hulls in a particular place during the past couple of months... I won't say which ones or where, because I'm exploiting it as fast as I can invent. If anybody wants to ask me, the trend on prices on that set of hulls shows them being back down to 0% margin in about a month and I'll talk about it then :)
Are you sure you read that data right? Less than 10% of all Hulks produced are from BPOs. How is that an argument for BPO removal?
Unless you're referring to some of the other hulls. In which case, all the BPOs are doing is creating an artificial bottom in the economy. Which frankly is needed for things like Eagles or there just wouldn't be any. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
473
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:03:00 -
[918] - Quote
I don't understand what the Double Face Palm is for..... what did I do???? |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
473
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:14:00 -
[919] - Quote
Tarendar wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
In March 2012, the percentage of ships produce from invention:
90.23% of Hulks, 67.85% of Sabres 65.01% of Wolves 22.16% of Pilgrims 6.00% of Eagles
Now, THAT is actually an interesting bit of data... and a strong argument for killing T2 BPOs, the first one I've seen. I've been building T2 hulls for a couple of years now. In particular, Hulks and Mackinaws. Why only barges? Because combat T2 hulls aren't profitable. Never have been. (1) We're talking maybe five percent margins most of the time, at which point there's no reason to go into the market. And I've always wondered who these idiots are, who keep the prices on T2 hulls below cost so much of the time. Now I know.
Your own data supports why having t2 BPO's is a GOOD THING....
Quote:We're talking maybe five percent margins most of the time.... And ... prices on T2 hulls below [production via invention] cost so much of the time.
Why does anyone want T2 BPOs removed, when it either doesn't effect the market (see t2 ammo and modules) or it results in LOWER PRICES for everyone (see your quote)????
It's not like you have to produce eagles to make isk, and it's not like you can't produce eagles without the BPO... So, I don't understand why your panties are in a twist... |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
390
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:29:00 -
[920] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:I don't understand what the Double Face Palm is for..... what did I do???? You bumped this thread...which was dead for over a month
It's the same back and forth, no one adds anything different and no one is convinced of anything one way or the other. It needs to die and get locked indefinitely. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
|
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
473
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 22:15:00 -
[921] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:I don't understand what the Double Face Palm is for..... what did I do???? You bumped this thread...which was dead for over a month It's the same back and forth, no one adds anything different and no one is convinced of anything one way or the other. It needs to die and get locked indefinitely.
I was linked to it from another post... I wasn't browsing the S&I forum.... and I'll stop bumping it now and let it die... |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 02:44:00 -
[922] - Quote
Hi. I wasn't going to comment in this thread but I see it's still going. I'm speaking as someone who "won" a T2 BPO years ago and made a nice profit on it.
How much profit you get from T2 BPOs, and how much affect they have on market prices, is irrelevant to whether they belong in the game or not. There are no BPOs for Tech2 BS or Tech3 and the markets for them are fine.
In a game where player innovation is celebrated, encouraged and really sets this game apart from others, T2 BPOs as they exist are the opposite of everything Eve Online stands for. With any other aspect of the game you can work towards getting whatever it is you want. Sometimes by yourself or with teamwork. Think about it:
You want to shoot players? Go for it. You want a BPO for a Tech 1 ship? Buy it. You want to make special Tech 2 items? Invention. You want to produce Technetium? Alchemy or claim a Tech moon.
You want a no risk, little effort, ISK-printing Mackinaw BPO? No.
That goes against everything Eve Online is about. In this way T2 BPOs are probably the worst feature in the game. Sorry, T2 BPO owners. With no other meaningful asset can you say "sorry this is mine and you can't have one like it, ever".
|
Pipa Porto
849
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 04:35:00 -
[923] - Quote
Traedar wrote:You want a no risk, little effort, ISK-printing Mackinaw BPO? No.
That goes against everything Eve Online is about. In this way T2 BPOs are probably the worst feature in the game. Sorry, T2 BPO owners. With no other meaningful asset can you say "sorry this is mine and you can't have one like it, ever".
Exhumer BPOs come up for sale with some regularity.
If you want a risky (prices are volatile over the course of a month), medium effort (quite a lot of logistics and marketeering if you want to make any money), poor investment T2 BPO, you can buy it.
And they're all poor investments. The best ones make ~3b Isk a month and are worth over 150b Isk if you sell them. So to break even, you need to run it for over 50 months (that's not counting the opportunity cost of not using that manufacturing slot for invention). All the while, risking further enhancement to invention (reducing the relative value of a BPO) or price fluctuations (Hulk BPO owners probably aren't very happy right now). EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
124
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 09:41:00 -
[924] - Quote
Traedar wrote: Hi. I wasn't going to comment in this thread but I see it's still going. I'm speaking as someone who "won" a T2 BPO years ago and made a nice profit on it.
infact, the discussion ended month ago but somebody necroed it. Congratz you won a T2 BPO, now that we know that, anything u say against them has twice the value
Traedar wrote: There are no BPOs for Tech2 BS or Tech3 and the markets for them are fine.
funny you mentioned the T2 BS....There is prolly no market beeing more unstable than these. Before you say anything smart again, try to make a golem and sell it in jita without making a loss.... so bad.
Traedar wrote: You want to shoot players? Go for it. You want a BPO for a Tech 1 ship? Buy it. You want to make special Tech 2 items? Invention. You want to produce Technetium? Alchemy or claim a Tech moon.
You want to produce from a T2 BPO? buy one on forums and do so <---- whats wrong with that?
Traedar wrote: That goes against everything Eve Online is about. In this way T2 BPOs are probably the worst feature in the game. Sorry, T2 BPO owners. With no other meaningful asset can you say "sorry this is mine and you can't have one like it, ever".
Oh unique Items are bad and stand (apparently) against anything eve stands for, you say? why is CCP giving new, absolute unique items out every year at the tournies, then? |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 20:47:00 -
[925] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: funny you mentioned the T2 BS....There is prolly no market beeing more unstable than these. Before you say anything smart again, try to make a golem and sell it in jita without making a loss.... so bad.
If the Golem is not profitable then invent something else. If enough people do this then it will become profitable. Just like all other industry in the game. BTW you might want to move out of Jita. I would suggest Lonetrek or maybe the Rens area.
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Traedar wrote: You want to shoot players? Go for it. You want a BPO for a Tech 1 ship? Buy it. You want to make special Tech 2 items? Invention. You want to produce Technetium? Alchemy or claim a Tech moon.
You want a no risk, little effort, ISK-printing Mackinaw BPO? buy one on forums and do so <---- whats wrong with that? There's nothing wrong with buying or selling stuff on forums. What I'm saying is, getting something on the forum should be an option, not a necessity. With anything else in the game, I can get it in-game if I work enough towards it.
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: Oh unique Items are bad and stand (apparently) against anything eve stands for, you say? why is CCP giving new, absolute unique items out every year at the tournies, then?
They give out unique ships, right (Freki, Mimir, Adrestia, Utu, etc)? I'm not sure how much practical value they have other than bragging rights and being collectors' items. To get practical use out of them, you have to fly them and maybe lose them. So who knows if they are used. A T2 BPO, on the other hand, provides all its benefit while sitting in a station. Not to mention, if you want a ship you can just build or buy another ship to fly but if you want another T2 BPO there is no way to work toward one in the game.
I'd like to add, I'm not saying Tech 2 BPOs should be removed from the game. I'm saying they don't belong as they exist. Removing them is a different question. Before doing that you'd have to consider some problems, like all the players who paid a ton of ISK for them and who would get pissed off.
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
124
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 01:49:00 -
[926] - Quote
Traedar wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: funny you mentioned the T2 BS....There is prolly no market beeing more unstable than these. Before you say anything smart again, try to make a golem and sell it in jita without making a loss.... so bad.
If the Golem is not profitable then invent something else. If enough people do this then it will become profitable. Just like all other industry in the game. BTW you might want to move out of Jita. I would suggest Lonetrek or maybe the Rens area.
lol, so your saying that Marauders market is just fine, but recommend to invent something else because its not profitable? BTW other T2 Ships (Hulk, Huginn, Scimitar etc.) with BPO`s are still profitable even when selling in Jita...im not making anything of these things anyway, but thanks for the advice
Traedar wrote: There's nothing wrong with buying or selling stuff on forums. What I'm saying is, getting something on the forum should be an option, not a necessity. With anything else in the game, I can get it in-game if I work enough towards it.
1. wrong again...T2 BPO`s can and are getting purchased via public contracts. 2. titans and supers cant be purchased via market/contracts either...so?
Traedar wrote: They give out unique ships, right (Freki, Mimir, Adrestia, Utu, etc)? I'm not sure how much practical value they have other than bragging rights and being collectors' items.
Traedar wrote: With no other meaningful asset can you say "sorry this is mine and you can't have one like it, ever".
what now, the asset has to be profitable to apply to this?
|
Matarella
The Last Call. Black Core Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 13:03:00 -
[927] - Quote
oh this thread is back. hello there. |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 17:08:00 -
[928] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:lol, so your saying that Marauders market is just fine, but recommend to invent something else because its not profitable? Welcome to EvE. Adapt or die.
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: BTW other T2 Ships (Hulk, Huginn, Scimitar etc.) with BPO`s are still profitable even when selling in Jita...im not making anything of these things anyway, but thanks for the advice
Yeah that's why I would love to be able to produce one of these from BPO. No risk, little effort income.
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Traedar wrote: There's nothing wrong with buying or selling stuff on forums. What I'm saying is, getting something on the forum should be an option, not a necessity. With anything else in the game, I can get it in-game if I work enough towards it.
1. wrong again...T2 BPO`s can and are getting purchased via public contracts. 2. titans and supers cant be purchased via market/contracts either...so?
I think you're completely missing my point. I have no problem with trading stuff on market, forum, contracts, Chribba, etc.
My point is that with any item in the game I can work towards building or otherwise obtaining it without relying on getting it from someone who already has it (by hunting for the right officer spawn, by buying a BPO, by starting a factory job or putting up a POS, etc). For instance I can mine or make an alt and train him to help me mine. But I can never create a T2 BPO or create an alt to train him to make one.
Traedar wrote: what now, the asset has to be profitable to apply to this?
Comparing unique ships from AT, with T2 BPOs is apples and oranges. If I want a unique ship AT reward I can choose to compete in the next Alliance Tournament and have the same chance to get one as anyone else. I don't have to rely on getting it from someone who already has one.
|
Matarella
The Last Call. Black Core Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 18:17:00 -
[929] - Quote
no you dont get the chance to get one as anyone else. at every AT they give out a difrent prize. you wont see a state raven being given out again. just like you wont see a T2 BPO being given out again.
and having gotten a state raven at the AT back then is profitable. as people are willing to pay billions to get one. |
Pipa Porto
854
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 18:23:00 -
[930] - Quote
Traedar wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: BTW other T2 Ships (Hulk, Huginn, Scimitar etc.) with BPO`s are still profitable even when selling in Jita...im not making anything of these things anyway, but thanks for the advice
Yeah that's why I would love to be able to produce one of these from BPO. No risk, little effort income.
Just have to look back a couple pages to find the links to T2 BPO auctions. Including a Scimitar BPO, which sold for 525 Billion ISK. Assuming that you discount the cost of material inputs entirely, you make roughly 7.7 (call it 10) billion ISK per month, so you'd break even after 52 months, or 4 and a half years. Since moon goo you mine is not, in fact, free, your actual profit per month is something like 4 Billion ISK per month so you need to wait ~130 months to break even (that's almost 11 years, for those keeping score).
Now, you might say "well you got it free" or somesuch. Well, in that case, the smart thing to do is to sell the dang thing immediately because you can do much better things with 525 Billion ISK than sink it into something that, with a fair amount of effort to run efficiently, can earn you 4 Billion ISK a month.
And given the number of T2 BPOs that it is unprofitable to manufacture, and the possibility that, sometime in the next 11 years, CCP might do something to further change the balance between BPOs and Invention, owning a T2 BPO is a pretty risky venture. And again, it's a fair bit of effort if you actually want to make money off of it.
Quote:I think you're completely missing my point. I have no problem with trading stuff on market, forum, contracts, Chribba, etc.
My point is that with any item in the game I can work towards building or otherwise obtaining it without relying on getting it from someone who already has it (by hunting for the right officer spawn, by buying a BPO, by starting a factory job or putting up a POS, etc). For instance I can mine or make an alt and train him to help me mine. But I can never create a T2 BPO or create an alt to train him to make one.
If you are a collector, and want them for their rarity, then making new ones available hurts their rarity. If you are a producer, then you're goal isn't "use a T2 BPO," your goal is "Produce a T2 Item profitably." Invention works just fine for you. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
|
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies The Unthinkables
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 20:44:00 -
[931] - Quote
eh anything the devs exploited for BoB back in the day should of been removed from game. but you know all those trillions of iskis and t2 bpos from that is still in game cause it would be unfair to remove them or so ccp says. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 21:12:00 -
[932] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:eh anything the devs exploited for BoB back in the day should of been removed from game. .
IT has been reomved from the game... I think it were only 5ish BPO wich were kinda bad anyways (except the Sabre BPO ofc) but all of it has been removed fro mthe game and 5-6 years later we could rly stop bring that **** up
|
Katerwaul
The Scope Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 04:38:00 -
[933] - Quote
By the power and wisdom of the Amaaran empire (whose technology I borrow on occasion) I hereby banish this evil back across the abyss. I incant the names Guiding Hand Social Club, Titans4U, & Phaser Inc. -- may the tears flow back into the endless ether between the stars or curl around the corners of the bulging eyes of this topic's frozen corpse as its mouth curls to utter "but it's not fair" in revelry to the vast silent expanse, so that this too can become simply one page in the endless story that New Eden brings to bear upon the capsuleers and the rest of them may remain untainted until they a corp mate in the research division simply walk away from the corp with all of the corp's donated and fully researched BPOs in their pocket. Working with everyone to improve New Eden -- Internet Spaceships Iz Serious Business. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:11:00 -
[934] - Quote
Hello,
I posted in the morning when the world was begun I posted from the Moons and the stars and the Suns I came down from Heaven and I danced on the Earth At Caldari Institute 5 moon 3 I had my birth:
I posted for the bitter vets and the Devs of CCP But they would not post back and they wouldn't follow me I posted for the noobs and for the good Kugu They came with me and the thread went on:
Post, post, wherever you may be I am the lord of the T2BPO whine thread, said he And I lead you all, wherever you may be And I lead you all in the thread, said he
I posted on a Friday when the world turned black It's hard to find time to post with invention on your back They buried my thread, they thought it was gone But this thread will never ever die and so the posts go on!
They cut me down and I leapt up high I am the life that will never, never die I'll whine with you if you'll whine with me I am the Lord of the T2BPO whine thread.
End T2BPO it was unfair then it's unfair now and detrimental to the game. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
195
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:11:00 -
[935] - Quote
But, why remove them?
Seed them on the markets for extravagant amounts in lowsec Select NPC stations and let a whole new wave of fighting begin. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:12:00 -
[936] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:But, why remove them?
Seed them on the markets for extravagant amounts in lowsec Select NPC stations and let a whole new wave of fighting begin.
And you think CCP pets will be happy sharing their private monthly source of CCP welfare? Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
195
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:17:00 -
[937] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Kara Books wrote:But, why remove them?
Seed them on the markets for extravagant amounts in lowsec Select NPC stations and let a whole new wave of fighting begin. And you think CCP pets will be happy sharing their private monthly source of CCP welfare?
very good point, but I dont think this is where we want the game to head. |
Pipa Porto
857
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:31:00 -
[938] - Quote
Oh look. He's back.
And still with no new arguments to patch the holes that've been ripped out of his original ones. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
195
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 11:33:00 -
[939] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Oh look. He's back.
And still with no new arguments to patch the holes that've been ripped out of his original ones.
I like your post, and the previous 2 posts you have up there as you read up |
Pipa Porto
857
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 12:09:00 -
[940] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Oh look. He's back.
And still with no new arguments to patch the holes that've been ripped out of his original ones. I like your post, and the previous 2 posts you have up there as you read up
I'm not sure what you're saying, but seeding new T2 BPOs will simply kill the market for invention, as described in detail earlier in the thread.
The idea to seed them in LS is novel on its face, but all you need to do is JF in, buy the BPO, then jump to a exit system where your Orca is ready. No fighting (except for the guys sitting on the undock to blap cyno ships) involved. So it's really no more risky than any LS logistics. Which means the proposal is the same as Brewlar's "T2 BPOs are unfair because they're expensive, so CCP should give me one seed them." EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
158
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 12:52:00 -
[941] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:I'm not sure what you're saying, but seeding new T2 BPOs will simply kill the market for invention
T2 BPO owners killed invention years ago. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 12:56:00 -
[942] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:I'm not sure what you're saying, but seeding new T2 BPOs will simply kill the market for invention T2 BPO owners killed invention years ago. Funny because I pay for 3 plex + profit doing invention. Too bad you can't figure it out. Maybe all the tears in your eyes are giving you problems seeing? Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
158
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:00:00 -
[943] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Funny because I pay for 3 plex + profit doing invention. Too bad you can't figure it out. Maybe all the tears in your eyes are giving you problems seeing?
We aren't talking about T3s and wormholes here. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
195
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 13:04:00 -
[944] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Kara Books wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Oh look. He's back.
And still with no new arguments to patch the holes that've been ripped out of his original ones. I like your post, and the previous 2 posts you have up there as you read up I'm not sure what you're saying, but seeding new T2 BPOs will simply kill the market for invention, as described in detail earlier in the thread. The idea to seed them in LS is novel on its face, but all you need to do is JF in, buy the BPO, then jump to a exit system where your Orca is ready. No fighting (except for the guys sitting on the undock to blap cyno ships) involved. So it's really no more risky than any LS logistics. Which means the proposal is the same as Brewlar's "T2 BPOs are unfair because they're expensive, so CCP should give me one seed them."
Perhaps, this is very true, the richest would buy out the blueprints and compete with each other on easy level, naturally crashing the prices on inventors at will.
then back to invention, it is. allowing newer players to do their thing, selling off excess goods. older players can do their thing with or without T2 BPO's
Still would be interesting to see low-sec have a nice wave of Violence take grip. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
115
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:00:00 -
[945] - Quote
A fantastic nerf to t2bpo's would be to only allow them to manufacture in low sec, null and wh and from inside a pos and not remotely from a station. This would see some great conflicts emerge with real goals and points to the fighting. As it stands a good T2BPO was a 5bn isk a month gift from CCP that required no effort other than being cushy with the devs. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:41:00 -
[946] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Zifrian wrote:Funny because I pay for 3 plex + profit doing invention. Too bad you can't figure it out. Maybe all the tears in your eyes are giving you problems seeing? We aren't talking about T3s and wormholes here. I don't see anywhere in my post that says anything about T3s or wormholes. Man, those tears are really messing up your sight. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 15:24:00 -
[947] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Man, those tears are really messing up your sight.
So, you own T2 BPOs. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 15:46:00 -
[948] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I posted for the bitter vets and the Devs of CCP But they would not post back and they wouldn't follow me I posted for the noobs and for the good Kugu They came with me and the thread went on:
Post, post, wherever you may be I am the lord of the T2BPO whine thread, said he And I lead you all, wherever you may be And I lead you all in the thread, said he .
hahaha...yea I see how Kugu is supporting your campaign brewlar`s Kugu thread
so good!
|
Pipa Porto
858
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 15:47:00 -
[949] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:I'm not sure what you're saying, but seeding new T2 BPOs will simply kill the market for invention T2 BPO owners killed invention years ago.
Stop lying, Jorma. We've repeatedly explained to you exactly how Invention is quite profitable for the vast majority of T2 markets. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 15:54:00 -
[950] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Stop lying, Jorma. We've repeatedly explained to you exactly how Invention is quite profitable for the vast majority of T2 markets.
T2 BPO owners set the prices. For example Large Semiconductor Memory Cell II. |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:07:00 -
[951] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Stop lying, Jorma. We've repeatedly explained to you exactly how Invention is quite profitable for the vast majority of T2 markets. T2 BPO owners set the prices. For example Large Semiconductor Memory Cell II.
you're a damn funny guy
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:10:00 -
[952] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Zifrian wrote:Man, those tears are really messing up your sight. So, you own T2 BPOs. LOL again...never said anything about owning a T2 BPO....I said "invention". Might want to get your tear ducts checked out. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:13:00 -
[953] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Might want to get your tear ducts checked out.
Because you keep mentioning tears, you seem to like those T2 BPOs. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:14:00 -
[954] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Stop lying, Jorma. We've repeatedly explained to you exactly how Invention is quite profitable for the vast majority of T2 markets. T2 BPO owners set the prices. For example Large Semiconductor Memory Cell II. Except it's profitable with 2 different decryptors.
Also, you ever hear of anyone finding T2 Rig BPC's when doing mag sites? I do. Maybe that has an effect too? Perhaps?
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:15:00 -
[955] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Zifrian wrote:Might want to get your tear ducts checked out. Because you keep mentioning tears, you seem to like those T2 BPOs. OK moron, stop trolling. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:32:00 -
[956] - Quote
If there's no profit to be made from BPOs then there's no reason to keep them in game. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:35:00 -
[957] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:If there's no profit to be made from BPOs then there's no reason to keep them in game. but they do make a little profit, wich means they belong in the game according to this rule |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:42:00 -
[958] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:but they do make a little profit, wich means they belong in the game according to this rule
That's only the first month. After the first month you can make billions.
If it's only small profit then it's exactly like T1 BPOs. Why not give a option to get T2 BPOs from NPCs just like it is with T1 BPOs? |
Skeenal Raholan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 16:53:00 -
[959] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:I'm not sure what you're saying, but seeding new T2 BPOs will simply kill the market for invention T2 BPO owners killed invention years ago.
I make quite a bit more then 4 bil a month doing invention (i have no pot in this remove T2 BPO whine fest). If you can't make more inventing off a t1 bp, then someone with a t2 bpo, you are doing it wrong, they have a limited number of runs they can make! Quit your bitching, adapt and overcome. |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:00:00 -
[960] - Quote
Skeenal Raholan wrote:they have a limited number of runs they can make!
I've heard that copying T2 BPO is possible... |
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:01:00 -
[961] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:they have a limited number of runs they can make! I've heard that copying T2 BPO is possible... Oh come on. We've been over this. Copies take longer to make than production. You are TROLLING. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
160
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:04:00 -
[962] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Oh come on. We've been over this. Copies take longer to make than production.
Copying T2 BPO takes less time than inventing. And that's main point. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
393
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:13:00 -
[963] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Zifrian wrote:Oh come on. We've been over this. Copies take longer to make than production. Copying T2 BPO takes less time than inventing. And that's main point.
Hammerhead II BPO Copy time: 50 minutes per single run Production Time: 26 minutes production time
Why would anyone copy them when you can build them faster?
As for invention, I can invent 40-50 runs of Hammerhead II in 2 hours. So copying a T2 BPO takes less time than inventing? Ahh no, not even close.
What exactly is your point? That you have no idea wtf you are talking about? Oh, no that's right. You are TROLLING. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Skeenal Raholan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:19:00 -
[964] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:they have a limited number of runs they can make! I've heard that copying T2 BPO is possible...
Really? Can you actually build from that t2bpo while it's copying???
NO, that's a very idiotic response!
Think before posting again!
End result, inventing can make more money then a t2bpo( due to limited runs on the bpo), end of story. if you can't figure out why, that's your loss i'm afraid. |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:19:00 -
[965] - Quote
Round and round we go with the amazing head-injured Jorma Morkkis (seriously, letting a Concussion go for months without a Doctors examination isn't smart. Go to the hospital. Amnesia is a serious medical concern.)
Copying T2 BPOs is never, has never, and almost certainly will never be an issue because it takes longer and costs more than manufacturing straight off the BPO.
And invention sets the prices in the vast majority of markets. Not BPOs. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
115
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:20:00 -
[966] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I posted for the bitter vets and the Devs of CCP But they would not post back and they wouldn't follow me I posted for the noobs and for the good Kugu They came with me and the thread went on:
Post, post, wherever you may be I am the lord of the T2BPO whine thread, said he And I lead you all, wherever you may be And I lead you all in the thread, said he .
hahaha...yea I see how Kugu is supporting your campaign brewlar`s Kugu threadso good!
Not my thread sorry that's not my Kugu user name someone is just trolling with it sadly. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
161
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:37:00 -
[967] - Quote
Skeenal Raholan wrote:due to limited runs on the bpo
BPCs: limited runs BPOs: unlimited runs
Good game. You should try it. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
196
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:41:00 -
[968] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Round and round we go with the amazing head-injured Jorma Morkkis (seriously, letting a Concussion go for months without a Doctors examination isn't smart. Go to the hospital. Amnesia is a serious medical concern.)
Copying T2 BPOs is never, has never, and almost certainly will never be an issue because it takes longer and costs more than manufacturing straight off the BPO.
And invention sets the prices in the vast majority of markets. Not BPOs.
I stand corrected, Yet again, apparently some one thinks there is no profit to be made in T2 BPO's but its all in Invention? So... lets take the logical step here...underpants...profit? |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:44:00 -
[969] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:due to limited runs on the bpo BPCs: limited runs BPOs: unlimited runs
Look, he thinks he caught something.
Jorma, BPOs are limited in the number of runs they can produce per unit time. You brought up BPCs as a way around that limitation. We pointed out that you were dead wrong. Not recognizing the context of the sentence you quoted (when your comments were the context) is a sign that you have severe short term memory problems for which you should see a Doctor.
That's the advantage invention has over BPOs. With a given amount of Capital, you can fill far more factory slots using invention than you ever could with T2 BPOs. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
115
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:44:00 -
[970] - Quote
''Geez would CCP stop spamming me with all these worthless T2BPO's how can I possibly make profit from these gifted items with inventors under cutting me all the time?'' Never once said not even by X-BOB members. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
|
Skeenal Raholan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:48:00 -
[971] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:due to limited runs on the bpo BPCs: limited runs BPOs: unlimited runs Good game. You should try it.
Good lord it's amazing you know enough to breath.
I hope you don't reproduce. If you have or plan too, i feel sorry for the children.
Bpo = limited # of runs you can run per month, moron.
I can make more t2 bpc's in a month then the owner of the t2bpo can produce product. |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:49:00 -
[972] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Round and round we go with the amazing head-injured Jorma Morkkis (seriously, letting a Concussion go for months without a Doctors examination isn't smart. Go to the hospital. Amnesia is a serious medical concern.)
Copying T2 BPOs is never, has never, and almost certainly will never be an issue because it takes longer and costs more than manufacturing straight off the BPO.
And invention sets the prices in the vast majority of markets. Not BPOs. I stand corrected, Yet again, apparently some one thinks there is no profit to be made in T2 BPO's but its all in Invention? So... lets take the logical step here...underpants...profit?
Where did I say T2 BPOs were not, on the whole, profitable? Quote and Link, please. (Yes, I'm going to treat your straw men the same way I treat Jorma's)
You need to pack your straw men better.
Not being the price setter does not mean that the T2 BPOs aren't profitable. They are, but, because most of the demand is filled by invented items, the price is set relative to inventors and their costs, not BPO owners and their costs. And despite the fact that their profit/unit is higher, they're still a terrible investment because of their insane valuation. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:51:00 -
[973] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Geez would CCP stop spamming me with all these worthless T2BPO's how can I possibly make profit from these gifted items with inventors under cutting me all the time?'' Never once said not even by X-BOB members.
Remove Invention T2 production should be for CCP's chosen players just like it originally was. Noobs don't deserve the ability to make T2. As for T3 what the **** where are the BPO's? get them out to pets ASAP!
If you're not going to address our rebuttals and are instead going to keep posting the same debunked shit and straw man arguments, get out.
By the way, didn't you promise that you were quitting in favor of EVE:Serenity? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
196
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:54:00 -
[974] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:due to limited runs on the bpo BPCs: limited runs BPOs: unlimited runs Look, he thinks he caught something. Jorma, BPOs are limited in the number of runs they can produce per unit time. You brought up BPCs as a way around that limitation. We pointed out that you were dead wrong. Not recognizing the context of the sentence you quoted (when your comments were the context) is a sign that you have severe short term memory problems for which you should see a Doctor. That's the advantage invention has over BPOs. With a given amount of Capital, you can fill far more factory slots using invention than you ever could with T2 BPOs.
This makes no sense, your argument is invalid. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
116
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:02:00 -
[975] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Geez would CCP stop spamming me with all these worthless T2BPO's how can I possibly make profit from these gifted items with inventors under cutting me all the time?'' Never once said not even by X-BOB members.
Remove Invention T2 production should be for CCP's chosen players just like it originally was. Noobs don't deserve the ability to make T2. As for T3 what the **** where are the BPO's? get them out to pets ASAP! If you're not going to address our rebuttals and are instead going to keep posting the same debunked shi t and straw man arguments, get out. By the way, didn't you promise that you were quitting in favor of EVE:Serenity?
Yeah about that... the server was peaking at over 40k players which is higher than tranquillity which was nice but sadly it's kinda drifting off now. Also they make it kinda hard to pay. Also I'm happy to see this post get necro'd and I'm here just to throw petrol on the fire. Although to be fair T2BPO's glaring flaws does not really need any more fuel.
Also I'm 100% for T2BPO now.
T2BPO's are the best thing in game, if you don't have one tough **** you should have been around when CCP was chucking them to their mates for **** all. Actually lest than **** all, garbage is currently worth around 12 isk per unit. RP is worth less than that. Anyway if you want one your going to have to pay for it by buying plex or getting your ass onto Ebay where you can RMT one because there ain't no other way your getting it.
Your not ganking it because there is zero reason for a t2bpo to leave a station and your not stealing it because he magical BPO locks prevent you stealing them. Sure you can still use it though. CCP really ought to allow supercaps to be locked incase someone loses 1 in combat. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
162
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:10:00 -
[976] - Quote
Skeenal Raholan wrote:Bpo = limited # of runs you can run per month, moron.
Try to copy it next time... |
Skeenal Raholan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:13:00 -
[977] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:Bpo = limited # of runs you can run per month, moron. Try to copy it next time...
You have already been told why that's an invalid argument.
|
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:15:00 -
[978] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:Bpo = limited # of runs you can run per month, moron. Try to copy it next time...
And you end up manufacturing fewer items in that month. Good job. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
162
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:19:00 -
[979] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:And you end up manufacturing fewer items in that month. Good job.
That's why you have at least ten BPOs. |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:20:00 -
[980] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Yeah about that... the server was peaking at over 40k players which is higher than tranquillity which was nice but sadly it's kinda drifting off now. Also they make it kinda hard to pay. Also I'm happy to see this post get necro'd and I'm here just to throw petrol on the fire. Although to be fair T2BPO's glaring flaws does not really need any more fuel.
Also I'm 100% for T2BPO now.
T2BPO's are the best thing in game, if you don't have one tough **** you should have been around when CCP was chucking them to their mates for **** all. Actually lest than **** all, garbage is currently worth around 12 isk per unit. RP is worth less than that. Anyway if you want one your going to have to pay for it by buying plex or getting your ass onto Ebay where you can RMT one because there ain't no other way your getting it.
Your not ganking it because there is zero reason for a t2bpo to leave a station and your not stealing it because he magical BPO locks prevent you stealing them. Sure you can still use it though. CCP really ought to allow supercaps to be locked incase someone loses 1 in combat.
If you have any evidence that any T2 BPOs currently in the game were seeded improperly or otherwise acquired due to Dev misconduct, either post that evidence or send it to CCP's IA department.
As for your little fit about RP values, if you have the time machine needed to make that argument valid, I would suggest that there are better things you could use it for. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
|
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:21:00 -
[981] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And you end up manufacturing fewer items in that month. Good job. That's why you have at least ten BPOs.
And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs)
There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month.
But then, we've been over this before. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
162
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:25:00 -
[982] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs)
There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month.
Those BPOs cost you exactly 0 isk. so 40 billion per month for 0 isk investment is quite good. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:27:00 -
[983] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs)
There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month. Those BPOs cost you exactly 0 isk. so 40 billion per month for 0 isk investment is quite good.
your not funny. tbqfh
|
Skeenal Raholan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:29:00 -
[984] - Quote
Isn't there a limited number of each type of t2bpo in game (thought I read 3 of each max). So yeah |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:33:00 -
[985] - Quote
Skeenal Raholan wrote:Isn't there a limited number of each type of t2bpo in game (thought I read 3 of each max). So yeah
think its like 10-15 per ship and a lot more per module.. |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
162
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:38:00 -
[986] - Quote
Skeenal Raholan wrote:Isn't there a limited number of each type of t2bpo in game (thought I read 3 of each max). So yeah
For example there's 20-25 Scimi BPOs left in the game. There was around 200 but most of them burned in wrecks or something weird happened to them. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
196
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:46:00 -
[987] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And you end up manufacturing fewer items in that month. Good job. That's why you have at least ten BPOs. And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs) There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month. But then, we've been over this before.
Yes you can start a bank then scam people out of their ISK |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 19:57:00 -
[988] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs)
There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month. Those BPOs cost you exactly 0 isk. so 40 billion per month for 0 isk investment is quite good.
You can sell them for the 5 Trillion ISK and use that ISK for other things, which means that no matter how you got them, they're still worth 5 Trillion ISk.
It's called "Opportunity Cost." Look it up. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 19:58:00 -
[989] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Skeenal Raholan wrote:Isn't there a limited number of each type of t2bpo in game (thought I read 3 of each max). So yeah For example there's 20-25 Scimi BPOs left in the game. There was around 200 but most of them burned in wrecks or something weird happened to them.
Do you have a source for this information, or are you lying again? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:04:00 -
[990] - Quote
Wow this thread exploded again.
Pipa Porto wrote:Just have to look back a couple pages to find the links to T2 BPO auctions. Including a Scimitar BPO, which sold for 525 Billion ISK. Assuming that you discount the cost of material inputs entirely, you make roughly 7.7 (call it 10) billion ISK per month, so you'd break even after 52 months, or 4 and a half years. Since moon goo you mine is not, in fact, free, your actual profit per month is something like 4 Billion ISK per month so you need to wait ~130 months to break even (that's almost 11 years, for those keeping score).
Would you pay 10B ISK for a T1 Raven hull? I mean, come on, if you mission for an hour a day it will only take you 5 years to make 100% profit! Or would you sooner buy a Raven BPO from NPC and build one yourself?
Pipa Porto wrote: If you are a collector, and want them for their rarity, then making new ones available hurts their rarity.
T2 BPOs are rare but they are not collectors' items. Guardian Vexor and State Issue Raven and AT Gold Medal are collector's items. T2 BPO's purpose is to produce T2 items without the invention process. If you paid through the nose for a T2 BPO because you felt it was a collector's item, that's your business.
Pipa Porto wrote: If you are a producer, then you're goal isn't "use a T2 BPO," your goal is "Produce a T2 Item profitably." Invention works just fine for you.
The goal here is not "Produce a T2 Item profitably." The goal is "Produce T2 item without having the hassle of invention".
Pipa Porto wrote: Oh, and Faction Towers, previous AT prizes, special event prizes. The list goes on of items previously, but not currently able to be brought into existence.
I'll fly a different ship or use a different tower, and get similar or more benefits. There are enough alternatives. However, if I want to produce T2 without the hassle of invention then there is no way for me to create a T2 BPO.
You know, AT prizes are exactly that: unique prizes given to those who earned them by being the best. They are collectors' items, not desirable because they can earn you billions of passive income a month, but because they had to be won by being the best. They also are not the only ships available and many others can perform the same functions just as well or better. Don't compare them to T2 BPOs which have a real purpose that can't be duplicated: to produce T2 items without the time or ISK of the invention process.
|
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:09:00 -
[991] - Quote
Traedar wrote: T2 BPOs are rare but they are not collectors' items. .
lol
|
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:15:00 -
[992] - Quote
Traedar wrote:I'll fly a different ship or use a different tower, and get similar or more benefits. There are enough alternatives. However, if I want to produce T2 without the hassle of invention then there is no way for me to create a T2 BPO.
If you want to produce a T2 Item, you can invent it. Invention is the alternative to a BPO that has similar benefits (you create a T2 item).
Faction towers take less effort to run and run more efficiently than regular towers, T2 BPOs take less effort to run and run more efficiently than Invention.
If you're lazy and want that ease of use and efficiency (that's really not that much easier than Invention, especially in cases of fluctuating markets, where good market awareness might be the only thing to keep you in the black, while an inventor can simply switch away from the volatile market), T2 BPOs go on sale pretty regularly. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:18:00 -
[993] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Traedar wrote:
T2 BPOs are rare but they are not collectors' items. .
TROLOLOLOLOL lol
Fine, I'll clarify. They are limited and if you want to collect them then you can because there won't be any more (as they exist today). However, they have a real purpose isn't duplicated by any other item: to create T2 without the invention process and make a ton of ISK while doing so. So they have unique purpose in the game other than being collected.
Also I think one point I'm trying to make is, they should not be collector's items any more than a Raven BPO should be. |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
636
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:20:00 -
[994] - Quote
Traedar wrote:I'll fly a different ship or use a different tower, and get similar or more benefits. There are enough alternatives. However, if I want to produce T2 without the hassle of invention then there is no way for me to create a T2 BPO.
How exactly is the invention process so burdensome that it isn't a valid alternative to T2 BPOs? I've actually found that the barrier to entry is fairly low. Ramping up research/production is costly, but then so is seriously producing off of any BPO, especially one with so many component inputs.
|
Pipa Porto
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:24:00 -
[995] - Quote
Traedar wrote:Fine, I'll clarify. They are limited and if you want to collect them then you can because there won't be any more (as they exist today). However, they have a real purpose isn't duplicated by any other item: to create T2 without the invention process and make a ton of ISK while doing so. So they have unique purpose in the game other than being collected.
Then tell me, what rationale besides "It's a collectors item" do you have for a Scimitar BPO (which earns about 4b a month) being valued by the market (as in, this is what it sold for) at half a Trillion ISK? And how is making a .7% monthly return on an investment "making a ton of ISK?"
And I could say that about faction Towers. Their ability to last longer without being refueled isn't duplicated by any other tower. And their fuel savings make a ton of ISK while being convenient in that way. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies The Unthinkables
76
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:33:00 -
[996] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Red Teufel wrote:eh anything the devs exploited for BoB back in the day should of been removed from game. . IT has been reomved from the game... I think it were only 5ish BPO wich were kinda bad anyways (except the Sabre BPO ofc) but all of it has been removed fro mthe game and 5-6 years later we could rly stop bring that **** up
you're pretty stupid to think ccp has a way to track that. why do you think the devs havn't spoken about how many of the t2 bpos are there in game are. |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:33:00 -
[997] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Traedar wrote:Fine, I'll clarify. They are limited and if you want to collect them then you can because there won't be any more (as they exist today). However, they have a real purpose isn't duplicated by any other item: to create T2 without the invention process and make a ton of ISK while doing so. So they have unique purpose in the game other than being collected. Then tell me, what rationale besides "It's a collectors item" do you have for a Scimitar BPO (which earns about 4b a month) being valued by the market (as in, this is what it sold for) at half a Trillion ISK? And how is making a .7% monthly return on an investment "making a ton of ISK?" And I could say that about faction Towers. Their ability to last longer without being refueled isn't duplicated by any other tower. And their fuel savings make a ton of ISK while being convenient in that way.
Well, collector's value aside for a moment, I suppose someone decided that 4B a month income with a half hour effort was worth that much investment. I actually would maybe consider that if I had that much to invest.
I think really the point I'm trying to make is: that Scimitar BPO price is ridiculous. See this:
Traedar wrote:Would you pay 10B ISK for a T1 Raven hull? I mean, come on, if you mission for an hour a day it will only take you 5 years to make 100% profit! Or would you sooner buy a Raven BPO from NPC and build one yourself? ... and ...
Traedar wrote:Also I think one point I'm trying to make is, they should not be collector's items any more than a Raven BPO should be.
|
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:41:00 -
[998] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Red Teufel wrote:eh anything the devs exploited for BoB back in the day should of been removed from game. . IT has been reomved from the game... I think it were only 5ish BPO wich were kinda bad anyways (except the Sabre BPO ofc) but all of it has been removed fro mthe game and 5-6 years later we could rly stop bring that **** up you're pretty stupid to think ccp has a way to track that. why do you think the devs havn't spoken about how many of the t2 bpos are there in game are.
FYI there was a lot more shenanigans back in those days than just CCP Devs giving T2 BPOs to BoB. Like intel given to players about which NPC corps they were most likely to win the lottery with. Things of that nature.
Not to mention their exploits and EULA violations that had nothing to do with invention.
They (or some at CCP at least) basically didn't have much respect for their players in those days, IMO.
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
116
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:44:00 -
[999] - Quote
Really lets make eve a world class game by removing local in null and low, introducing anti-bot code and banning those caught botting, removing T2BPO's.
Lets do all this in time for the integration with Dust. If people moan about it too much CCP just go for a full server restart and blame it on a hardware failure. :) Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:54:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Traedar wrote:
Also I think one point I'm trying to make is, they should not be collector's items any more than a Raven BPO should be.
you dont really get what a collector is im afraid. Nobdoy calls T2 BPO`s out as collector items but for the pure fact that they are rare (there are like 50 tounry ships of each but only 15-20 T2 ships per kind) and cannot be replaced.
Traedar wrote: they have a real purpose isn't duplicated by any other item: to create T2 without the invention process and make a ton of ISK while doing so. So they have unique purpose in the game other than being collected
you and your dramatic statements about thing beeing unique in a certain way.... fine, a t2 BPO is the only thing that can make T2 items without using a copy in the game....so? a Freki is the only Rifter Hull class that has a bonus for webbing, boost rifters
try as much as you want, you cant talk away that T2 BPO`s are collector items.
Red Teufel wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Red Teufel wrote:eh anything the devs exploited for BoB back in the day should of been removed from game. . IT has been reomved from the game... I think it were only 5ish BPO wich were kinda bad anyways (except the Sabre BPO ofc) but all of it has been removed fro mthe game and 5-6 years later we could rly stop bring that **** up you're pretty stupid to think ccp has a way to track that. why do you think the devs havn't spoken about how many of the t2 bpos are there in game are. well, u must have missed the full story then, as CCP got hacked and it was published to everyone by a third party and even by CCP at a later date, what the dev illegaly brought into the game. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
118
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:04:00 -
[1001] - Quote
No one complains about rare hulls because rare hulls are easily popped or stolen if they are used or shared, The point is that T2BPO's can not be stolen when shared nor can they be destroyed as there is zero reason to move them from a station. A perfect nerf would be to only allow T2BPO's to be used outside high sec and only physically in a pos. This would bring them in line with rare ships. You could keep your t2bpo in a station alongside a unique ship but you should not be able to use it or profit from it. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Vigilant
Vigilant's Vigilante's
4
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:07:00 -
[1002] - Quote
Why is this thread still going? CCP is not going to remove them, quit whining about it.
They really need to give more out, if you ask me |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies The Unthinkables
76
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:08:00 -
[1003] - Quote
that's okay i don't mind t2bpo's all that much...keep the prices down for me mwhahahaha |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:16:00 -
[1004] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:No one complains about rare hulls because rare hulls are easily popped or stolen if they are used or shared, The point is that T2BPO's can not be stolen when shared nor can they be destroyed as there is zero reason to move them from a station. A perfect nerf would be to only allow T2BPO's to be used outside high sec and only physically in a pos. This would bring them in line with rare ships. You could keep your t2bpo in a station alongside a unique ship but you should not be able to use it or profit from it.
no Brewlar yo usaid this 10 times already and its still a stupid idea... how would anyone know whats inside a POS and what not? |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
196
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:50:00 -
[1005] - Quote
I have to agree, Not moving T2 BPO's is not good for the economy, they should at the very least be made in a way where they can easily be stolen if shared.
it would be nice to see T2 manufacture move to Lowsec or nulsec |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 22:01:00 -
[1006] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: you and your dramatic statements about thing beeing unique in a certain way.... fine, a t2 BPO is the only thing that can make T2 items without using a copy in the game....so? a Freki is the only Rifter Hull class that has a bonus for webbing, boost rifters
First off, if you want a ship with a web bonus you can use a Loki or I believe Huginn.
Also I am not calling a T2 BPO a "collector's item" the way that a Freki is a collector's item. I think this is the post of mine that you missed.
Traedar wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Traedar wrote:
T2 BPOs are rare but they are not collectors' items. .
TROLOLOLOLOL lol Fine, I'll clarify. They are limited and if you want to collect them then you can because there won't be any more (as they exist today). However, they have a real purpose isn't duplicated by any other item: to create T2 without the invention process and make a ton of ISK while doing so. So they have unique purpose in the game other than being collected. Also I think one point I'm trying to make is, they should not be collector's items any more than a Raven BPO should be.
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 22:06:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:I have to agree, Not moving T2 BPO's is not good for the economy, they should at the very least be made in a way where they can easily be stolen if shared.
it would be nice to see T2 manufacture move to Lowsec or nulsec
yea its not a secret that you have to agree anything that brewlar says, even tho the entire topic of "can be stolen" is just stupid...
How does switching the owner help the situation of T2 BPO`s destroying the market etc? Does it matter if the BPO stays the same but is used by a different owner? Did u fail to steal a T2 BPO or what?
Traedar wrote: First off, if you want a ship with a web bonus you can use a Loki or I believe Huginn.
So? if you want a t2 ship, invent it of a t1 copy... you see there are always alternatives that work but in the case of T2 production you guys have to cry about the only alternative that you are apparently not able to use as you simply cannot afford it. If you ask me, its a pretty shady and childish attitude. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
118
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:10:00 -
[1008] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs)
There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month. Those BPOs cost you exactly 0 isk. so 40 billion per month for 0 isk investment is quite good.
Said a thousand times over they won't admit it.
T2BPO ROI is off the charts. If we take a value of RP invested into the ''lottery'' and we look at the value of the T2BPO's dished out. The return in investment is phenomenal. The original investment for a T2BPO was nothing and that nothing could become an instant 600 billion along side a guaranteed 5 billion isk risk free per month on the very best blue prints. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
860
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:18:00 -
[1009] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:And now you're saying that it's worth tying say 5 Trillion ISK up in BPOs in order to make 40 billion ISK a month. (Scimitar BPOs)
There are any number of things you can do with 5 Trillion ISK that would earn far more than 40 billion ISK a month. Those BPOs cost you exactly 0 isk. so 40 billion per month for 0 isk investment is quite good. Said a thousand times over they won't admit it. T2BPO ROI is off the charts. If we take a value of RP invested into the ''lottery'' and we look at the value of the T2BPO's dished out. If the lottery was fair (it wasn't) and it sunk more isk than it dealt out then we would not have a problem with T2BPO's. The return in investment is phenomenal. The original investment for a T2BPO was nothing and that nothing could become an instant 600 billion along side a guaranteed 5 billion isk risk free per month on the very best blue prints. CCP completely de-legitimised the EVE economy by gifting content that completely over valued the effort required to obtain it. Untill T2BPO's are removed from the game the EVE online economy will be nothing but a sham and to call it player driver is slanderous and false advertising. CCP controls the eve economy through gifts to players.
You have a very odd definition of Instant, since that Scimitar BPO couldn't have spawned any time later than 5 years ago.
5 years is instant. Brewlar Kuvakei, everyone!
Oh, and the ROI is only at all worthwhile if you don't understand opportunity cost. (And possibly have a time machine.) EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Vigilant
Vigilant's Vigilante's
4
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:22:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Back to the point, CCP is not removing them. If you want a direct answer just show up to the next even (EVE Vegas) and ask.
I sure as hell will, and I will ask them to restart the "lottery" and give us more t2 BPO's. It's time to make R&D points worth something, and datacores are just nice to have.
|
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
118
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:24:00 -
[1011] - Quote
The cost of opportunity was nothing you dip ****. All you had to do was enter a lottery. A lottery that had no place existing as it was gifting items without taking any equal capital in return. Such a lottery could only exist in a fictional economy such as EVE's. Anyone who says the eve economy is player driven or realistic is wrong for this reason.
CCP controls the eve economy and until they remove T2BPO's that will always be the case. As long as T2BPO's remain CCP has no right to call the eve realistic. It is purely a fabrication driven by them. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
118
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:25:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Vigilant wrote:Back to the point, CCP is not removing them. If you want a direct answer just show up to the next even (EVE Vegas) and ask.
I sure as hell will, and I will ask them to restart the "lottery" and give us more t2 BPO's. It's time to make R&D points worth something, and datacores are just nice to have.
I agree 100%. I've been calling on CCP to destroy the T3 market for months now. Make T3 bpo's a reality it's time to bring wormhole dwellers over to my side. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:39:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: I agree 100%. I've been calling on CCP to destroy the T3 market for months now. Make T3 bpo's a reality it's time to bring wormhole dwellers over to my side.
l2sarcasm dude, I dont even know who you are actually trolling
|
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:41:00 -
[1014] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Traedar wrote: First off, if you want a ship with a web bonus you can use a Loki or I believe Huginn.
So? if you want a t2 ship, invent it of a t1 copy... you see there are always alternatives that work but in the case of T2 production you guys have to cry about the only alternative that you are apparently not able to use as you simply cannot afford it. If you ask me, its a pretty shady and childish attitude. [/quote] I would do that if I were interested in invention. My point is that I'm not interested in the invention clickfest. I'm interested in building T2 from a BPO like I can do with any T1 item in the game (I can buy the BPO from a NPC!). If there exist any BPO for these items at all, like they do for say a Raven, then why can't I buy one in the game via PVE? This is what I mean when I say, a T2 BPO should not be a collector's item any more than a Raven BPO should be. They should be available for anyone to get (via PVE).
Pipa Porto wrote: Faction towers take less effort to run and run more efficiently than regular towers, T2 BPOs take less effort to run and run more efficiently than Invention.
A tower's function is to run reacton, moon harvest, research BPO, etc. Any tower can do this. So a faction tower uses 10% less fuel? You're comparing this to a T2 BPO bypassing the costs and effort of invention? With a T2 BPO, you can build off it using 1 hr of effort per month saving plenty of cost and logistics compared to invention (invest in T1 BPO, tower, make BPC, buy datacore, decryptor).
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
197
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:43:00 -
[1015] - Quote
Vigilant wrote:Back to the point, CCP is not removing them. If you want a direct answer just show up to the next even (EVE Vegas) and ask.
I sure as hell will, and I will ask them to restart the "lottery" and give us more t2 BPO's. It's time to make R&D points worth something, and datacores are just nice to have.
What about all the future dust players who may want to partake in eve online and the T2 lottery?
How are they going to fare against the established community, this is why the T2 situation needs to be looked into, remove not remove, just made fair, and theftable/scamable. this is EvE.
Id like to see the numbers swell to 100K online on the servers one day, that would be much better then looking at the few grappling on to their precious.
Deal with IT. |
Pipa Porto
860
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:48:00 -
[1016] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:The cost of opportunity was nothing you dip ****. All you had to do was enter a lottery. A lottery that had no place existing as it was gifting items without taking any equal capital in return. Such a lottery could only exist in a fictional economy such as EVE's. Anyone who says the eve economy is player driven or realistic is wrong for this reason.
CCP controls the eve economy and until they remove T2BPO's that will always be the case. As long as T2BPO's remain CCP has no right to call the eve realistic. It is purely a fabrication driven by them.
Nope. You had to win the lottery. And even then, there was a good chance of getting a ****** BPO.
The lottery was meant to represent the vagaries of scientific research. There are plenty of people who invent something new and get rich off of it. That's what the lottery was meant to represent.
But enough about the game mechanics of 5 years ago. To make an argument for removing T2 BPOs from the game, you either need to make a case for the availability of Time Travel or for T2 BPOs causing actual harm to the game now, not 5 years ago.
You've failed on both counts. You've failed on the second count repeatedly. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Pipa Porto
860
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:55:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Traedar wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Faction towers take less effort to run and run more efficiently than regular towers, T2 BPOs take less effort to run and run more efficiently than Invention. A tower's function is to run reacton, moon harvest, research BPO, etc. Any tower can do this. So a faction tower uses 10% less fuel? You're comparing this to a T2 BPO bypassing the costs and effort of invention? With a T2 BPO, you can build off it using 1 hr of effort per month saving plenty of cost and logistics compared to invention (invest in T1 BPO, tower, make BPC, buy datacore, decryptor).
A T2 BPO's function is to create a T2 Item. Invention can also do this. So a T2 BPO uses a little less effort then invention, just like a Faction tower takes a little less effort to run. So a T2 BPO consumes a little less ISK in production, just like a Faction tower takes a little less ISK to run.
Just like if you want the convenience of a faction tower, you have to buy one from another player, if you want the convenience (and terrible ROI) of a T2 BPO, you have to buy one from a player.
An unlimited seed of T2 BPOs would simply destroy the invention profession, and in the process make T2 manufacturing about as profitable as T1 manufacturing.
Just because you want something but are too cheap to pay market value for it doesn't mean it's CCP's duty to provide it to you. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Pipa Porto
860
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 23:56:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Vigilant wrote:Back to the point, CCP is not removing them. If you want a direct answer just show up to the next even (EVE Vegas) and ask.
I sure as hell will, and I will ask them to restart the "lottery" and give us more t2 BPO's. It's time to make R&D points worth something, and datacores are just nice to have.
What about all the future dust players who may want to partake in eve online and the T2 lottery? How are they going to fare against the established community, this is why the T2 situation needs to be looked into, remove not remove, just made fair, and theftable/scamable. this is EvE. Id like to see the numbers swell to 100K online on the servers one day, that would be much better then looking at the few grappling on to their precious. Deal with IT.
They'll be able to manufacture T2 items and profit from it just fine once their shiny new EVE toons get their science training done. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
197
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:03:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Kara Books wrote:Vigilant wrote:Back to the point, CCP is not removing them. If you want a direct answer just show up to the next even (EVE Vegas) and ask.
I sure as hell will, and I will ask them to restart the "lottery" and give us more t2 BPO's. It's time to make R&D points worth something, and datacores are just nice to have.
What about all the future dust players who may want to partake in eve online and the T2 lottery? How are they going to fare against the established community, this is why the T2 situation needs to be looked into, remove not remove, just made fair, and theftable/scamable. this is EvE. Id like to see the numbers swell to 100K online on the servers one day, that would be much better then looking at the few grappling on to their precious. Deal with IT. They'll be able to manufacture T2 items and profit from it just fine once their shiny new EVE toons get their science training done.
They cant profit from their shiny new BPO's they cant whoopsie from some ones corp hanger now can they. |
Pipa Porto
861
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:08:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:They cant profit from their shiny new BPO's they cant whoopsie from some ones corp hanger now can they.
Remove the ability to lock down BPOs and everyone's manufacturing alt will be in a one man corp. Industrial "Corps" will simply be chat channels. CEO's who want to help their newer industrialists by providing access to spare BPOs won't be able to do so.
Sounds like a grand improvement.
(Oh, and not everyone locks down their expensive BPO collection.) EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
199
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:17:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Kara Books wrote:They cant profit from their shiny new BPO's they cant whoopsie from some ones corp hanger now can they. Remove the ability to lock down BPOs and everyone's manufacturing alt will be in a one man corp. Industrial "Corps" will simply be chat channels. CEO's who want to help their newer industrialists by providing access to spare BPOs won't be able to do so. Sounds like a grand improvement. (Oh, and not everyone locks down their expensive BPO collection.)
Im glad we can agree on something.
Oh and, Why again are these CEO's Teaching "Newer Industrialists" how to make T2 items NOT from invention? I could have swore some one said that was more profitable.
Unlocking Blueprints just makes the Original owner, not collect passive ISK while their watching a "LazyTown Marathon" thats quite possibly another form of Passive ISK. |
Pipa Porto
862
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:20:00 -
[1022] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Kara Books wrote:They cant profit from their shiny new BPO's they cant whoopsie from some ones corp hanger now can they. Remove the ability to lock down BPOs and everyone's manufacturing alt will be in a one man corp. Industrial "Corps" will simply be chat channels. CEO's who want to help their newer industrialists by providing access to spare BPOs won't be able to do so. Sounds like a grand improvement. (Oh, and not everyone locks down their expensive BPO collection.) Im glad we can agree on something. Oh and, Why again are these CEO's Teaching "Newer Industrialists" how to make T2 items NOT from invention? I could have swore some one said that was more profitable. Unlocking Blueprints just makes the Original owner, not collect passive ISK while their watching a "LazyTown Marathon" thats quite possibly another form of Passive ISK.
So, you're proposing that only T2 BPOs can't be locked down? That's kind of an odd distinction, isn't it?
Invention is less profitable per unit, but much more lucrative due to the much higher volumes you can produce. For any given amount of capital, you can make much, much, much more ISK through Invention than you can through T2 BPOs. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
120
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:24:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Dam straight T2BPO owners should be driven into one man corps if they want to play with CCP isk welfare. Then they can be war dec'd on a daily basis so people can smash **** out of their posses.
CCP remove T2BPO let eve grow. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Vigilant
Vigilant's Vigilante's
4
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:29:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Dam straight T2BPO owners should be driven into one man corps if they want to play with CCP isk welfare. Then they can be war dec'd on a daily basis so people can smash **** out of their posses.
CCP remove T2BPO let eve grow.
Removing them without fixing the -4/-4 normal invention doesn't fix the problem. You will just drive cost up on everyone, minus the Alliances and they how corner certain markets. CCP would have to make invent BPC's somehow researchable, and that would have to be able to done by anyone and any security system.
Pick which side of the coin you want? Alliances running BPO's or running invention folks to the rules they make.
They have the capital to screw either side of the coin. CCP will not remove that... |
Pipa Porto
862
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:38:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Vigilant wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Dam straight T2BPO owners should be driven into one man corps if they want to play with CCP isk welfare. Then they can be war dec'd on a daily basis so people can smash **** out of their posses.
CCP remove T2BPO let eve grow. Removing them without fixing the -4/-4 normal invention doesn't fix the problem. You will just drive cost up on everyone, minus the Alliances and they how corner certain markets. CCP would have to make invent BPC's somehow researchable, and that would have to be able to done by anyone and any security system. Pick which side of the coin you want? Alliances running BPO's or running invention folks to the rules they make. They have the capital to screw either side of the coin. CCP will not remove that...
BPO's do not affect the sale price of most T2 items. The only T2 items that BPOs affect are ones who's sales volumes are so low that the BPOs can actually fill the demand (which means, like BLOPS [which have no BPOs], they wouldn't be worth inventing anyway).
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Dam straight T2BPO owners should be driven into one man corps if they want to play with CCP isk welfare. Then they can be war dec'd on a daily basis so people can smash **** out of their posses.
CCP remove T2BPO let eve grow.
You can wardec the corps with T2 BPOs now. Nothing's stopping you.
Show how an item that is regularly available on the market, that has a horrible ROI, and that cannot be easily shifted in the face of changing market conditions is "CCP ISK Welfare." EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
120
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 01:07:00 -
[1026] - Quote
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. If it did take massive amounts of effort or ISK then T2BPO would not be a problem. Unfortunately T2BPO is a problem and a huge flaw in EVE that needs solved if the game is to grow.
Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Skeenal Raholan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 01:33:00 -
[1027] - Quote
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. If it did take massive amounts of effort or ISK then T2BPO would not be a problem. Unfortunately T2BPO is a problem and a huge flaw in EVE that needs solved if the game is to grow.
Curious question would be, how many owners of the so called gifted t2bpo's still have possession of the t2bpo they WON in the rp lottery (over 5 years ago). I would guess very few if any.
If it were me who won (using the scimi for example) the t2bpo 5 YRS ago, i would have long ago sold it for the 600 bil. and paid for my accounts for the rest of my eve carrier. As i would assume ANY person would do. So thinking on that aspect of it, t2bpo's have a HUGE investment in the terms of isk, I could easily have made more money in the 5 yrs after selling the t2bpo inventing the same scimi's then you would have ever made with the t2bpo. So No, t2bpos are not a problem. |
Pipa Porto
863
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 07:50:00 -
[1028] - Quote
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. If it did take massive amounts of effort or ISK then T2BPO would not be a problem. Unfortunately T2BPO is a problem and a huge flaw in EVE that needs solved if the game is to grow.
You still clearly don't understand the concept of opportunity cost. Nor the concept of a time value of money.
Unless you are claiming that T2 BPO owners have access to time machines, the value of the BPO today and the value of the BPO 5 years ago are not interchangeable.
And getting yourself in a position where winning the lottery with a worthwhile BPO was at all likely was a pretty monumental effort at the time.
Again you claim that the game won't grow due to T2 BPOs. That's demonstrably false. The current subcount is roughly double what it was when the lottery ended 5 years ago. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 08:06:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: 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
calm down little warrior, the huge majority of T2 BPO`s beeing used right now, did cost their owner a massive amount of isk OR they are the original owners and were smart and lucky enough to invest their RP to the right time into the right thing (like me ).
This has absolutely nothing to do with with beeing "gifted" and even you probably know that. Its not a donation if you hand something out that the oposite has paid for (in form of a lottery ticket for exmaple).
Just try to understand what Lottery means: |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 08:47:00 -
[1030] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: 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 calm down little warrior, the huge majority of T2 BPO`s beeing used right now, did cost their owner a massive amount of isk OR they are the original owners and were smart and lucky enough to invest their RP to the right time into the right thing (like me ). This has absolutely nothing to do with with beeing "gifted" and even you probably know that. Its not a donation if you hand something out that the oposite has paid for (in form of a lottery ticket for exmaple). Just try to understand what Lottery means:
And everyone also knows that some parts of the lottery was fixed which means some person where gifted with t2 bpos. Most of them where in BoB back then which was the power house of that era in eve. |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
163
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 08:48:00 -
[1031] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:This has absolutely nothing to do with with beeing "gifted" and even you probably know that. Its not a donation if you hand something out that the oposite has paid for (in form of a lottery ticket for exmaple).
How much effort it required from you after you had that research job set up? None. It was, it is and always will be passive income. |
Pipa Porto
863
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 08:57:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: 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 calm down little warrior, the huge majority of T2 BPO`s beeing used right now, did cost their owner a massive amount of isk OR they are the original owners and were smart and lucky enough to invest their RP to the right time into the right thing (like me ). This has absolutely nothing to do with with beeing "gifted" and even you probably know that. Its not a donation if you hand something out that the oposite has paid for (in form of a lottery ticket for exmaple). Just try to understand what Lottery means: And everyone also knows that some parts of the lottery was fixed which means some person where gifted with t2 bpos. Most of them where in BoB back then which was the power house of that era in eve.
Got any evidence that any BPOs that were unfairly given out are still in the game?
The BPOs involved in the T20 mess were removed more than 5 years ago. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 09:00:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:
And everyone also knows that some parts of the lottery was fixed which means some person where gifted with t2 bpos. Most of them where in BoB back then which was the power house of that era in eve.
yea like 5 of thousands... or less than 1 % and even these got removed long time ago, but totally worth mentioning it over and over agian if u have other valid points again T2 BPO`s right?
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:This has absolutely nothing to do with with beeing "gifted" and even you probably know that. Its not a donation if you hand something out that the oposite has paid for (in form of a lottery ticket for exmaple). How much effort it required from you after you had that research job set up? None. It was, it is and always will be passive income.
research agents worked different back then u might wana look it up and it actually did cost isk and effort to create a char farm just for this lottery. Obviously looking back to it from today the invested isk was marginal compared to what T2 BPO`s are worth now, but back then it was certainly a risky investion. |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
163
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 09:41:00 -
[1034] - Quote
What does WWII tank has to do with EVE?
And no, lottery hasn't changed in last 5 years. |
Pipa Porto
863
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 10:11:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:What does WWII tank has to do with EVE?
Stop trolling.
Quote: And no, lottery hasn't changed in last 5 years.
Jorma Morkkis: "Removing something isn't a change." EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
163
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 10:19:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Removing something isn't a change.
It's a change.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery |
Pipa Porto
863
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 10:30:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:What does WWII tank has to do with EVE? Stop trolling. Quote: And no, lottery hasn't changed in last 5 years.
Jorma Morkkis: "Removing something isn't a change." It's a change. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery
Selective quoting just makes you look dumber.
At this point I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
|
ISD BiscuitThief
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 11:08:00 -
[1038] - Quote
There's a lot of really useful information in this thread, but there's also a lot of misinformation and trolling going on.
I'd prefer not to go through 52 pages and remove every single troll post and I'd rather not press that lock button, so please try to keep it civil and on track from here on. Also, I removed some personal attacks and spam posts which I'm sure were purely accidental. ISD BiscuitThief Ensign Community Communication Liasons (CCLs) Interstellar Service Department |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
120
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 11:42:00 -
[1039] - Quote
ISD BiscuitThief wrote:There's a lot of really useful information in this thread, but there's also a lot of misinformation and trolling going on.
I'd prefer not to go through 52 pages and remove every single troll post and I'd rather not press that lock button, so please try to keep it civil and on track from here on. Also, I removed some personal attacks and spam posts which I'm sure were purely accidental.
We've seen what happens when you lock a T2BPO thread and all parties agree that this one focal point for the discussion is good enough. You could lock it but another one will just be created or maybe 5 others by different people like last time this thread got locked. I regret not putting this thread in the EVE general discussion as it would get a lot more posts there. :) Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
sodney
Elite Aeronautic Developer Syndicate Test Alliance Please Ignore
15
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 12:10:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: You could lock it but another one will just be created or maybe 5 others by different people like last time this thread got locked. I regret not putting this thread in the EVE general discussion as it would get a lot more posts there. :)
I cant remember this thread ever beeing locked tbh, but maybe it got locked because it had a equally low discussion-quality as this thread has aswell? If CCP or in this case the ISDs are trying to hide something wich you are accusing them, why wouldnt they just forum-ban you and delete this and all upcoming threads? not the worst idea, if you ask me.
|
|
Tivookz
Black Flag Operations The Kadeshi
30
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 12:33:00 -
[1041] - Quote
The people yelling for T2 BPO's should first spend 15 bil buying one.
We, the people who spent hard earned cash on T2 bpo's, don't want our investments to dissapear into thin air.
I didn't win any lottery, I didn't rob anyone. I spent serveral years to buy my T2 BPOs. I dont own many and quite frankly I have yet to earn any money from them.
You need to understand that most T2 BPO's have long production timers and or near zero profit.
Take my Berserker II BPO, it might be valued at around 25 bil give or take but I earn nothing producing them because the profit is zero. |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 13:30:00 -
[1042] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Azrael Dinn wrote:
And everyone also knows that some parts of the lottery was fixed which means some person where gifted with t2 bpos. Most of them where in BoB back then which was the power house of that era in eve.
yea like 5 of thousands... or less than 1 % and even these got removed long time ago, but totally worth mentioning it over and over agian if u have other valid points again T2 BPO`s right?
It's worth mentioning every single time it is mentioned just so that no one never forgets that someone in CCP *****d *p real bad. And what proof do YOU have that all of those prints where removed? none.
And it's wroth mentioning cause thats the time when people got the things so it's revelant and funny that things that happened 5 years back have still and effect to the game and it's players.
And no I do not have solutions to it. Neither do you. Only thing I have are my opinions which from your point of view sucks and your solutions form my point of view sucks, so no point talking about those.
So mayby something needs to be done about this so the topic would go away once and for all. I'll settle on what ever CCP says as long as they address the matter in some way. And not saying anything is not an answer. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
126
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 14:12:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote: It's worth mentioning every single time it is mentioned just so that no one never forgets that someone in CCP *****d *p real bad. And what proof do YOU have that all of those prints where removed? none.
IT was wrong, yes but its still a game after all, right? the way you and your friend brewlar mentioning it almost sounds like we are tlking about the holocaust. Since the website who found that out defentily wasnt working together with CCP to that point, im sure they would have mentioned it. proof enough for me tbh.
Azrael Dinn wrote: And no I do not have solutions to it. Neither do you. Only thing I have are my opinions which from your point of view sucks and your solutions form my point of view sucks, so no point talking about those.
I dont see a problem that need to be fixed, there for i have never offered a solution for a not existing issue.
Azrael Dinn wrote: So mayby something needs to be done about this so the topic would go away once and for all. I'll settle on what ever CCP says as long as they address the matter in some way..
to achieve that goal you would have to remove envy from of the human nature, wich is the only reason why ppl are complaining at all.
Azrael Dinn wrote: And not saying anything is not an answer.
there has been so much discussion about that topic over the years... but there are just these special snowflakes that dont want to understand, so its understandable that they dont wase their time to explain it over and over again instead of fixing real issues. |
Tivookz
Black Flag Operations The Kadeshi
30
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 14:28:00 -
[1044] - Quote
The people yelling for T2 BPO's to be removed should first spend 15 bil buying one, as a future investment.
We, the people who spent hard earned cash on T2 bpo's, don't want our investments to dissapear into thin air.
I didn't win any lottery, I didn't rob anyone. I spent serveral years playing the market, mining and ratting to buy my T2 BPOs. I dont own many and quite frankly I have yet to earn any money from them.
You need to understand that most T2 BPO's have long production timers and or near zero profit.
Take my Berserker II BPO, it might be valued at around 25 bil give or take but I earn nothing producing them because the profit is next to zero compared to how much you need to spend to buy such a BPO.
To give you some numbers to think about:
I can produce 16200 Berserker II's in a year if the BPO is in production 24/7.
Manufacture cost(16200 Runs): 7 795 576 663.43 ISK Manufacture cost one unit: 481 208.44 ISK Minimum sell cost (16200 Runs): 7 951 488 196.70 ISK Minimum sell cost one unit: 490 832.60 ISK Market profit (16200 runs): 571 075 336.57 ISK Market profit one unit: 35 251.56 ISK ISK/h: 65 319.07 ISK Profit %: 7.33%
This is what I spend and earn per YEAR from my Berserker II BPO. 571 mil in profit per year from a 25 bil investment.
If we assume that the value of said BPO is 25 bil then at the current market prices it will take me 43,7 years to earn 25 bil in pure profit from it.
43,7 Earth years. Yes.
Please rethink your reason for creating this plead to remove T2BPOs. |
Korg Tronix
Time Bandits.
66
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 16:04:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Tivookz wrote:The people yelling for T2 BPO's to be removed should first spend 15 bil buying one, as a future investment.
We, the people who spent hard earned cash on T2 bpo's, don't want our investments to dissapear into thin air.
I didn't win any lottery, I didn't rob anyone. I spent serveral years playing the market, mining and ratting to buy my T2 BPOs. I dont own many and quite frankly I have yet to earn any money from them.
You need to understand that most T2 BPO's have long production timers and or near zero profit.
Take my Berserker II BPO, it might be valued at around 25 bil give or take but I earn nothing producing them because the profit is next to zero compared to how much you need to spend to buy such a BPO.
To give you some numbers to think about:
I can produce 16200 Berserker II's in a year if the BPO is in production 24/7.
Manufacture cost(16200 Runs): 7 795 576 663.43 ISK Manufacture cost one unit: 481 208.44 ISK Minimum sell cost (16200 Runs): 7 951 488 196.70 ISK Minimum sell cost one unit: 490 832.60 ISK Market profit (16200 runs): 571 075 336.57 ISK Market profit one unit: 35 251.56 ISK ISK/h: 65 319.07 ISK Profit %: 7.33%
This is what I spend and earn per YEAR from my Berserker II BPO. 571 mil in profit per year from a 25 bil investment.
If we assume that the value of said BPO is 25 bil then at the current market prices it will take me 43,7 years to earn 25 bil in pure profit from it.
43,7 Earth years. Yes.
Please rethink your reason for creating this plead to remove T2BPOs.
What i find really funny is i earn more from invented damage controls each month than you do from your bpo in a year
Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams] |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
199
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 16:05:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Tivookz wrote:The people yelling for T2 BPO's to be removed should first spend 15 bil buying one, as a future investment.
We, the people who spent hard earned cash on T2 bpo's, don't want our investments to dissapear into thin air.
I didn't win any lottery, I didn't rob anyone. I spent serveral years playing the market, mining and ratting to buy my T2 BPOs. I dont own many and quite frankly I have yet to earn any money from them.
You need to understand that most T2 BPO's have long production timers and or near zero profit.
Take my Berserker II BPO, it might be valued at around 25 bil give or take but I earn nothing producing them because the profit is next to zero compared to how much you need to spend to buy such a BPO.
To give you some numbers to think about:
I can produce 16200 Berserker II's in a year if the BPO is in production 24/7.
Manufacture cost(16200 Runs): 7 795 576 663.43 ISK Manufacture cost one unit: 481 208.44 ISK Minimum sell cost (16200 Runs): 7 951 488 196.70 ISK Minimum sell cost one unit: 490 832.60 ISK Market profit (16200 runs): 571 075 336.57 ISK Market profit one unit: 35 251.56 ISK ISK/h: 65 319.07 ISK Profit %: 7.33%
This is what I spend and earn per YEAR from my Berserker II BPO. 571 mil in profit per year from a 25 bil investment.
If we assume that the value of said BPO is 25 bil then at the current market prices it will take me 43,7 years to earn 25 bil in pure profit from it.
43,7 Earth years. Yes.
Please rethink your reason for creating this plead to remove T2BPOs.
This is the best argument against removal that has touched this topic to date, very nice, the smalltime Industrialists moving into their bigtime is a warm sight to see, I bet this is exactly how CCP intended this T2 Lottery to Play out, but in fact, its not this pretty 95% of the time.
Far earlier into this subject, I have mentioned several times, that if there is a T2 removal or Massive change to the entire segment, the option to refund owners the estimated amount should be considered and a good long thought should be given before making any changes to the T2 BPO project are to be made, to avoid Volatility and possible catastrophic results to the Market ecosystem are just some "Ingame reasons"
The result CAN aim for More players to be recruited into the CCP 514/EvE project, ample but profitable supply of all goods to be available to the general playerbase and the ability to make anything from scratch all on your own should be an important Tertiary goal, The later half CCP is actually doing a superb job, and very minimal Market interruption is being incurred.
10/10 excellent job.
But all games Aside, this is my main reason Why im here, fighting for this "Option" and is my response to your compelling argument.
Several months ago we began to see a drop in New blood entering the game, CCP responded with a solid decision to Protect newbies for at-least a few days while they learn to control their ships, how to scan and most importantly so they can focus on making their first friends in the game in hopes of retaining these new customers long enough to for them to see just how unique and incredible this game really is at its very heart once they actually head out and run into the likes of me on the forums or you on the Niarja gate as some random examples.
If CCP, where to make a strong push, which they likely will with DUST514, players can flood the eve servers by the tens of thousands and retaining them longer then 6 months could mean actually doing whatever needs be done to really hook them, and you,(large scale) T2 BPO holders, may actually want to consider this a viable tradeoff.
like most if not all of the posters here on this topic, Removal, Modification or otherwise Giving them something very special is a Legitimate option within options we CANNOT ignore and I believe CCP has is closely following this topic because they already understand exactly that, its in yours, mines and their best interests to Nab as many new players into this game as possible and retain them for (hopefully) years.
This is one of these subjects that CCP can use to gain and retain a stronger and solid player base in the case they decide to pursue a very certain type of advertisement campaign but only if certain circumstances and accurances actually take place. |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
121
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 16:17:00 -
[1047] - Quote
CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
sodney
Elite Aeronautic Developer Syndicate Test Alliance Please Ignore
15
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 16:28:00 -
[1048] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more.
Or eve will grow and live like it did the past 7 years aswell with T2 BPO`s as they are
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
394
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 16:51:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more. So does this mean you are quitting? Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 21:31:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more.
I suspended 13 accounts and have not played EVE for 3+ months, and my 25 T2BPOs are taking dust unproducing. for 2 reasons :
- Diablo 3 (basic and fun, no headaches, no spreadsheets) - Sheer amount of bad faith and stupidity from bitter complainers who don't understand the basics of the game and spend their time giving advices that nobody asked for.
----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
126
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 22:03:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more.
you said that every new player will quit as soon he will hear about t2 BPO`s. I think you heard about them and are apparently a new player, so why are you still playing the game?
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
122
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 22:14:00 -
[1052] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more. you said that every new player will quit as soon he will hear about t2 BPO`s. I think you heard about them and are apparently a new player, so why are you still playing the game?
I was looking forward to doing T2 industry and even though select t2 fields are open to noobs where demand surpasses T2BPO production numbers I choose not to engage in the activity. I don't see why I should be offered the scraps while CCP has selected a player to have first pickings and a monopoly over that item.
I do however produce T2 rigs and other items where CCP has not given a chosen player the ability to out perform noobs. Yet I still hope CCP introduces BPO's for rigs and for T3. As all of you lot are saying T2BPO's don't harm the game what so ever and are all round amazing so please CCP seed T3 BPO's and rig BPO's because as you can see they are great just ask idiots such as shar'ra matcevsovski . She'll explain why gifted BPO's are great for the game. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
865
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 22:55:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I was looking forward to doing T2 industry and even though select t2 fields are open to noobs where demand surpasses T2BPO production numbers I choose not to engage in the activity. I don't see why I should be offered the scraps while CCP has selected a player to have first pickings and a monopoly over that item.
I do however produce T2 rigs and other items where CCP has not given a chosen player the ability to out perform noobs. Yet I still hope CCP introduces BPO's for rigs and for T3. As all of you lot are saying T2BPO's don't harm the game what so ever and are all round amazing so please CCP seed T3 BPO's and rig BPO's because as you can see they are great just ask idiots such as shar'ra matcevsovski . She'll explain why gifted BPO's are great for the game.
1. Most T2 items have demands that far outstrip the capacity of their BPOs.
2. So you want CCP to remove T2 BPOs from some items, but add them for others? What kind of strawman are you building up to now?
3. Ah. There's the straw filled payoff. Something not being a problem does not mean that adding more of that something is a good idea.
4. You still don't seem to understand the concept of a lottery.
The existence and use of T2 BPOs don't cause any significant economic problems for inventors. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise (or evidence of the existence of a time machine)? Do you have any evidence to support your bizarre claim that T2 BPOs drive new players away from the game? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 03:03:00 -
[1054] - Quote
I think a system could work where invention would be "newb" T2 production with low barrier to entry and then vets would be able to buy expensive T2 BPOs from NPCs just like any other BPO is available from NPCs. The prices on them could be relatively high compared to build cost.
|
Katerwaul
The Scope Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 03:46:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Hello,
I posted in the morning when the world was begun I posted from the Moons and the stars and the Suns I came down from Heaven and I danced on the Earth At Caldari Institute 5 moon 3 I had my birth:
I posted for the bitter vets and the Devs of CCP But they would not post back and they wouldn't follow me I posted for the noobs and for the good Kugu They came with me and the thread went on:
Post, post, wherever you may be I am the lord of the T2BPO whine thread, said he And I lead you all, wherever you may be And I lead you all in the thread, said he
I posted on a Friday when the world turned black It's hard to find time to post with invention on your back They buried my thread, they thought it was gone But this is a thread that will never ever die and so the posts go on!
They cut me down and I leapt up high I am the life that will never, never die I'll whine with you if you'll whine with me I am the Lord of the T2BPO whine thread.
End T2BPO it was unfair then it's unfair now and detrimental to the game.
It now feels more like a support group and less like an eight-ball of pent up angst waiting for some twitchy newb to find it and become addicted to the disquieting cry of "It's not FAIR".
As long as we can agree that this is the T2BPO whining thread I suppose I can't argue with you. Working with everyone to improve New Eden -- Internet Spaceships Iz Serious Business. |
Pipa Porto
866
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 08:51:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Traedar wrote:I think a system could work where invention would be "newb" T2 production with low barrier to entry and then vets would be able to buy expensive T2 BPOs from NPCs just like any other BPO is available from NPCs. The prices on them could be relatively high compared to build cost.
That would be fine until T2 BPOs reached the saturation point, then the bottom would fall out from invention.
Look at the Supercap and Titan BPC markets. A Titan BPC used to sell for about 20b so everyone and their brother who could afford to bought Titan BPOs for copying and now they sell for ~4b. The decline happened effectively overnight as the number of BPCs available reached and exceeded the demand for them.
Seed unlimited new T2 BPOs and people will buy them and knock the bottom out of the Invention market. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Tivookz
Black Flag Operations The Kadeshi
31
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:29:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Korg Tronix wrote:Tivookz wrote:The people yelling for T2 BPO's to be removed should first spend 15 bil buying one, as a future investment.
We, the people who spent hard earned cash on T2 bpo's, don't want our investments to dissapear into thin air.
I didn't win any lottery, I didn't rob anyone. I spent serveral years playing the market, mining and ratting to buy my T2 BPOs. I dont own many and quite frankly I have yet to earn any money from them.
You need to understand that most T2 BPO's have long production timers and or near zero profit.
Take my Berserker II BPO, it might be valued at around 25 bil give or take but I earn nothing producing them because the profit is next to zero compared to how much you need to spend to buy such a BPO.
To give you some numbers to think about:
I can produce 16200 Berserker II's in a year if the BPO is in production 24/7.
Manufacture cost(16200 Runs): 7 795 576 663.43 ISK Manufacture cost one unit: 481 208.44 ISK Minimum sell cost (16200 Runs): 7 951 488 196.70 ISK Minimum sell cost one unit: 490 832.60 ISK Market profit (16200 runs): 571 075 336.57 ISK Market profit one unit: 35 251.56 ISK ISK/h: 65 319.07 ISK Profit %: 7.33%
This is what I spend and earn per YEAR from my Berserker II BPO. 571 mil in profit per year from a 25 bil investment.
If we assume that the value of said BPO is 25 bil then at the current market prices it will take me 43,7 years to earn 25 bil in pure profit from it.
43,7 Earth years. Yes.
Please rethink your reason for creating this plead to remove T2BPOs. What i find really funny is i earn more from invented damage controls each month than you do from your bpo in a year
Yes. You see, T2BPO's only appear to be game breaking.. often its quite the contrary.
T2 BPO's don't need to be removed because they are not a problem. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
394
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 11:53:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more. you said that every new player will quit as soon he will hear about t2 BPO`s. I think you heard about them and are apparently a new player, so why are you still playing the game? I was looking forward to doing T2 industry and even though select t2 fields are open to noobs where demand surpasses T2BPO production numbers I choose not to engage in the activity. I don't see why I should be offered the scraps while CCP has selected a player to have first pickings and a monopoly over that item. I do however produce T2 rigs and other items where CCP has not given a chosen player the ability to out perform noobs. Yet I still hope CCP introduces BPO's for rigs and for T3. As all of you lot are saying T2BPO's don't harm the game what so ever and are all round amazing so please CCP seed T3 BPO's and rig BPO's because as you can see they are great just ask idiots such as shar'ra matcevsovski . She'll explain why gifted BPO's are great for the game. If you choose not to engage in the activity, then why do you care to comment on it? What gives you any weight to your opinion if you do not do it? That's like me commenting on faction warfare and how unfair it is, which I have chosen not to engage in. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
200
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 13:07:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Zifrian wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more. you said that every new player will quit as soon he will hear about t2 BPO`s. I think you heard about them and are apparently a new player, so why are you still playing the game? I was looking forward to doing T2 industry and even though select t2 fields are open to noobs where demand surpasses T2BPO production numbers I choose not to engage in the activity. I don't see why I should be offered the scraps while CCP has selected a player to have first pickings and a monopoly over that item. I do however produce T2 rigs and other items where CCP has not given a chosen player the ability to out perform noobs. Yet I still hope CCP introduces BPO's for rigs and for T3. As all of you lot are saying T2BPO's don't harm the game what so ever and are all round amazing so please CCP seed T3 BPO's and rig BPO's because as you can see they are great just ask idiots such as shar'ra matcevsovski . She'll explain why gifted BPO's are great for the game. If you choose not to engage in the activity, then why do you care to comment on it? What gives you any weight to your opinion if you do not do it? That's like me commenting on faction warfare and how unfair it is, which I have chosen not to engage in. My theory is that you like the attention, good or bad. That's why after three months of no one posting in this thread you go and copy it on another forum and link it back here. I mean as you said earlier, if you posted it in the general forum you would have got a lot more posts. That's what matters right? Not your poorly informed, logic defficient arguments - its all about the attention and post count.
because we would like to but on fair terms, [we] the 99%
|
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 13:40:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Zifrian wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:CCP will tire of noobie industrialist players leaving the game when they find out about T2BPO and will eventual stem the blood flow that is pissing out of the eve economy and player base. It may take many years and eve might slip further down the ladder but eventual they will fix the problem, If they don't eve will die and it won't matter any more. you said that every new player will quit as soon he will hear about t2 BPO`s. I think you heard about them and are apparently a new player, so why are you still playing the game? I was looking forward to doing T2 industry and even though select t2 fields are open to noobs where demand surpasses T2BPO production numbers I choose not to engage in the activity. I don't see why I should be offered the scraps while CCP has selected a player to have first pickings and a monopoly over that item. I do however produce T2 rigs and other items where CCP has not given a chosen player the ability to out perform noobs. Yet I still hope CCP introduces BPO's for rigs and for T3. As all of you lot are saying T2BPO's don't harm the game what so ever and are all round amazing so please CCP seed T3 BPO's and rig BPO's because as you can see they are great just ask idiots such as shar'ra matcevsovski . She'll explain why gifted BPO's are great for the game. If you choose not to engage in the activity, then why do you care to comment on it? What gives you any weight to your opinion if you do not do it? That's like me commenting on faction warfare and how unfair it is, which I have chosen not to engage in. My theory is that you like the attention, good or bad. That's why after three months of no one posting in this thread you go and copy it on another forum and link it back here. I mean as you said earlier, if you posted it in the general forum you would have got a lot more posts. That's what matters right? Not your poorly informed, logic defficient arguments - its all about the attention and post count. because we would like to but on fair terms, [we] the 99%
The conditions are as fair as they could be...but making isk with T2 BPO-¦s is kindoff Indy-engame gameplay so you cant complain as a newer or casual player that you cant get in there yet. I know you do anyway
|
|
Pipa Porto
866
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 14:19:00 -
[1061] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:because we would like to but on fair terms, [we] the 99%
You can acquire a T2 BPO the same way most of the current owners acquired them.
You can also make more ISK with any given amount of Capital through Invention than through BPO ownership (meaning that, no matter how you acquired the BPO, selling it and switching to invention will result in a higher income).
What's unfair about a process whose only significant effect is reducing the cost of flying niche ships and fitting niche modules? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Obsidiana
White-Noise
171
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 15:35:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Leave them in. Just buff Invention and make T2 BPOs obsolete. |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
200
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 15:47:00 -
[1063] - Quote
Interesting.... |
Obsidiana
White-Noise
172
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 15:57:00 -
[1064] - Quote
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
952
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 18:20:00 -
[1065] - Quote
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
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 18:29:00 -
[1066] - Quote
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
Hedion University Amarr Empire
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 19:10:00 -
[1067] - Quote
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
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
394
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 19:31:00 -
[1068] - Quote
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! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
200
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 22:17:00 -
[1069] - Quote
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
867
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 22:39:00 -
[1070] - Quote
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
Hedion University Amarr Empire
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 23:05:00 -
[1071] - Quote
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... |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 22:24:00 -
[1072] - Quote
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. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
876
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 22:30:00 -
[1073] - Quote
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
Hedion University Amarr Empire
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 22:40:00 -
[1074] - Quote
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.
|
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
203
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 00:28:00 -
[1075] - Quote
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
Hedion University Amarr Empire
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 01:06:00 -
[1076] - Quote
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 |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 06:43:00 -
[1077] - Quote
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
----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 12:24:00 -
[1078] - Quote
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
All those who speak out against the dumbfuckery 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. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 12:25:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Buff invention and make T2BPO's irrelevant. That way T2BPO owners could not complain as there BPO's have not been touched. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Sevastian Liao
DreamWeaver Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 12:38:00 -
[1080] - Quote
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
881
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 13:34:00 -
[1081] - Quote
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 KnowGäó EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1269
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 13:46:00 -
[1082] - Quote
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. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Pipa Porto
881
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 13:53:00 -
[1083] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:All those who speak out against the dumbfuckery that is T2BPO along the years are my alts.
Glad you finally admitted it.
Quote:If present counts stand I have over 1000 accounts so CCP hey up remove T2BPO before you lose 1/30th of your player base.
1,000/350,000=1/30
Glad to hear it, Brewlar.
Oh and, [citation needed] on the "1000 people have spoken out against T2 BPOs." EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Pipa Porto
881
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 13:57:00 -
[1084] - Quote
Akita T wrote: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.
Even if the BPOs were in their original owner's hands, the fact that they have a market price and can be sold means that holding on to one incurs an opportunity cost equal to the item's sale value, which means that the method of acquisition isn't relevant, it's still (from a profit standpoint) far better to sell the BPO and invest your ISK elsewhere. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 20:22:00 -
[1085] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:All those who speak out against the dumbfuckery that is T2BPO along the years are my alts. Glad you finally admitted it. Quote:If present counts stand I have over 1000 accounts so CCP hey up remove T2BPO before you lose 1/30th of your player base. 1,000/350,000=1/30 Glad to hear it, Brewlar. Oh and, [citation needed] on the "1000 people have spoken out against T2 BPOs."
This looks like Serious buziness, I should stay out of |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:20:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Where are all these people I only ever see 29k to 32k except my 1k on at any one time? I think you're over estimating EVE's player base. Weekend numbers rarely rise over 35k at peak time nowadays. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
884
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 05:09:00 -
[1087] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where are all these people I only ever see 29k to 32k except my 1k on at any one time? I think you're over estimating EVE's player base. Weekend numbers rarely rise over 35k at peak time nowadays.
So you're saying that the majority of players are logged on 24/7? Ooookay...
By the way, according to the QEN, EVE had 357,000 active accounts at the end of 2010. That stagnated some, fell a bit (Incarna), and has pretty much recovered.
Tell me more about how your 1,000 accounts represent 1/30th of EVE's 350,000 subscriptions.
And tell me more about how there have been 1,000 different active characters arguing for the removal of T2 BPOs. Feel free to list them. Since you already counted them, I'm sure listing them will be trivial. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 06:30:00 -
[1088] - Quote
Akita T wrote: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 ? [
CCP admitted that some prints where given out. Or I recall something like this from the past year when invention was being made. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1269
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 08:16:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:Akita T wrote: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 ? CCP admitted that some prints where given out. Or I recall something like this from the past year when invention was being made. The so-called "t20 incident" was exposed to the general public on the 9th of February 2007 (so, nearly 5 and a half years ago) by a player whose name used to be filtered out for a long time on the forums (starts with "Kugu"). In a hotly disputed move afterwards, t20 was only "internally punished" and Kugu- banned due to the particular way in which he made the discovery public. t20 kept working at CCP for a while, but in other capacities, then changed employers later, in 2008 (IIRC, allegedly, to "Realtime Worlds", which funny enough, closed down in 2010). Kugu started that other site that lambastes every mistake CCP makes, and alongside SHC, they're the two most often used external forums by EVE players.
The fishy stuff involved a grand total of 10 (TEN) T2 BPOs, out of which, only 1 (ONE) was actually valuable (a Sabre BPO), and they were all removed from those who obtained them through favouritism and put back into the lottery queue. That's less than 0.1% of the total number of T2 BPOs, and they were all yanked out, so any "unfairness" past the normal effect of lottery randomness was minuscule to begin with, and nevertheless redressed.
The CCP Internal Affairs division ("CCP IA")was created shortly afterwards to pro-actively supervise CCP employee actions, investigate and punish allegations of misconduct. If Brewlar thinks he has any sort of evidence that the tampering with the lottery extended in any way past the t20 incident, he should have brought that evidence to CCP IA, which are in a far better position to actually see what really happened, because that's who has all the logs (as opposed to wild speculations, unfounded rumours, or outright malicious lies). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 12:26:00 -
[1090] - Quote
Good point. release a T2BPO winners list so we can see which players and corporations had the T2BPO's dished out to. After all it was a lottery and all players deserve to see a winners list.
Oh CCP is not going to publish the list? Then I call corruption. The lottery was corrupt and CCP simply chose which players to give the best T2BPO's to and until a winners list is published my call of corruption is relevant. The only difference with T20 Vincent was that he got caught.
Or CCP could move on from T2BPO's and remove them as clearly they are not going to be forgotten about. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
171
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 13:57:00 -
[1091] - Quote
Was T20 a tank?
Or was it fictional character created by someone? |
Pipa Porto
884
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 14:07:00 -
[1092] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Good point. release a T2BPO winners list so we can see which players and corporations had the T2BPO's dished out to. After all it was a lottery and all players deserve to see a winners list.
Oh CCP is not going to publish the list? Then I call corruption. The lottery was corrupt and CCP simply chose which players to give the best T2BPO's to and until a winners list is published my call of corruption is relevant. The only difference with T20 Vincent was that he got caught.
Do you have any evidence to suggest that such a list would fruitfully produce evidence of corruption, or is it simply a fishing expedition? You're making the accusation. It's up to you to provide evidence to get an investigation started.
Regardless, even if BPOs were seeded unfairly, the origins of the BPOs is not relevant to their current economic importance (and lack thereof) unless you have a time machine, so they're irrelevant to the question of whether they need to be removed.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Was T20 a tank?
Or was it fictional character created by someone?
This is just getting sad. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 14:23:00 -
[1093] - Quote
relseasing that list would: 1) not tell you if or who of them got the BPO`s properly or gifted 2) consist like ~3000 differenct accounts 3) kinda violate the ingame privacy, as you probably wouldnt liek to know what you have in ur wallet/assets.
wouldnt be the worstthting ever to release it but I just cannot see nay benefit to do so, not for the owners neither for the haters.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Was T20 a tank?
Or was it fictional character created by someone?
lol, its so hard to be funny these days, isnt it? |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 20:40:00 -
[1094] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:relseasing that list would: 1) not tell you if or who of them got the BPO`s properly or gifted 2) consist like ~3000 differenct accounts 3) kinda violate the ingame privacy, as you probably wouldnt like others to know, what you have in ur wallet/assets either. wouldnt be the worstthting ever to release it but I just cannot see nay benefit to do so, not for the owners neither for the haters. Jorma Morkkis wrote:Was T20 a tank?
Or was it fictional character created by someone? lol, its so hard to be funny these days, isnt it?
On the contrary, Why so serious? |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 00:31:00 -
[1095] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Where are all these people I only ever see 29k to 32k except my 1k on at any one time? I think you're over estimating EVE's player base. Weekend numbers rarely rise over 35k at peak time nowadays.
it proves nothing except that you are limited by your perception, and that you talk about things without knowing. You're in subjectivity, not in the pursuit of knowledge, otherwise you would not dare to write as deeply stupid things : You are of the worst ignorants, of those who are satisfied by their subjectivity and who don't try to improve themselves.
Instead of worrying about you to improve things for others, you'd better worry about improving your own level of understanding of how things work ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1270
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 13:52:00 -
[1096] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:it was a lottery and all players deserve to see a winners list Do they ? I don't think so. What WOULD be useful however would be a list of RP in play total in each field, number of players total, number of players that got an offer and rejected it or let it expire, and average RP spent on accepted offers per BP type. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
183
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:08:00 -
[1097] - Quote
How is this thread still alive? T2 BPOs are in the game. Deal with it. Just like the specialty ships. Some people have them, some don't, big deal. Know how many T2 BPOs I have? 0. Do I care? Not really. Much like the super-rare ships, moving one out of a station would probably just mean getting ganked anyway.
However, I do like the 100-run BPCs that come out of them, so...keep chuggin' along, all you T2 BPO-ers.
If you're crying over this tiny, relatively insignificant factor in EVE-dom, you need a new MMO, and WoW is over here.
You can now play with fuzzy pandas. Enjoy. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1270
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:12:00 -
[1098] - Quote
CorInaXeraL wrote:How is this thread still alive? People are naturally bad at math in general and statistics in particular, full of envy and greed, assuming anybody else who has it better than them does so because of some sort of favouritism, and would rather hurt people who have any advantage than work towards getting a similar advantage themselves, even if the advantage is quite minimal, carries a huge cost, and those that have the that advantage would generally be better off selling it to somebody else given current market prices. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 00:26:00 -
[1099] - Quote
No one has a problem with unique ships. Unique ships don't stop me undocking in my regular ships, T2BPO does however rule out complete areas of T2 manufacture.
If CCP gave a selected few players a special ship that insta'd titans and was indestructible we'd call this a game imbalance, such an imbalance exists in regards to T2 manufacture.
The only people here who are bad at math are CCP. They gave out content who's value far exceeded any effort put into the game to achieve or acquire, they then stoped giving out this content. That is the worse math this game has seen and yet CCP have failed to correct this error and simply allows the error to multiply and compound with each passing day. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
891
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 01:00:00 -
[1100] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:No one has a problem with unique ships. Unique ships don't stop me undocking in my regular ships, T2BPO does however rule out complete areas of T2 manufacture.
If CCP gave a selected few players a special ship that insta'd titans and was indestructible we'd call this a game imbalance, such an imbalance exists in regards to T2 manufacture.
The only people here who are bad at math are CCP. They gave out content who's value far exceeded any effort put into the game to achieve or acquire, they then stoped giving out this content. That is the worse math this game has seen and yet CCP have failed to correct this error and simply allows the error to multiply and compound with each passing day.
Nope. Name one instance where all the markets related to a science skill are dominated by BPO manufacture. If you can't, then no area of T2 manufacture is dominated by BPO manufacture. Specific markets may be, but invention is all about following the market anyway.
No, it doesn't.
So now you want CCP to keep seeding T2 BPOs? Which is it? Are they overpowered and in need of removal, or are they [something] and in need of extra seeding? You gotta limit yourself to swinging the bat in one direction at a time man. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
|
Ginger Barbarella
State War Academy Caldari State
99
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 02:33:00 -
[1101] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:The only people here who are bad at math are CCP. They gave out content who's value far exceeded any effort put into the game to achieve or acquire, they then stoped giving out this content. That is the worse math this game has seen and yet CCP have failed to correct this error and simply allows the error to multiply and compound with each passing day. [/quote]
Why are you still arguing with this troll after all these pages?? |
Pipa Porto
892
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 03:37:00 -
[1102] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:Why are you still arguing with this troll after all these pages??
Fanatics and Trolls are different beasts. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Doktor Malinowka
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 07:08:00 -
[1103] - Quote
Quote:Rumor threads and posts Rumor threads and posts which are based off no actual information and are designed to either troll or annoy other users will be locked and removed. Players who engage in these type of threads can expect to receive a warning and ban.
doesnt this describe exactly whats going on here, or the OP keep trying to do.... why is the thread still not locked yet? |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1270
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 08:15:00 -
[1104] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:[CCP] gave out content who's value far exceeded any effort put into the game to achieve or acquire, they then stopped giving out this content. That is the worse math this game has seen and yet CCP have failed to correct this error and simply allows the error to multiply and compound with each passing day. Most "limited edition" stuff has value that far exceeds any effort put into the game to achieve or acquire. Most officer mods ALSO have a value that far exceeds the effort put into the game (by that one person who does catch an officer) to achieve or acquire. Heck, even bottleneck moongoo, THAT also has a value that far exceeds the effort put into getting it (if it didn't, nobody would bother owning it).
The "error" does not really "compound and multiply" either. In fact, the numbers of T2 BPOs are slowly but surely going down, NEVER UP (not since 5 years ago anyway). Also, the effect does not go up, it also goes down - all tweaks to invention, all moongoo changes, everything in that area only REDUCED the importance of T2 BPOs, and future announced//planned changes will reduce it even further. Out of all T2 BPOs, only a small percentage are actually in production 24/7, and their PROFIT POTENTIAL has kept going DOWN most of the time. And last but not least, T2 BPOs don't create ISK. They move ISK from one player to another mainly, and in the process actually DESTROY SOME ISK in form of taxes. That's actually good for almost everybody.
Removing T2 BPOs outright WITHOUT HEAVILY BUFFING INVENTION will lead to increased T2 prices (arguably unpleasant for most end users), further inflated bottleneck moongoo prices (also arguably a bad thing), and NO NOTEWORTHY EXTRA PROFIT FOR INVENTORS (which already do just fine regardless of existence or absence of T2 BPOs). Leaving T2 BPOs alone and instead buffing invention would lead to decreased T2 prices (arguably a good thing), lowered moongoo values (which is also arguably good), but still no extra profit per inventor (possibly, a lower profit per inventor, as invention entry barriers get lowered, more inventors pop up, and some will accept even lower profits, bringing down overall profitability). Regardless of what you do, inventors will not have it much harder nor much easier. Inventors should not care about T2 BPOs existing or not, and most of the GOOD inventors already don't care. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 09:41:00 -
[1105] - Quote
I agree buffing invention me and P beyond that of T2BPO would also be a good idea allowing for inventors to control markets and only allowing T2BPO owners access to markets where demand outstrips the supply of invention. The point of the T2BPO would just be for ease with out the invention click fest and installation click fest.
When I ask for more BPO's I'm talking in regards to T3 production. I'd like to see CCP destroy that along with T2 because why only go 1/2 tard when you can go full tard. 1/2 Tard just annoys me because it's CCP admitting that BPO's are a terrible idea with out actually correcting the problem which is just lazy. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
172
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 12:55:00 -
[1106] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Leaving T2 BPOs alone and instead buffing invention would lead to decreased T2 prices (arguably a good thing), lowered moongoo values (which is also arguably good), but still no extra profit per inventor (possibly, a lower profit per inventor, as invention entry barriers get lowered, more inventors pop up, and some will accept even lower profits, bringing down overall profitability).
So why it's so bad to buff T2 BPOs?
Something like you should be able to use all lines available in the system, but you only need that one BPO. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1270
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 13:30:00 -
[1107] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:So why it's so bad to buff T2 BPOs? Something like you should be able to use all lines available in the system, but you only need that one BPO. It's basically the same as releasing 50-200 times more BPOs (so, 500k-2m extra T2 BPOs on top of the ~10k existing ones) and putting them ALL in the hands of the people that already have them. NOT EXACTLY the same, but as close as possible to that from most practical intents and purposes. This means you'd be drastically slashing T2 manufacture profits to around T1 manufacture levels, with T2 items at their lowest possible prices ever. Instead of having just a few low-usage items (which no serious inventor would really bother much with even if no T2 BPOs for it existed) where BPOs already fulfill the need, you'd have many more items where BPOs would be able to fulfill the entire need - almost all items, that is (if not all, period). You'd be basically restricting the market for invention services to a handful of items only, and even for those, at radically lower levels than before. For practical intents and purposes, invention would become
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:I agree buffing invention me and P beyond that of T2BPO would also be a good idea allowing for inventors to control markets and only allowing T2BPO owners access to markets where demand outstrips the supply of invention. NOTHING outstrips the potential supply of invention. It is basically as good as limitless. A tiny percentage of the people playing, if going into the invention business, could easily supply all the rest with all needed T2 goods. Also, past a really low PE/ME level, additional levels are fairly insignificant (there IS a huge difference between ME/PE 0 and ME/PE +1, but the difference between ME/PE: +5 and ME/PE: +50 is much smaller), so even allowing potentially limitless ME/PE levels on invented T2 BPCs, due to datacore/decryptor/T1-BPC/metaitem costs, if you ignore T2 BPO RoI and/or opportunity cost, you still won't be putting invention on par total per unit produced costs wise with T2 BPOs. Side-note, suggesting that T2 BPOs should be limited to negative ME/PE levels, now that's just silly.
So, yeah, I have nothing against buffing invention to high positive ME/PE levels, via, say, T2 BPC ME/PE levels. But that also means you need to redesign the bonuses that decryptors provide, because the ME/PE bonuses on them would become quite pointless.
Quote:The point of the T2BPO would just be for ease with out the invention click fest and installation click fest. And why exactly do we need to KEEP the current invention clickfest ? Why should we accept that invention must suck as a given and nerf BPOs as a counter-measure? Why can't we just streamline the invention process instead, so you could actually invent and produce from invented BPCs in batches up to 30 days long ? Why do you want to nerf one so badly, when you could heavily buff the other instead ?
Quote:When I ask for more BPO's I'm talking in regards to T3 production. I'd like to see CCP destroy that along with T2 because why only go 1/2 tard when you can go full tard. 1/2 Tard just annoys me because it's CCP admitting that BPO's are a terrible idea with out actually correcting the problem which is just lazy. Nobody ever said that T2 BPOs are a good idea. NOBODY. Not me, not anybody else in this thread. It's just that "fixing it" is not as simple as you make it out to be. YOUR most vocally touted suggestions so far for "fixing" it make things worse, not better. You need to heavily refine your ideas based on feedback, and focus of what you claim you want done that actually stands a chance of ever being implemented.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 13:46:00 -
[1108] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: When I ask for more BPO's I'm talking in regards to T3 production. I'd like to see CCP destroy that along with T2 because why only go 1/2 tard when you can go full tard. 1/2 Tard just annoys me because it's CCP admitting that BPO's are a terrible idea with out actually correcting the problem which is just lazy.
when do you get that your whole T3 argument has simply nothing to do with T2 BPO`s? There are only 4 different T3 lines in the game while T2 has thousands. The Raw materials for T2 production are getting mined at moons while T3 raw materials can only be farmed...just 2 entirly different production lines, Stop comparing apples with pears, OR do whatever as nobdoy is listening to you anyway. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1270
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 14:23:00 -
[1109] - Quote
For small ammo, some modules and such, casual invention profitability might indeed suffer heavily from the lack of a clickfest. On the other hand, invention results could be rebalanced with regards to skills so that the three appropriate science skills might matter a whole lot more for invention chances, thus actually raising the barrier to entry back at least a bit, so all in all, it should be more or less a wash. We could also do with a much, MIUCH higher initial install costs in NPC lines, which would also mean larger batches are inherently more profitable than smaller (or even single unit) batches, and that POS production might actually become more attractive. We could also add more POS manufacture installations, with slightly better ME/PE stats than those we currently have, better than NPC lines, to shift the production more from NPC lines to POS lines, even in highsec. Granted, all that would mean "all L5s" and a heavy starter capital (to keep the lines busy for a few weeks, or even the full month) would be a must to actually make a decent profit in NPC lines, but that's not necessarily such a bad thing IMO.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 14:39:00 -
[1110] - Quote
Akita T wrote: On the other hand, invention results could be rebalanced with regards to skills so that the three appropriate science skills might matter a whole lot more for invention chances, thus actually raising the barrier to entry back at least a bit, so all in all, it should be more or less a wash.
agreed, its not required that you have to be "defacto" a perfect inventor after 1-2 month when you will prolly do the same thing over and over for years. new players can start with T1 manufaction before they start with T2. Even tho Industry in is quite a big content and can fill a lot of game time, it requires nearly no skills compared to PVE, pr even mining( 2 litteraly 2 skills that take 2 weeks to manufacture 80% of the items in eve on the same level as 5 year old player)
T2 production does not have to be availbale for a new playerss at all, just as running a lvl4 missions require a couple month time of skill training, standing-grinding. I think, the PE level of all Bluepronts`s can be reduced across the board, to reduce the over-production, and make T2 production to a profession instead of a thing that everyone can do on the side. its prolly not what most ppl want to hear, but the best way to boost invention is to make it harder to get or more it effort to keep it running. |
|
Seminole Sun
Galactic Industrial Explorers
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 15:59:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Akita T wrote:For small ammo, some modules and such, casual invention profitability might indeed suffer heavily from the lack of a clickfest, but for ships and other longer things, not so much. On the other hand, invention results could be rebalanced with regards to skills so that the three appropriate science skills might matter a whole lot more for invention chances, thus actually raising the barrier to entry back at least a bit, so all in all, it should be more or less a wash. We could also do with a much, MIUCH higher initial install costs in NPC lines, which would also mean larger batches are inherently more profitable than smaller (or even single unit) batches, and that POS production might actually become more attractive. We could also add more POS manufacture installations, with slightly better ME/PE stats than those we currently have, better than NPC lines, to shift the production more from NPC lines to POS lines, even in highsec. Granted, all that would mean "all L5s" and a heavy starter capital (to keep the lines busy for a few weeks, or even the full month) would be a must to actually make a decent profit in NPC lines, but that's not necessarily such a bad thing IMO.
I like this
1) Spike the initial cost to something real (or potentially let it float DRAMATICALLY like office prices) 2) Make Lvl5 in the sciences actually mean something (currently, going from lvl 4 to lvl 5 increases success 1.3% on a cruiser... that's fairly trivial) 3) I'd add that the advanced ship assembly thing (the one that lets you do T2 ships) is laughable (the only POS module you can use to build those ships IIRC and it ADDS waste)... I'd suggest giving two of each assembler... a fast one (like there is now) and an "efficient" one (should be no more than 5% efficiency gain to keep it a decent choice). So 35-50% faster or 3-5% less materaials... you choose
______
I <3 Akita T
|
Seminole Sun
Galactic Industrial Explorers
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 16:14:00 -
[1112] - Quote
I've got no problem with them in general (for reasons MOST of us understand) though I acknowledge the "unfairness" factor involved...
But they point to a specific problem.
Look at command ships. The Astarte costs $241million to build if you do it from a collision measurement (+3ml) decryptor... It sells for $197million
Those ships are flown SOOOO rarely and die SOOOOO rarely, that they are selling at a rate that apparently the BPOs can easily keep up with.
That's probably not healthy... But the problem being the BPOs is not the correct diagnosis. The problem is the ships suck (or, in this specific case, they NEVER die). CCP should mine the market data for the ships and mods that never get used and then figure out why (do they need a buff? or is a game play mechanic keeping them from leaving the economy?) |
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
696
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 07:30:00 -
[1113] - Quote
replace the t2 bpo with max run max ME of t2 bpc 'sof the same item enough BPCs to have 2 year supply of what ever item the bpo was of so if you have a ship BPC that takes exactly 1 day to make 1 you will get 365x2 BPCs with max ME ( and some PE I guess)
this will be fair to everyone who has the bpo, as they will at the very least have the items to make their isk back, as invention will never have perfect ME they will be getting profit. the only way it wouldn't be profitable is if someone stupidly bought a t2 bpo for over 2 years worth of manufacturing. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 09:47:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Herping yourDerp wrote:replace the t2 bpo with max run max ME of t2 bpc 'sof the same item enough BPCs to have 2 year supply of what ever item the bpo was of so if you have a ship BPC that takes exactly 1 day to make 1 you will get 365x2 BPCs with max ME ( and some PE I guess)
this will be fair to everyone who has the bpo, as they will at the very least have the items to make their isk back, as invention will never have perfect ME they will be getting profit. the only way it wouldn't be profitable is if someone stupidly bought a t2 bpo for over 2 years worth of manufacturing.
Why replace the T2 bpo ? arbitrary assumption Why 2 years supply ? arbitrary value Why would this be fair ? It's not fair from the point of view of many ! arbitrary justice Where have you seen a T2 bpo for less than 2 years worth of manufaturing ? ignorance Why stupidly bought T2 bpo? bpo are traded following the rules of the game, their values are in accordance.
Finally, be honest and acknowledge that what is affected, it is the narcissism of some players who do not have these BPOS and not the production process of T2.
T2 Market is affected by demand, however you produce the items, if there is no demand, stuff won't sell at all. removing bpos, buffing invention will not change that. ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 10:08:00 -
[1115] - Quote
Herping yourDerp wrote:replace the t2 bpo with max run max ME of t2 bpc 'sof the same item enough BPCs to have 2 year supply of what ever item the bpo was of so if you have a ship BPC that takes exactly 1 day to make 1 you will get 365x2 BPCs with max ME ( and some PE I guess)
this will be fair to everyone who has the bpo, as they will at the very least have the items to make their isk back, as invention will never have perfect ME they will be getting profit.
Yo, I guess you havent bothered reading the thread... that Idea got brought up a cple times, its just not that good. Fixing something that would apply in 2-3 years and litherally destroy invention over that time is a very bad fix if u aks me.
Herping yourDerp wrote: the only way it wouldn't be profitable is if someone stupidly bought a t2 bpo for over 2 years worth of manufacturing.
yea please show me a profitable T2 BPO that got sold for a ROI of 2 years...Avg ROI for modules is like 5-6 years when ships rarely getting sold for less then 8 years ROI. You can take any recent sold ship BPO`s for that (scimitar, sleipnir, etc. etc.) "2 years ROI for a T2 BPO" ... Welcome to Eve-Online.
Eventually you noticed that ppl pay for these BPO`s that much because they become that valuable as a collectors item. So it would just mean to take peoples hard earned collector items away, just because some ppl who cant be bothered to do some math are jelly and moan about stuff they cant afford.
|
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 12:05:00 -
[1116] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:yea please show me a profitable T2 BPO that got sold for a ROI of 2 years...Avg ROI for modules is like 5-6 years when ships rarely getting sold for less then 8 years ROI. You can take any recent sold ship BPO`s as a example for that (scimitar, sleipnir, etc. etc.) "2 years ROI for a T2 BPO" ... Welcome to Eve-Online.
Eventually you noticed that ppl pay for these BPO`s that much because they become that valuable as a collectors item. So it would just mean to take peoples hard earned collector items away, just because some ppl who cant be bothered to do some math are jelly and moan about stuff they cant afford.
T2 Ships that are used much are easy to sell, furthermore if they have no T3 counterparts. That's the case of logistic cruisers and transport ships. Thus having the bpo for something that will sell easily is valuable, hence the high prices for these bpo (last guardian bpo sold for 220 Bil isks)
To be noticed aswell that logistic cruisers are a lot produced threw the invention process, despite of the high productivity of the T2 bpo (around 50 units per month at a station). Because they are almost all the time in high demand and are primaried often
=> When a ship is in high demand, T2 bpos and invention coexist for the benefit of all producers. =>=> once more, the true problem is buyer-side, buyers want sexy ships and will pay for them. It's not production-side : buffing invention, removing bpos will not improve the intrinsic quality of the product.
This topic from the beginning is a false debate with empty arguments and bad faith ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Hedion University Amarr Empire
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 13:49:00 -
[1117] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:
T2 Ships that are used much are easy to sell, furthermore if they have no T3 counterparts. That's the case of logistic cruisers and transport ships. Thus having the bpo for something that will sell easily is valuable, hence the high prices for these bpo (last guardian bpo sold for 220 Bil isks)
infact, transport ships are one of those ships, that do are not worth inventing as they arent flown enough. BPO`s can easily fill their demand so I bet most of them arent even profitable to build, just like claymore, eos etc. (the deadspace Transportships at least) for example last Scimi BPO sold for 525bn, last mastodon sold for 60 iirc
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 14:41:00 -
[1118] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:So why it's so bad to buff T2 BPOs? Something like you should be able to use all lines available in the system, but you only need that one BPO. It's basically the same as releasing 50-200 times more BPOs (so, 500k-2m extra T2 BPOs on top of the ~10k existing ones) and putting them ALL in the hands of the people that already have them. NOT EXACTLY the same, but as close as possible to that from most practical intents and purposes. This means you'd be drastically slashing T2 manufacture profits to around T1 manufacture levels, with T2 items at their lowest possible prices ever. Instead of having just a few low-usage items (which no serious inventor would really bother much with even if no T2 BPOs for it existed) where BPOs already fulfill the need, you'd have many more items where BPOs would be able to fulfill the entire need - almost all items, that is (if not all, period). You'd be basically restricting the market for invention services to a handful of items only, and even for those, at radically lower levels than before. For practical intents and purposes, invention would become
Forcing other players to stop T2 manufacturing would be good. T2 BPO owners should be allowed to control T2 market. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1270
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 14:59:00 -
[1119] - Quote
How cute, reverse psychology attempt combined with a false dichotomy. Whatever floats your rhetoric boat, buddy. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
191
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 15:16:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote: Forcing other players to stop T2 manufacturing would be good. T2 BPO owners should be allowed to control T2 market.
You know what? Let's do it. CCP! We need another T2 lottery to push for this change. Let's hand out, oh...200 random T2 BPOs for high-end T2 items and make it happen.
While we're at it, how about one lucky person gets a Revenant BPO to beat back all those rare BPCs with a stick. |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 17:57:00 -
[1121] - Quote
CorInaXeraL wrote:You know what? Let's do it. CCP! We need another T2 lottery to push for this change. Let's hand out, oh...200 random T2 BPOs for high-end T2 items and make it happen.
While we're at it, how about one lucky person gets a Revenant BPO to beat back all those rare BPCs with a stick.
Who said anything about lottery? Just give those BPOs to current T2 BPO owners. |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
193
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 19:05:00 -
[1122] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:CorInaXeraL wrote:You know what? Let's do it. CCP! We need another T2 lottery to push for this change. Let's hand out, oh...200 random T2 BPOs for high-end T2 items and make it happen.
While we're at it, how about one lucky person gets a Revenant BPO to beat back all those rare BPCs with a stick. Who said anything about lottery? Just give those BPOs to current T2 BPO owners.
Even better! |
Altalicious
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 20:12:00 -
[1123] - Quote
Wow, shades, of 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007......
You know T2 BPOs are not as elite as you might think. I own 13 BPOs and only keep 3 in continuous production. A few I fire up occasionally and some I have not used in years. Why? Because they really are not worth much. If I make something and it doesn't sell I am looking at a dead resource. So that BPO sits until it is worth it for me to start manufacturing. That said though, the ones I do keep in production are very profitable. The ones I occasionally use are profitable but sales are slow. And I have one or two that just are not worth the paper they are printed on.
I do also build with invented BPCs but I really must watch the markets and see how profitable a certain item is in order for me to manufacture it. Some items, especially ships, have a very low profit margin so I really need to pay attention to the markets.
I am an independent manufacturer so I don't have access to some of the discounts that big alliance guys can get. (No tin hat here, just an observation). So when I buy I have to get my materials at market price. This does put me at a disadvantage so I have to be fairly selective on what I manufacture.
One last thing. I did not play eve for 18 months so while I was gone those BPOs sat in my hangar and were not utilized. I know of several people who did have BPOs and have either quit or lost them. There is not that many of them out there and they are slowly disappearing. Eventually they will become an oddity but not much more.
|
Pipa Porto
917
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 20:58:00 -
[1124] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Forcing other players to stop T2 manufacturing would be good. T2 BPO owners should be allowed to control T2 market.
You're just talking to make noise now, aren't you?
Where has anyone, besides you and Brewlar, suggested that? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 06:03:00 -
[1125] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Where has anyone, besides you and Brewlar, suggested that?
It's a bit weird that you don't see how good idea it is. Because you're better player you are allowed to control how other players play the game. |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 06:44:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:It's a bit weird that you don't see how good idea it is. Because you're better player you are allowed to control how other players play the game.
Another false assumption in this thread : who is minding about someone's else business with this thread ? Those who claim to change arbitrary the rules, those who ask for the removal to control someone's else assets. No T2 bpo owner has ever whined about invention, because most of them are inventors also and know the ropes to make it a profitable business
Want to mind about T2 bpo ? : start to buy a few ones and start producing/selling your goods. Then you may have some feedback to publicize. ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 06:58:00 -
[1127] - Quote
Lara Dantreb wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:It's a bit weird that you don't see how good idea it is. Because you're better player you are allowed to control how other players play the game. Another false assumption in this thread : who is minding about someone's else business with this thread ? Those who claim to change arbitrary the rules, those who ask for the removal to control someone's else assets. No T2 bpo owner has ever whined about invention, because most of them are inventors also and know the ropes to make it a profitable business Want to mind about T2 bpo ? : start to buy a few ones and start producing/selling your goods. Then you may have some feedback to publicize.
I've heard that trying to do everything is bad for profit. Produce or sell, not both.
Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit. |
Pipa Porto
925
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 07:06:00 -
[1128] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:I've heard that trying to do everything is bad for profit. Produce or sell, not both.
wat
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit.
Where has anybody in this thread* said that? Quote and Link.
*aside from you and Brewlar in sad attempts at setting up straw men to argue against EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Lara Dantreb
New Horizons
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 07:09:00 -
[1129] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:I've heard that trying to do everything is bad for profit. Produce or sell, not both.
Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit.
Invention is by CCP design to minor T2 BPOs profit : invention happily ended the times when cap recharger 2 worthed 20 Mil. Invention is an anti-trust process.
There is no problem with inventors, I invented and produced thousands of ships, meanwhile producing and selling from my T2 bpos.
You can't control an open market with T2 bpos : demand and speculation are stronger levers than T2 bpo will ever be ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1271
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 07:25:00 -
[1130] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit. Where has anybody in this thread* said that? Quote and Link. Well, the troll has a sliver of truth tacked on to the end of his ranting, inventors do limit T2 BPO owners' possible profits in any of the reasonably high traffic markets (they limit it amongst themselves for low-traffic markets). That was THE VERY POINT of adding invention to the game in the first place (i.e. drastically limit or even practically eliminate the influence of BPO owner cartels by unbottlenecking T2 item production through the removal of the total monopoly on T2 production by T2 BPO owners only - and that remains valid even with a worse/slightly more expensive invention than it already is). But... to jump from that to "T2 BPO owners actively promote actions to get rid of all inventors", and not just in general, but in THIS thread (I'm going to mirror the "quote and link" request), that takes L5 in tinfoilhat mastery to even begin to claim. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
Pipa Porto
925
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 07:42:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Akita T wrote:Well, the troll has a sliver of truth tacked on to the end of his ranting, inventors do limit T2 BPO owners' possible profits in any of the reasonably high traffic markets (they limit it amongst themselves for low-traffic markets).
Yes, Jorma did stumble onto the tautological truth that "Monopoly holders benefit from strengthened monopolies."
But, as you point out later in your post, that's not what I asked. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 17:08:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Monopoly holders benefit from strengthened monopolies.
Exactly. Monopoly is always good for everyone. Even RL has proved that: nothing can compete against Microsoft. |
Pipa Porto
938
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 02:18:00 -
[1133] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Akita T wrote:Well, the troll has a sliver of truth tacked on to the end of his ranting, inventors do limit T2 BPO owners' possible profits in any of the reasonably high traffic markets (they limit it amongst themselves for low-traffic markets). Yes, Jorma did stumble onto the tautological truth that "Monopoly holders benefit from strengthened monopolies." But, as you point out later in your post, that's not what I asked. Exactly. Monopoly is always good for everyone. Even RL has proved that: nothing can compete against Microsoft.
First, learn to read. First rule of reading: The whole sentence is important.
Second, ever going to post a quote and link to back up your bizzarre claims?
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit. Where has anybody in this thread* said that? Quote and Link. *aside from you and Brewlar in sad attempts at setting up straw men to argue against
If not, stop lying. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 07:48:00 -
[1134] - Quote
You used word "monopoly" without knowing what it means. |
Pipa Porto
938
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 07:54:00 -
[1135] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:You used word "monopoly" without knowing what it means.
No, I didn't.
Ever going to post a quote and link to back up your bizzarre claims?
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit. Where has anybody in this thread* said that? Quote and Link. *aside from you and Brewlar in sad attempts at setting up straw men to argue against
Where's the quote and link, Jorma? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 08:21:00 -
[1136] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:No, I didn't.
Then you should know that it's better for you as T2 BPO owner.
Have you actually read this thread? |
Pipa Porto
938
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 08:22:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:No, I didn't. Then you should know that it's better for you as T2 BPO owner. Have you actually read this thread?
Context. It matters.
Ever going to post a quote and link to back up your bizzarre claims?
Pipa Porto wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit. Where has anybody in this thread* said that? Quote and Link. *aside from you and Brewlar in sad attempts at setting up straw men to argue against
Where's the quote and link, Jorma? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 08:26:00 -
[1138] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Ever going to post a quote and link to back up your bizzarre claims?
Have you actually read this thread? |
Pipa Porto
938
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 08:29:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Ever going to post a quote and link to back up your bizzarre claims? Have you actually read this thread?
Yes, I have.
Where did anyone besides you or Brewlar say:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Point T2 BPO owners are making in this thread is that they want to get rid off inventors, because inventors lower their possible profit. in this thread? Quote and Link.
Heck, I'll make this easier on you. Show that someone of substance said
Jorma Morkkis wrote:they want to get rid off inventors
You're making the claim. Why aren't you willing to show the basis for that claim? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Doktor Malinowka
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 08:39:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:You used word "monopoly" without knowing what it means.
sorry son, but you`re the one who dont know what it means...
when every single player in the game can build what a T2 BPO owner can, you think thats Monopoly? |
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 08:52:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Doktor Malinowka wrote:sorry son, but you`re the one who dont know what it means...
when every single player in the game can build what a T2 BPO owner can, you think thats Monopoly?
Read the thread...
Like I said before... Remove invention and this problem goes away. Only owners of T2 BPOs should be allowed to produce T2 ships/items. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Bait Club
131
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 10:17:00 -
[1142] - Quote
Kara Book`s alt wrote:Doktor Malinowka wrote:sorry son, but you`re the one who dont know what it means...
when every single player in the game can build what a T2 BPO owner can, you think thats Monopoly? Read the thread... Like I said before... Remove invention and this problem goes away. Only owners of T2 BPOs should be allowed to produce T2 ships/items.
true, but we dont live in a perfect world
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 10:39:00 -
[1143] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:true, but we dont live in a perfect world
Then:
- Remove invention - Give more T2 BPOs to current active T2 BPO owners - Allow them to "copy" job to other slots in same system (only one print per item is needed) - If there's not enough free slots for T2 BPO owner jobs with highest % completed will be canceled (only if T1 job) |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1271
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 11:50:00 -
[1144] - Quote
And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 14:22:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ?
Currently profit you as T2 BPO owner get from your investment is very small. That should be fixed. And because we are in cold and harsh universe cap between elite players and lesser players should be bigger. |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
660
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 17:28:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ? Currently profit you as T2 BPO owner get from your investment is very small. That should be fixed. And because we are in cold and harsh universe cap between elite players and lesser players should be bigger.
This has now gotten to the point of performance art. Someone needs to go back and actually read Artaud and try again. |
Pipa Porto
939
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 18:18:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ? Currently profit you as T2 BPO owner get from your investment is very small. That should be fixed. And because we are in cold and harsh universe cap between elite players and lesser players should be bigger.
Either you're trying (and horribly failing) to set up a straw man, or you've changed your mind in the most absurd way.
Either way, you need help.
The breaking of the BPO bottleneck of T2 production was intentional. Leaving BPOs in place to provide a baseline supply of uncommon items was equally intentional.
Quote and Link where anyone of substance has suggested removing Invention or Buffing BPOs. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1271
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 05:43:00 -
[1148] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ? Currently profit you as T2 BPO owner get from your investment is very small. That should be fixed. And because we are in cold and harsh universe cap between elite players and lesser players should be bigger. In spite of you obviously trolling, I will bite and answer honestly, as if you weren't.
There is absolutely no problem with tiny RoIs as long as the investment amount is very high, but only if the amount of effort required per absolute profit amount total is noticeably lower than a similar total profit from a significantly lower investment in other manufacture branches. As such, T2 BPOs provide a way to leverage existing funds which would otherwise sit unused (or at least heavily underused) for industrialist-minded people too busy to do much more micro-management, while industrialists with more free time can opt to actively spend some of it extra to get more ISK in the same total timespan.
There are already way better methods to invest large lumps of ISK and get significantly more back in a shorter time span than T2 BPOs, but the risk is higher, and the intellectual effort much higher, so it's not for everybody (and even then, not all the time).
The gap between the "elite" and "n00b" players is already huge enough (not to be confused with the gap between "casual" and "active", which is a different issue altogether), and would remain similarly huge even if EITHER all T2 BPOs would be removed OR the invention process was removed. It's more than just raw ISK that makes the difference, it's expertise in finding ways to make ISK efficiently. An "elite" player will keep adapting to new ways of efficiently squeezing ISK out of almost any opportunity, while a "n00b" will keep on complaining that the one thing he learned how to do is not doing all that well (because there's too many other "n00bs" doing it lately). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 10:50:00 -
[1149] - Quote
Akita T wrote:The gap between the "elite" and "n00b" players is already huge enough (not to be confused with the gap between "casual" and "active", which is a different issue altogether), and would remain similarly huge even if EITHER all T2 BPOs would be removed OR the invention process was removed. It's more than just raw ISK that makes the difference, it's expertise in finding ways to make ISK efficiently. An "elite" player will keep adapting to new ways of efficiently squeezing ISK out of almost any opportunity, while a "n00b" will keep on complaining that the one thing he learned how to do is not doing all that well (because there's too many other "n00bs" doing it lately).
You got that wrong.
Elite players: players who get info about upcoming changes 2-3 months before everyone else so they can adapt. Like for example this barge change. These players started crafting thousands of Retrievers and are now just waiting the moment they can start creating minerals from thin air by reprocessing those Retrievers.
Normal EVE players: players who need to adapt to changes after the changes have been publicly announced. Players without hacking/exploiting skills. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Bait Club
131
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 10:57:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote: Elite players: players who get info about upcoming changes 2-3 months before everyone else so they can adapt.
you just had to read forums to know that...I know, its a bit more complicated than posting as there is no "read" button, but thats why we are elite player and you are just a newbie.
|
|
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 11:06:00 -
[1151] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote: Elite players: players who get info about upcoming changes 2-3 months before everyone else so they can adapt.
you just had to read forums to know that...I know, its a bit more complicated than posting as there is no "read" button, but thats why we are elite player and you are just a newbie.
No info about barge changes in February/March on forums... |
Zelda Wei
New Horizon Trade Exchange
176
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 17:23:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ?
It's only a monopoly because they closed the lottery. |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Bait Club
131
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 19:25:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Zelda Wei wrote: It's only a monopoly because they closed the lottery.
Hi, please dont throw with terms around wich you dont understand
Quote:A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity
Are T2 BPO`s owners the only party that can supply T2 things?- No. Are the products made from BPO`s any different to Invention-made products?- No. Have T2 BPO`s ever created a Monopoly?- No, they didnt, at best a oligopoly before invention was introduced
tl;dr Monopoly has and had never anything to do with this |
Pipa Porto
946
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 21:34:00 -
[1154] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote: Elite players: players who get info about upcoming changes 2-3 months before everyone else so they can adapt.
you just had to read forums to know that...I know, its a bit more complicated than posting as there is no "read" button, but thats why we are elite player and you are just a newbie. No info about barge changes in February/March on forums...
If you have any evidence to suggest that players were told of upcoming changes inappropriately, I'm sure CCP would love to hear about it in an email to [email protected]
Otherwise, stop lying, and how in the world do your paranoid theories about mining barges have any bearing on the issue of T2 BPOs? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Pipa Porto
946
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 21:36:00 -
[1155] - Quote
Zelda Wei wrote:Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ? It's only a monopoly because they closed the lottery.
That's so strange. I could have sworn my Alt was creating T2 items identical to those produced by BPOs without access to any T2 BPO. Was I creating fake merchandise?
Anyone want to buy knockoff T2 Invulns? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1271
|
Posted - 2012.09.17 07:16:00 -
[1156] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Elite players: players who get info about upcoming changes 2-3 months before everyone else so they can adapt. you just had to read forums to know that...I know, its a bit more complicated than posting as there is no "read" button, but thats why we are elite player and you are just a newbie. No info about barge changes in February/March on forums... No info about the EXACT changes, true, but that's because they weren't final yet.
The first news about the change was during Fanfest 2012 (in February), when they explained in more detail what they WANT to do about the so-called "tiericide", and explicitly mentioning they want to make barges more of a "role" thing rather than a "tier" thing. The videos are up on youtube for everybody to see. Then in early March, there was a devblog about it, in case you can't be bothered to watch youtube vids.
"Elite players" could already DEDUCE that this would mean the "lower" barges will get buffed. HOW they would end up getting buffed was of a distant secondary importance. The main thing to take out of it was that they would certainly go up in price, so it was certainly a good time to start manufacturing some. Not being able to tell just from that info that you should go long on the low barge/exhumer tiers is a surefire sign you don't have what it takes to be an "elite" player, taking advantage of any scrap of info you get your hands on.
The actual changes to the barges were quite irrelevant, the only difference would have been just how much ISK you'd be making, NOT the difference between making some or making none. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1271
|
Posted - 2012.09.17 07:25:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Zelda Wei wrote:Akita T wrote:And why exactly would CCP add back something they explicitly said they wanted to remove (the monopoly on T2 production) and did so equally explicitly by adding invention ? It's only a monopoly because they closed the lottery. That's so strange. I could have sworn my Alt was creating T2 items identical to those produced by BPOs without access to any T2 BPO. Was I creating fake merchandise? Anyone want to buy knockoff T2 Invulns? Well, the proper phrasing I should have used would have needed to be "the oligopoly on T2 production by T2 BPO owners" instead of "the monopoly on T2 production" shorthand I did use. This was supposed to contrast with the invention "anybody can build T2 stuff" possibility. To elaborate, in practical terms, for items with demand beyond production capability of T2 BPOs, an oligopoly on T2 production was pretty much the same as a monopoly on T2 production anyway, since it was fairly obvious for T2 BPO owners that they WILL get to sell their product either way (so it was only a matter of how fast you wanted the funds). The only significant differences back in pre-invention-times showed up for items with supply capabilities in excess of demand, but those were junk before and still are junk (barring infrequent buffs). http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 22:58:00 -
[1158] - Quote
shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: Are the products made from BPO`s any different to Invention-made products?- No.
Sadly yes, they are produced at a fraction of the cost as they don't require any invention costs such as data cores, t1 copying and decryptors. It is true that the T2BPO's required research points to obtain but the number was so unbelievably small for what the T2bpo is worth it's not even worth factoring.
T2BPO's also have a much higher ME an P than the invented copies which have -10 -10. A buff to invention so that inventions have 100 100 ME and P would be a welcome nerf to T2BPO's. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Pipa Porto
972
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 23:33:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:shar'ra matcevsovski wrote: Are the products made from BPO`s any different to Invention-made products?- No.
Sadly yes, they are produced at a fraction of the cost as they don't require any invention costs such as data cores, t1 copying and decryptors. It is true that the T2BPO's required research points to obtain but the number was so unbelievably small for what the T2bpo is worth it's not even worth factoring. T2BPO's also have a much higher ME an P than the invented copies which have -10 -10. A buff to invention so that inventions have 100 100 ME and P would be a welcome nerf to T2BPO's.
Stop lying. Most (if not all) blueprints have a base invented ME/PE of -4/-4. You can't even get the basic mechanics right.
Second, if you think the products made from BPOs are different than those made from invention, show me how to distinguish between a T2 item built from a BPO and one built through invention. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
shar'ra matcevsovski
Bait Club
145
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 04:51:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: bump
l2read, the result of a BPO or BPC are exactly the same, even tho the requirments were different. |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 09:40:00 -
[1161] - Quote
''Stop lying'' so T2BPO and inventions have the same M and P efficiency? Well good to know we can close this thread now and that CCP has finally fixed it's most terrible mistake after all these years . Hint, hint CCP, fix T2BPO bring invented T2 BPC's up to spec with regards to M & P efficiency.
Nope, just checked the BPO's and CCP still giving it's pet players and corps huge hand outs that continue to this day in the form of unending T2BPO productions. Anyway blah the only way to set things right now would be a complete server restart where CCP admits the mistakes it made by constantly interfering and giving it's mates 'cool stuff' and then removing stuff that other players managed to get off their own back.
Example goon FW manipulation. CCP ''What? someone has obtained trillions of isk worth of content with out us placing it straight into their lap? Take it, take it ALL!'' Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1421
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 09:51:00 -
[1162] - Quote
page 58 and still going strong, lol TK is recruiting |
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:00:00 -
[1163] - Quote
On that note I'm going to stop posting here again and let the thread slide down the list until it gets necro'd by some one else discovering the crap T2BPO situation for the first time. I should really have put this thread in the eve general where it could easily have got 500 pages by now. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:07:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Posting in a future necro'd thread.
Also, I <3 T2BPOs. I want this bumper-stickered onto all of my ships. |
Pipa Porto
987
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 18:21:00 -
[1165] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:On that note I'm going to stop posting here again and let the thread slide down the list until it gets necro'd by some one else discovering the crap T2BPO situation for the first time. I should really have put this thread in the eve general where it could easily have got 500 pages by now.
The part where Brewlar admit's it's all about the attention whoring.
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:''Stop lying'' so T2BPO and inventions have the same M and P efficiency? Well good to know we can close this thread now and that CCP has finally fixed it's most terrible mistake after all these years . Hint, hint CCP, fix T2BPO bring invented T2 BPC's up to spec with regards to M & P efficiency.'
Reading is helpful if you want to understand things. You claimed that invented BPCs had an ME/PE of -10/-10. That's a lie. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Gamer4liff
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 16:52:00 -
[1166] - Quote
Man, I can't believe people are still trying to get rid of T2 BPOs after all these years. Give it up people, it's not going to happen.
The only "fair" way to remove T2 BPOs without screwing everybody would be to reimburse the owners with the isk market value of the BPOs prior to the announcement of their removal. That's definitely never going to happen for a variety of reasons.
What should be done is a new system should be put in place where there's an astronomically small chance to invent a T2 BPO from an invention job. This chance should be astronomically low, and should also be scaled down and up as needed to avoid ruining the standard invention markets. This system would reward inventors directly by their manufacturing activity. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
1278
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 20:43:00 -
[1167] - Quote
Gamer4liff wrote:What should be done is a new system should be put in place where there's an astronomically small chance to invent a T2 BPO from an invention job. This chance should be astronomically low, and should also be scaled down and up as needed to avoid ruining the standard invention markets. This system would reward inventors directly by their manufacturing activity. If it's TOO astronomically low, it makes more sense to just buy one from another holder, since the overall expected average cost is lower, but in time, values keep sliding down either way, since more keep showing up. If the chance is not low enough, there will be a huge chase after them, leading to a crash in value in the long run due to the rebound oversupply effect.
Also, the perceived value ascribed to the "uniqueness" of these items (particularly poignant for "crap" items) will plummet because of the ability to create new ones (regardless of cost) renders it far less meaningful. They will of course retain some degree of added value due to scarcity, but nowhere near as high as nowadays.
All in all, the ability to create ANY new T2 BPOs will eventually lead to a situation where invention becomes eventually meaningless as long as no extra (bottleneck) moon minerals can be created over the amounts that can be generated today. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/User:Akita_T http://eve-search.com/stats/Akita_T T2 BPO poll : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114789 |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: [one page] |