EVE Search - To people that want to remove T2 BPOs : give a GOOD reason why

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Science and Industry

To people that want to remove T2 BPOs : give a GOOD reason why

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
adriaans Amarr Ankaa. Nair Al-Zaurak	Posted - 2010.07.31 00:52:00 - [121] Edited by: adriaans on 31/07/2010 00:52:21 Stop blaming t2 bpo's... it's stupid idiotic moron inventors who undercut WAY to much that makes for the pathetic profits... INVENTORS SETS THE PRICE! t2 bpo's have a right to stay just like limited issue ships and other items. and no i dont own any, even if i can easy afford to. --signature-- Support the Field Command ship boost: Here
Jovialmadness	Posted - 2010.07.31 03:32:00 - [122] Quote: Not really. It works exactly the other way around. The only markets "controlled by T2 BPOs" are those markets where inventors would never make a profit in the first place, and where even those BPO holders barely make any ISK at all themselves. If ANY T2 BPO holders would EVER again try to jack up prices for an item that is nowadays profitable to invent (or, worse, for those NOT yet profitable to invent), heck, even if one person would actually own ALL of the T2 BPOs for a certain item type to form a monopoly which would have been devastating pre-invention, you know what would happen ? (assuming of course some T2 BPO holder would actually be stupid enough to try to do any of that... and god forbid if a group of inventors has the "bright" idea to try it...) The price MIGHT spike... for all of a couple of days. Then it would crash down HARD as soon as inventor products start flocking in. Still, it won't crash below BPO build cost, because in that case people would buy them off to reprocess... so the guy attempting to jack prices can't even really make a decent profit out of the crash itself either. It's not T2 BPOs that offer any sort of market control, it's exactly the other way around. Inventors automatically and naturally top-cap the possible price level of T2 items to a bit over invention break-even on a regular basis. T2 BPO owners would have to be pretty stupid to sell for LESS than inventors sell, so, at least as far as the actual market is concerned (as long as real market demand really does outstrip T2 BPO supply). In fact, in such markets, inventors and T2 BPO owners alike actually do compete on an even footing !!! If a T2 BPO owner goes below invention breakeven, all the inventor has to do is BUY OUT THE T2 BPO HOLDER'S STOCK and sell it as his own (and therefore obtain the goods at slightly less than what he could have made it for himself). yea well thats how i see it
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.07.31 08:08:00 - [123] Originally by: Jovialmadness yea well thats how i see it _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
clixoras	Posted - 2010.07.31 11:28:00 - [124] Ok. saturday morning fresh perspective post - Keep T2 BPO's - Give invented BPC's some advantage over BPO's (significantly faster build times!) Result, T2 BPO's have convenience and slightly better base materials requirements. Use invention if you want to manufacture loads of stuff in short amount of time. So, if i can produce 10 modules in a day with a BPC, you can only produce 3 - 5 with a BPO making it impossible for BPO holders to flood markets.
Linaeon	Posted - 2010.07.31 11:35:00 - [125] How about let the ppl that not have lottery chance to get that T2 BPO too, maybe once in a year, is that fair ?? Or is that not fair for T2 BPO owner ??
Emporer Norton	Posted - 2010.07.31 13:10:00 - [126] Yes this would be nice either redo the lottery occasionaly in limited amounts or give a way of inventing bpos either random chance or by using bpo to invent from Originally by: Linaeon How about let the ppl that not have lottery chance to get that T2 BPO too, maybe once in a year, is that fair ?? Or is that not fair for T2 BPO owner ??
Voogru Gallente Massive Damage	Posted - 2010.07.31 13:46:00 - [127] Edited by: Voogru on 31/07/2010 13:49:57 Originally by: clixoras Ok. saturday morning fresh perspective post - Keep T2 BPO's - Give invented BPC's some advantage over BPO's (significantly faster build times!) Result, T2 BPO's have convenience and slightly better base materials requirements. Use invention if you want to manufacture loads of stuff in short amount of time. So, if i can produce 10 modules in a day with a BPC, you can only produce 3 - 5 with a BPO making it impossible for BPO holders to flood markets. The primary reason the inventards want to get rid of T2 bpos is because they are in competition with them, and they believe that the T2 BPO owners hurt their profits. Increasing the amount of production that can be done with invention will flood the market with more invention goods, driving down prices and profit margins even more. Originally by: Linaeon How about let the ppl that not have lottery chance to get that T2 BPO too, maybe once in a year, is that fair ?? Or is that not fair for T2 BPO owner ?? You can do this now, I'll tell you how. Step 1: Find a T2 BPO you'd like to have Step 2: Earn enough ISK to buy it. Step 3: Buy it from the owner. Step 4: ??? Step 5: Profit. Many argue that "OH WELL THOSE EVIL GUYS GOT THEIR BPOS FOR FREE WHY CANT I", NEWSFLASH: Majority of prints that are owned were bought from lottery winners. Oh... you want it for free. Well then that makes sense. Hate Farmers? Click Here
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.07.31 17:37:00 - [128] Holy smokes that's a lot of thread spammage as (an almost direct) result of this thread's creation (posted 2010.07.29 00:01:00)... 2010.07.29 09:50:00 To people that want to KEEP T2 BPOs : give a GOOD reason why 2010.07.29 19:11:00 Standalone question to LHA (and for everyone elses pleasure ;) 2010.07.30 23:48:00 To the people discussing T2 BPO removal or keeping it (spam-locked) 2010.07.31 11:34:00 Make T2 BPO and Invention Same ROFL _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
Bluebeard Minmatar LoneStar Industries	Posted - 2010.07.31 18:28:00 - [129] Originally by: Akita T Holy smokes that's a lot of thread spammage as (an almost direct) result of this thread's creation (posted 2010.07.29 00:01:00)... 2010.07.29 09:50:00 To people that want to KEEP T2 BPOs : give a GOOD reason why 2010.07.29 19:11:00 Standalone question to LHA (and for everyone elses pleasure ;) 2010.07.30 23:48:00 To the people discussing T2 BPO removal or keeping it (spam-locked) 2010.07.31 11:34:00 Make T2 BPO and Invention Same ROFL You forgot (All started by our favourite troller LHA Tarawa) Fixing invention Why T2 BPOs need to be removed from EVE. An alternate idea to "fix" some issues many see with th game. Why is the game better with T2 BPOs than it would be without them?
Carl Stonewall Caldari The Maverick Navy IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.07.31 22:02:00 - [130] Originally by: Akita T You could argue that the lottery itself was unfair... but that's why it was removed in the first place, and invention placed in its stead. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ which is the reason, unfair advantages given by the lottery should be removed as well... aka BPO's -------------------------------------------------- " Get rich or die mining "

Carl Stonewall Caldari The Maverick Navy IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.07.31 22:25:00 - [131] Edited by: Carl Stonewall on 31/07/2010 22:27:23 Edited by: Carl Stonewall on 31/07/2010 22:25:24 Originally by: Voogru The primary reason the inventards want to get rid of T2 bpos is because they are in competition with them, and they believe that the T2 BPO owners hurt their profits. Increasing the amount of production that can be done with invention will flood the market with more invention goods, driving down prices and profit margins even more. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your proving the point that the current system is unfair... what your saying is that the market will drive prices down and reduce profit margins... So logically you must agree that this system is not viable, since by your own words there will be "too" much supply if the BPO's were removed. which of course is not possible, cause then it would be the market setting the prices, not a few lucky players with an unfair edge And dont tell me its not unfair and that i can just buy the BPO's if that was the case you wouldent have a problem with CCP buying all the BPO's for market prices to get rid of BPO's would you ? because then problem is solved :) My problem with this is that eve is advertised as a sandbox game, there is really nothing sandbox about a few ppl getting to control what kind of sandcastles you can build in the sandbox. -------------------------------------------------- " Get rich or die mining "
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.08.01 00:43:00 - [132] Originally by: Carl Stonewall Originally by: Akita T You could argue that the lottery itself was unfair... but that's why it was removed in the first place, and invention placed in its stead. which is the reason, unfair advantages given by the lottery should be removed as well... aka BPO's The fact nobody else could build T2 items other than T2 BPO owners was unfair. That allowed them to raise T2 item prices to insane levels due to extreme scarcity. That unfairness was corrected by the introduction of invention. Now ANYBODY can build T2 items. And all desirable T2 items have a much, MUCH lower price level nowadays. Now there is no more unfairness, only an ever so slight advantage for those that have T2 BPOs. It's an advantage for which current T2 BPO owners paid heavily already, MUCH more than most people would really consider to be worth it. Or, in case any of them are still the original owners, they would have had refrained from making a quick and easy truckload of ISK, so in the grand scheme of things, it's almost as if they did pay that price. __ Let's put it this way... there extreme case scenarios regarding T2 BPOs are the following... Scenario 1 : T2 BPOs are not really worth their going price, and they don't offer much of an advantage. Scenario 2 : T2 BPOs are worth more than what they sell for, and they constitute an unfair advantage for their owners. If you believe scenario 1 is closer to the truth, you should either not really care T2 BPOs exist, or in case you are the owner of one, you should try to unload it for the best price you can get for it ASAP. If you believe scenario 2 is closer to the truth, all you have to do is get enough ISK to buy the one you want and become a member of the so-called "elite" yourself, to reap the full benefits of that so-called "unfair advantage" on your own. There are plenty of ways to make ISK that do not involve T2 BPOs, and T2 BPOs of all kinds are being sold on a regular basis, even if somewhat slowly... so it's NOT impossible to get one. Difficult, costly, maybe, but certainly not impossible. Either way, you should be happy T2 BPOs exist, precisely because you HAVE a long-term goal, that of obtaining that "unfair advantage" for yourself. In none of those scenarios should you really want to get rid of T2 BPOs, nor in any of the cases in between those extremes. _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
Umega Solis Mensa	Posted - 2010.08.01 01:54:00 - [133] Originally by: Carl Stonewall Edited by: Carl Stonewall on 31/07/2010 22:27:23 Edited by: Carl Stonewall on 31/07/2010 22:25:24 Originally by: Voogru The primary reason the inventards want to get rid of T2 bpos is because they are in competition with them, and they believe that the T2 BPO owners hurt their profits. Increasing the amount of production that can be done with invention will flood the market with more invention goods, driving down prices and profit margins even more. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your proving the point that the current system is unfair... what your saying is that the market will drive prices down and reduce profit margins... So logically you must agree that this system is not viable, since by your own words there will be "too" much supply if the BPO's were removed. which of course is not possible, cause then it would be the market setting the prices, not a few lucky players with an unfair edge And dont tell me its not unfair and that i can just buy the BPO's if that was the case you wouldent have a problem with CCP buying all the BPO's for market prices to get rid of BPO's would you ? because then problem is solved :) My problem with this is that eve is advertised as a sandbox game, there is really nothing sandbox about a few ppl getting to control what kind of sandcastles you can build in the sandbox. Does your voice always contradict your actions? There are a limited number of nullsec systems for players to control. Surely this falls under the same exact principle of limited number anything, like T2 BPOs. By your logic, CCP should allow the empires to move in and take over all of ITs and the rest of the nullsec alliances systems. That would be far to everyone then, right? If not everyone can have something, then no one should seems to be your logic. And rather ironic.. that certainly no alliance, corp, single person would ever dare impose their will on someone to build a sandcastle the way they deem it.. no, surely no one ever invades and tries to knock someones else sandcastle over cause they don't like the way they built it. ---------------------------------------- -Treat the EVE Market like you're a pimp and it is your 'employee'.. freely fondle it as you wish and make it pay you for it-
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.08.01 04:39:00 - [134] Originally by: Akita T Holy smokes that's a lot of thread spammage as (an almost direct) result of this thread's creation (posted 2010.07.29 00:01:00)... 2010.07.29 09:50:00 To people that want to KEEP T2 BPOs : give a GOOD reason why 2010.07.29 19:11:00 Standalone question to LHA (and for everyone elses pleasure ;) 2010.07.30 23:48:00 To the people discussing T2 BPO removal or keeping it (spam-locked) 2010.07.31 11:34:00 Make T2 BPO and Invention Same ROFL Stop screwing up my forums with your warmongering Akita
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.08.01 22:25:00 - [135] Originally by: XXSketchxx Stop screwing up my forums with your warmongering Akita I am sorry, but it is my duty... _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
Sturmwolke	Posted - 2010.08.02 05:05:00 - [136] My replies to several posters .. Originally by: BP Buyer One of my T2 BPOs has a profit margin of about 90M (!) per month. It lies dormant in my hangar, because I make more money with producing T1 modules on this lane. You wanna have it? You'll have 'guaranteed profits' (however big or small) Yes, please personal contract me that crappy T2 BPO of yours. Originally by: Fumitsugu Sylwia Not really. You are arguing that T2 BPOs remove the effort from manufacturing Wrong interpretation. I should have worded it better, but it's fairly brainless on what the paragraph (you quoted) means to T2 producers that runs vertically from bottom to top (well, most will start from Advanced Moon materials). Originally by: Cashews Invention might be a bit more work, but it is also scalable! While your fabulous T2 BPO can only occupy one production line at a time, you can use multiple production lines and alts simultaneously with invention. T2 BPOs are not really relevant to the market but to the owners, hence perfectly fine. Yes, scalable ... but it will also require MORE work. Your point is irrelevant. On the other hand, it's very relevant regarding T2 BPO because it bypasses the standard game mechanics, allowing 1 person (or several) to churn out a T2 product (per BPO) almost indefinitely. From an individual perspective (not market perspective) that is close to an exploit. Originally by: Akita T 1. The gist of what you were saying is irrelevant, ISK is ISK no matter where you get it from. There's also very little effort in setting up a lowball buy order for T2 items, it also bypasses invention, since I get them without effort, I just wait. Should that mean that the ability to trade is also a license to print ISK that has to be quashed ? 2. Also, talk about guaranteed profits to those people that WOULD LOSE MONEY if they would manufacture with their T2 BPOs... and yes, there are T2 items where not even a T2 BPO holder will see any profit (or profit so tiny as to not even matter). 3. T2 BPOs are not "a license to print ISK". They WERE, back before invention came around. Not anymore. You're loosing coherence here. Perhaps I didn't quite get my original post worded clearly, given the chances of people misinterpreting or quoting things out of context. 1. Let's get back to T2 BPOs and T2 production shall we? I can certainly spam lots of pseudo-reasonable examples as you did and never get anywhere. It establishes nothing in the end because many of those examples are also situational. The gist of what I had been saying should be evident if you read my above reply to Cashews. P.S. You're mostly bull****ing on this part. 2. You're arguing a small percentage that would seem to make a loss (which means stupid inventors) and those that barely break even. Sure it's valid. However, it does not exclude the good/decent T2 BPOs nor does it invalidate the general premise of my argument in my original post. 3. Yes they are actually, from a T2 production perspective. Your mixing of the T1 and T2 production lines profits clouded the reasonings of what might have been otherwise. It was definitely good to know that T1 BPOs can rival the profitability of T2 BPOs (which may be old news to some people), but you also need to understand the market saturation and the untangible differences between these two. I'm not bored atm, so I cba to write up an essay on this, plus I'm lazy.
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.08.02 06:54:00 - [137] Originally by: Sturmwolke Originally by: BP Buyer One of my T2 BPOs has a profit margin of about 90M (!) per month. It lies dormant in my hangar, because I make more money with producing T1 modules on this lane. You wanna have it? You'll have 'guaranteed profits' (however big or small) Yes, please personal contract me that crappy T2 BPO of yours. At the lately usual going rate of 5 years to pay off, that's about 5.4 bil ISK. I am more than sure he would be ECSTATIC to see you pay that much for it. Originally by: Sturmwolke You're loosing coherence here. Perhaps I didn't quite get my original post worded clearly, given the chances of people misinterpreting or quoting things out of context. No, you worded your post clearly enough, but saying something to the extent that (a completely hypothetical and unrealistic similar RL scenario) home beer brewers face an unfair advantage from AnheuserûBusch InBev N.V. which produces Budweiser cheaper than they can, even if they (the small home brewers) are also allowed to sell identical quality beer labeled as Budweiser on the market themselves. I mean, HOW DARE THEY (the big company that originally sold it) have the audacity to hold the patent to operate those expensive machines that allows for cheap mass production ! Of course, the fact that the beer now sells at 1/10 of the price it used to sell back when only the big corporation made it has nothing to do with the fact the small guys are now allowed to make and sell it too ! Originally by: Sturmwolke Let's get back to T2 BPOs and T2 production shall we? I can certainly spam lots of pseudo-reasonable examples as you did and never get anywhere. It establishes nothing in the end because many of those examples are also situational. The gist of what I had been saying should be evident if you read my above reply to Cashews. Quote: "Yes, scalable ... but it will also require MORE work. Your point is irrelevant. On the other hand, it's very relevant regarding T2 BPO because it bypasses the standard game mechanics, allowing 1 person (or several) to churn out a T2 product (per BPO) almost indefinitely. From an individual perspective (not market perspective) that is close to an exploit." The standard game mechanics was T2 BPOs. Invention was introduced to fill some of the UNFULFILLABLE DEMAND, not to completely replace manufacture capablities. If you believe the T2 BPOs offer such an unfair, exploit-like advantage, EVEN GIVEN THEIR GOING PRICES, feel free to purchase one yourself. If you refuse to purchase a T2 BPO, it can only be one of two possible reasons : either you do not believe the current costs justify the advantages they offer (in which case, shut up), OR you are unwilling to obtain the necessary ISK (in which case, again, shut up). Quote: Your mixing of the T1 and T2 production lines profits clouded the reasonings of what might have been otherwise. It was definitely good to know that T1 BPOs can rival the profitability of T2 BPOs (which may be old news to some people), but you also need to understand the market saturation and the untangible differences between these two. I'm not bored atm, so I cba to write up an essay on this, plus I'm lazy. You know what the difference for a manufacturer is between making a 5 bil ISK/month profit using T1 BPOs and making a 5 bil ISK/month profit using T2 BPOs ? Other than much, much higher initial investment for T2 production, for the manufacturer, ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE. So, no, there is no "clouding" going on here, it is perfectly pertinent for the argument at hand, the only thing that matters when you claim something is an "unobtainable ISK printing machine" is how much ISK your can get out of it, compared to obtainable alternatives. _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
Voogru Gallente Massive Damage	Posted - 2010.08.02 11:31:00 - [138] How to tell if a T2 bpo whiner is just a jealous hypocrite. Step 1: Sell them a valuable (20B+) T2 BPO for 1 billion ISK. Step 2: Ask them to trash it. Step 3: Watch as they put it into production or auction it off on the sell orders forum after transfering it to an alt. Step 4: In the event they produce from it, watch as they suddenly flip sides on the T2 BPO debate. Hate Farmers? Click Here
Jovialmadness	Posted - 2010.08.02 13:54:00 - [139] Edited by: Jovialmadness on 02/08/2010 13:54:12 Originally by: Voogru How to tell if a T2 bpo whiner is just a jealous hypocrite. Step 1: Sell them a valuable (20B+) T2 BPO for 1 billion ISK. Step 2: Ask them to trash it. Step 3: Watch as they put it into production or auction it off on the sell orders forum after transfering it to an alt. Step 4: In the event they produce from it, watch as they suddenly flip sides on the T2 BPO debate. Never! They all have such epic integrity they would most assuredly trash them! Of this i am certain!
TrimethylChromiumdioxide	Posted - 2010.08.02 20:43:00 - [140] Of course t2 bpo's need to get removed. I don't have them. I'd also like to point out that no one has given me 500 bil yet. So I'd like an isk cap for all players in the game at say, what my bank account is right now. The rich have an unfair advantage. And while we're here let's talk training times; I'd like to be able to skip a few years of training time and catch up with the old timers in the game. Gimme. Seriously Akita, there is no such valid argument. IMHO the only thing that's needed in that area is a change to invention: a wider range of decrypters, including super rare decrypters; a slight increase in the probability of success rates for max skills; and a variable me/pe modifier that allows for extremely good (or bad) end results, affected by the decrypters of course.

Capt Ty Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.02 21:54:00 - [141] Edited by: Capt Ty on 02/08/2010 21:55:53 Edited by: Capt Ty on 02/08/2010 21:54:43 Originally by: Vasundhara When I discovered how the research lottery worked I changed the corps I had been missioning with as a newb to start the standings grind with an R&D corp. I also dedicated time to training the relevant R&D skills so I'd be ready once I had the standings. I started gaining some RP and sat on it on the off chance I'd win the lottery. Turns out that they had just shut it off. It was kind of a let down to spend time preparing for something only to have the game mechanic change out from under me. To be clear, CCP doesn't owe me anything other than the ability to log on to their servers for the time I pay for but for me, issues like this make the game less fun to play. This ^^
Jovialmadness	Posted - 2010.08.02 23:42:00 - [142] Originally by: Capt Ty Edited by: Capt Ty on 02/08/2010 21:55:53 Edited by: Capt Ty on 02/08/2010 21:54:43 Originally by: Vasundhara When I discovered how the research lottery worked I changed the corps I had been missioning with as a newb to start the standings grind with an R&D corp. I also dedicated time to training the relevant R&D skills so I'd be ready once I had the standings. I started gaining some RP and sat on it on the off chance I'd win the lottery. Turns out that they had just shut it off. It was kind of a let down to spend time preparing for something only to have the game mechanic change out from under me. To be clear, CCP doesn't owe me anything other than the ability to log on to their servers for the time I pay for but for me, issues like this make the game less fun to play. This ^^ So me discovering i could buy them after never being able to get one and then having ccp remove them would be better how?
Capt Ty Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.03 00:05:00 - [143] Originally by: Jovialmadness Originally by: Capt Ty Edited by: Capt Ty on 02/08/2010 21:55:53 Edited by: Capt Ty on 02/08/2010 21:54:43 Originally by: Vasundhara When I discovered how the research lottery worked I changed the corps I had been missioning with as a newb to start the standings grind with an R&D corp. I also dedicated time to training the relevant R&D skills so I'd be ready once I had the standings. I started gaining some RP and sat on it on the off chance I'd win the lottery. Turns out that they had just shut it off. It was kind of a let down to spend time preparing for something only to have the game mechanic change out from under me. To be clear, CCP doesn't owe me anything other than the ability to log on to their servers for the time I pay for but for me, issues like this make the game less fun to play. This ^^ So me discovering i could buy them after never being able to get one and then having ccp remove them would be better how? I see the madness, but not how it's Jovial. The comment was simply venting an opinion about how CCP executed game design, but I'll bite on your question. One person grinds endlessly, waits patiently, saves diligently and spends it all on an NPC character. One person grinds endlessly, waits patiently, saves diligently and enriches their competition. Which would you rather be?
Nahkep Narmelion Gallente CALIMA COLLABORATIVE	Posted - 2010.08.03 02:42:00 - [144] Originally by: Voogru The primary reason the inventards want to get rid of T2 bpos is because they are in competition with them, and they believe that the T2 BPO owners hurt their profits. Increasing the amount of production that can be done with invention will flood the market with more invention goods, driving down prices and profit margins even more. Now just one minute you young whipper snapper....I do inventions and have been arguing for keeping the t2 BPOs. You are right that many of the inventors are likely motivated by rent seeking/unearned profits by reducing competition. But not all of us inventors fall into that catagory.
Enal Angus	Posted - 2010.08.03 06:08:00 - [145] First I want to state that this whole discussion is ****ed. If BPO:s were not a huge advantage you sacks of would not be defending them so vehemently. Every one of akitas arguments can easily be proven wrong. The only valid argument, and the most important one is that people have invested too much in them, and it would be infinetly more unfair to remove them. Arguing about profit margins and that inventors are to blame is also ****ed. It is a player controlled market. If there is more supply than demand, prices will adapt so that only BPO owners can afford to manufacture X. But this also goes for BPO:s themselves. Their prices, too, reflect how much the investment is worth. If they were not outrageously owerpowered they would not be outrageously priced. It really is that simple. Any way the system is changed will screw someone over. The only fair way to do things would be to introduce t3 modules in my opinion.
Nahkep Narmelion Gallente CALIMA COLLABORATIVE	Posted - 2010.08.03 07:51:00 - [146] Another moron who can't read joins the circus.
Fumitsugu Sylwia	Posted - 2010.08.03 08:15:00 - [147] Originally by: Enal Angus First I want to state that this whole discussion is ****ed. If BPO:s were not a huge advantage you sacks of ** would not be defending them so vehemently. You don't get it. We're saying they are, often, irrelevant. I built 100 xxxxxxx IIs yesterday in 17 hours. How many could a BPO owner make in this time? 17-18. Due to invention's prickly interface, the margins aren't murderous (I can expect around 80%) having bought all the materials from sell orders and paid a premium for someone else to do the BP copying for me to economise time and effort. T2 BPOs are like limited edition ships; people will pay large amounts for them purely because they are rare.
Narfas Deteis	Posted - 2010.08.03 08:57:00 - [148] Originally by: Enal Angus [cut] If they were not outrageously owerpowered they would not be outrageously priced. It really is that simple. [cut] Nope, it's not that simple. Some time ago T2 BPOs buyers calculated 6 months profit. Prices increased. Then calculated 1 year profit. Prices increased again. Then calculated 2 years profit. Prices... you know what. Now it looks like they do not make any real calculations before purchase. Their argument is that they can make some profit and they can sell this BPO back at any time, probably for a higher price. Another thing is, there are plenty of resellers, increasing prices even more. So, prices of T2 BPOs are pure speculation and they do not have much in common with the real profit from production. It's all about speculation, convenience of production, prestige, long term goals and collectibles. This is EVE and I like it.
Drojdier Minmatar	Posted - 2010.08.03 10:34:00 - [149] The people that complain about T2 BPOs are the idiots that have absolutely ZERO knowledge on how EVE markets and economy in general work. They are in such a blind rage that they cannot see the whole picture and, as it is common with this kind of narrow people, they blame everyone and everything else APART from themselves for their own failures. Fail at doing basic math? It's CCP's fault!!!11 And burn those T2 BPOs owners in righteous fire. Oh, and there are also those that claim that T2 BPOs and limited edition ships/items in-game create social class problems....those people have different and way deeper issues and I doubt any move from CCP will be able to cure them.
Voogru Gallente Massive Damage	Posted - 2010.08.03 11:28:00 - [150] Originally by: Drojdier Oh, and there are also those that claim that T2 BPOs and limited edition ships/items in-game create social class problems....those people have different and way deeper issues and I doubt any move from CCP will be able to cure them. We have a name for these kinds of people. Socialists. Hate Farmers? Click Here



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.