Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xyzibit
Caldari New-Roots
|
Posted - 2010.12.04 23:03:00 -
[61]
No... nuff said...
|
Li Freeman
|
Posted - 2010.12.06 13:26:00 -
[62]
Supported!
|
Linda Dreamwalker
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 10:45:00 -
[63]
This deserves support
|
Niklas
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 11:23:00 -
[64]
After invention came out, I wanted them to warn people for a year ahead of time, and at that time, replace bpos with bpcs equivalent to the number of runs of that item they could produce at max skills in a year(at the PE/ME of their original bp, or some highish compromise number). Would have given 1 year warning on any sales, and knowledge that it would last another 2 years, easily enough to get moneys worth out of it.
|
Don Pellegrino
Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 15:04:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Niklas After invention came out, I wanted them to warn people for a year ahead of time, and at that time, replace bpos with bpcs equivalent to the number of runs of that item they could produce at max skills in a year(at the PE/ME of their original bp, or some highish compromise number). Would have given 1 year warning on any sales, and knowledge that it would last another 2 years, easily enough to get moneys worth out of it.
Tech 2 BPOs are sold for 2.5 to 4.5 years of profits, depending on the BPO, btw. ____________________________________________
|
Meridian Siri
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 21:48:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Vod**** Something must be done about T2 BPO's. EVE is a cruel place, but always having T2 hanging over the heads of all new players who were not around for the "old days" isn't right.
level the field and remove them from game.
Let it die so everyone can move on with more important things like lag
Should probably provide more options for invention as well; as previous posts have suggested
|
Tuleingel
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 10:50:00 -
[67]
I would really really like to see it happen.
|
MNagy
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 02:13:00 -
[68]
I do not like the dynamics of people owning t2 bpo's out there. Its free money for life.
However they did get them 'fairly' during gameplay when they were out.
I suspect if CCP really wants to handle this problem, they will have to just make a decision - and go with it. ( just like the latest learning fix ).
Perhaps give isk and skill points to owners of t2 bpos' to compensate.
I am on 'side' that no bpo of a t2 should exist. I do not own them, but I beleive gameplay is unfair because they are not available to any new players.
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy Spreadsheets Online
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 02:36:00 -
[69]
Quote: My proposal is to remove T2 BPO's from the game.
This will never happen.
However lets discuss the reality.
Highsec capships vs t2 bpos.
Neither are possible to create anymore. The usage of both are an unfair advantage over anyone who doesnt have one. Invention doesnt compete with t2 bpos... only volume can beat t2 bpos. Highsec dreads cant die... only volume can beat them.
Yet for some reason 1 of these is banned from being used. While the other is encouraged to be used. Absolutely absurd different standards.
I say we create mechanics to allow capships to move back into highsec. Used via a POS cyno gen moduleáat highsec poses.
In addition we create a way to invent t2 bpos. The chance can be low and the cost per attempt can be very high and the thing is spawned with very bad research levels.
Absolutely fixes the whole problem. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe.
|
Deja Thoris
Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 02:47:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Deja Thoris on 20/12/2010 02:47:23 My goodness, the peasants are revolting! Back to the slums with you!
|
|
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 05:56:00 -
[71]
I used to be for the removal of T2 BPOs, but as of this coming Friday a friend of mine is giving me his T2 BPO cap recharge.
So I will not be supporting anything that nerf T2 BPOs. Just got mine and I'll be darned if I'm going to let some snot nosed 'have not' cry baby mess with it!
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 08:25:00 -
[72]
Completely and totally NOT supported. Arguments and better suggestions. If you care.
TL;DR : THE ACTUAL PROBLEM is a combination between invention waste and a severely limited supply of "bottleneck" moon minerals. THE SOLUTION to that problem is the introduction of alternative moon mineral procurement methods and ways for invention to yield POSITIVE ME/PE levels even in the absence of decryptors. Fix that, and you "fix" the "T2 BPO problem" without even touching T2 BPOs at all.
THUMBS DOWN on this thread's proposal.
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts _
|
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 09:30:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Aloe Cloveris on 22/12/2010 09:30:18 Invention is fine as it is. I own no T2 BPOs and I can build 10 Invulnerability Field IIs in the time it takes that Invuln II BPO owner to build one from his single efficient print (Fun fact: T2 copies from BPOs take longer to create than actually building the module, making it less cost efficient). In 2.5 days I've cranked out 100 and sold them for 30M* isk profit (10 per run x 10 slots x 300k* isk per unit profit). He has built ten for 5M profit (10 per run x 1 slot x ~500k* isk per unit profit] + cost of (2 x 2 HMP x 2 QP) datacores needed to invent the print at ~50% success rate). His other 9 slots will have to be the -4/-4 prints he invented [unless he makes them from copies, which only serves to reduce that print's output/profit over time]).
I make 30M every 2.5 days running my 10 slots. BPO dude makes 34M every 2.5 days running his 10 slots. Not game breaking. If I want to earn the additional 1.6M isk per day, I can buy that 30B* Invuln II print from him. (I dunno about you, but 1.6M a day is a negligible amount of isk that one guy in 350,000+ accounts is getting for owning a rare collectors item ... the isk equivalent of 2 low-end BS rats).
There's now a healthy datacore market that tons of people both contribute to and rely on and that's a good thing, imo. I'm actually pretty impressed with how CCP implemented invention post-lottery.
Can't support this.
* numbers are pretty much entirely made up because :effort:. I have no idea what that particular print would sell for or if it even exists anymore.
|
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 09:38:00 -
[74]
Originally by: MNagy I do not like the dynamics of people owning t2 bpo's out there. Its free money for life.
Grind for R&D missions. Train Research Project Management (and AdvRPM).
Get free datacores every day forever. There's your own free money for life.
|
Mocam
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 10:00:00 -
[75]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Brian Khan
Originally by: Master Flakattack Either provide a way for others to get a T2 BPO or take them out of the game.
That is my standpoint as well.
there is. you can buy one.
Only if the owners are willing to sell it. Most aren't into doing that.
As such, either remove them or make them available in the game again. IMO -- getting rid of a few is better than making more. Let everyone compete with invention.
These are an unfair advantage that cannot just be gotten rid of by blowing something up.
|
Tasko Pal
Spallated Garniferous Schist
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 10:36:00 -
[76]
No. No one has demonstrated, yet again I might add, that there is a problem. If you want a T2 BPO, then buy one. It is that simple to acquire one. The ROI on these is not significantly different from any other big investor income like supercap BP copying or prestige item investment.
The comparison with unique ships remains valid. Those ships are limited run prestige items which can and are sold to other players. So are T2 BPOs.
As to gaming the T2 lottery, I don't see evidence that current T2 BPOs in existence were gained using anything other than ingame mechanics. Sounds to me like some people are still whining because BOB was the first to game the system.
|
Black Dranzer
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 11:05:00 -
[77]
I'm of the mind that T2 BPOs should be removed for a very simple reason: Resources in MMOs should never, ever be fixed. It does very bad things to the economy. There are some rare exceptions like one off ships, but not something as major as T2 BPOs. There should either be a means for producing them or they should not exist and be left entirely to invention. Personally I'd prefer removing them entirely. Replace them with high end 1000 run BPCs for all I care, just get rid of the damned originals.
|Bounty Fix|Mining Makeover| |
Xordel
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 11:30:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Akita T
Completely and totally NOT supported. Arguments and better suggestions. If you care.
TL;DR : THE ACTUAL PROBLEM is a combination between invention waste and a severely limited supply of "bottleneck" moon minerals. THE SOLUTION to that problem is the introduction of alternative moon mineral procurement methods and ways for invention to yield POSITIVE ME/PE levels even in the absence of decryptors. Fix that, and you "fix" the "T2 BPO problem" without even touching T2 BPOs at all.
THUMBS DOWN on this thread's proposal.
I TOTALLY agree with Akita T on this one when this is a thread about fixing t2 manufacturing! Which is not! This is about BPO's being an unfair advantage. #1 It is LIMITED! and dont compare it to a ship cmon dont be stupid BPO's affect the market. Which affects the game. Which we play. you get the point. #2 T2 originals are LIGHTYEARS better than copies. Atleast for t1 copies we can get a decent ME/PE that its ok to manufacture on copies. T2 copies give you negative ME/PE while originals can give you perfect ME/PE. NOTICE THE POLARITY? ITS BLACK AND WHITE! THE BEST OR THE WORST! and mind you non original holders get the worst! Which is majority of the EVE population. #3 Invention SUCKS! It takes a LOOOONG CHANCE based process to get the worst blueprint. You train 2 months and WOW you get 6 T2BPC out of 10 attempts. Congratulations! -4 ME/-4 PE! talk about double sucking. Those are three solid/factual points that makes T2 BPO's totally unfair.
BUT on a sidenote. T2 production cycle is broken IMHO. I think Akita T pinpointed it with the moon minerals. With or without BPO's T2 items are created with moon minerals and they are not an option it is a requirement for all T2 items. You got the skills and the blueprints wait you dont have a POS.. "No ones gonna stop me ill buy from the market! WTF!" market prices cut down your profit too much its not worth it anymore (sometimes it is). Unlimited supply of originals would not make it accessible to manufacturers. and yeah the DREADED INVENTION! But like i said these are all nice to haves. But taking away the bottleneck would only multiply the earnings of BPO holders. Therefore making it unfair. Yielding Positive ME/PE would probably be a good fix. But taking away all BPO's and letting the inventors invent all T2 Blueprints (I wont call it COPY or ORIGINAL). Is the best solution or vice versa give everyone access to T2 BPO (not seeded in NPC like T1 the distinction happens when you make it difficult to acquire it but you have access to it) and make T2 BPC(via Invention) as the entry level for T2 production. You make copies cause the original is too expensive. T2 BPO copy time stays the same. although through this solution i see invention dying cause more T2 BPO holders = more bored manufacturers that make T2 BPO copies. Thats just my 2 cents.
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 11:34:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Akita T
Completely and totally NOT supported. Arguments and better suggestions. If you care.
TL;DR : THE ACTUAL PROBLEM is a combination between invention waste and a severely limited supply of "bottleneck" moon minerals. THE SOLUTION to that problem is the introduction of alternative moon mineral procurement methods and ways for invention to yield POSITIVE ME/PE levels even in the absence of decryptors. Fix that, and you "fix" the "T2 BPO problem" without even touching T2 BPOs at all.
THUMBS DOWN on this thread's proposal.
QFT +1 to one of the very few consistent intelligent posters on these forums.
Holding a T2 BPO is not only riskier than inventing, its also less profitable; the original owners didnt get theirs for free either
"but how is it risky?" you may ask; all it does is sit in station and make silly amounts of money! Perhaps you should ask the people who bought EOS BPOs before the EOS nerf; now theyre stuck with a useless BPO that they cant get rid of because nobody wants it; actually its worse than useless because it's billions of ISK sitting there and they will be old men before they ever get their money back on it.
I invent, a lot, so while a T2 BPO owner may be able to make 5x more ISK per unit, I make 20x more units than he does . . . and Im adaptable.
Lastly, the original owners did not get theirs for free, it cost them all of their RP accumulated up to that point, which equates to billions in datacores when invention came out because they were crazy expensive. Say it with me people opportunity cost.
|
Joshua Yullsuz
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 11:54:00 -
[80]
No, stupid idea is stupid.
|
|
Keras Authion
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 12:10:00 -
[81]
Removing them would be even more unfair than some people having them. Even making the BPOs into BPCs that have enough runs to last for 5 years of continuous production is so-so imo.
I'd rather see a way to get new T2 BPOs, say gather 1000 max run BPCs on a station in NPC 0.0 or deep lowsec, use an expensive disposable piece of equipment and wait a month to get a -4ME -4PE T2 BPO which could be then used normally.
|
Shiho Weitong
Caldari Koa Mai Hoku
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 12:26:00 -
[82]
Edited by: Shiho Weitong on 22/12/2010 12:26:29 <- OMG. THAT GUY HAZ A GUARDIAN VEXOR. THAT'S SO UNFAIR. THAT'S LIKE 71B. (approx, not selling)
Well though luck buddy. I bought it back in the day and it was a wise investment.
Same deal with the T2 BPO's, I sold what I got from the lottery, and somebody else made an investment. If T2 BPO's go, every novelty and unique item should go as well. I just don't see why?
Unfair advantage you say?
So effing what? This is EVE. The game built on unfair advantages.
The funniest part is, that the "OMG REMOVE T2 BPO'S NAOW" people, don't seem to think that the T2 holders should be reimbursed if it happens. Not adequately anyways. I mean. Those BPO's are sold for 3-4 YEARS of projected profits.
As I said earlier in this thread.
T2 BPO's should be removed because they are unfair to you, and the owners shouldn't be adequately reimbursed because EVE is an unfair place. (reworded)
Hypocrisy much? ----------- Why is it called common sense, when it's clearly very rare.
I had a mind once, but alas, I seem to have forgotten where I left it.
Originally by: Tchell Dahhn You win, and thank you. |
Tasko Pal
Spallated Garniferous Schist
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 12:33:00 -
[83]
Edited by: Tasko Pal on 22/12/2010 12:35:48
Originally by: Black Dranzer I'm of the mind that T2 BPOs should be removed for a very simple reason: Resources in MMOs should never, ever be fixed. It does very bad things to the economy. There are some rare exceptions like one off ships, but not something as major as T2 BPOs. There should either be a means for producing them or they should not exist and be left entirely to invention. Personally I'd prefer removing them entirely. Replace them with high end 1000 run BPCs for all I care, just get rid of the damned originals.
I strongly disagree. I see no reason that T2 BPOs need to be fixed. After all, fixed resources are neither good or bad for an economy. They're just another quirk that you can have in an economy which you have to deal with. Second, moons are a fixed resource which is an even larger portion of the economy. That fact doesn't have a good or bad effect on the economy either.
This brings up one of the reasons I favor keeping T2 BPOs even though I don't own one. The moment you either remove them or allow creation of unlimited numbers of them, you make it like most of the rest of the Eve economy. I see no value in that. The fact that they are a fixed resource adds interesting subtlety and complexity to the game.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 12:55:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Shiho Weitong Edited by: Shiho Weitong on 22/12/2010 12:26:29 <- OMG. THAT GUY HAZ A GUARDIAN VEXOR. THAT'S SO UNFAIR. THAT'S LIKE 71B. (approx, not selling)
Well though luck buddy. I bought it back in the day and it was a wise investment.
Same deal with the T2 BPO's, I sold what I got from the lottery, and somebody else made an investment. If T2 BPO's go, every novelty and unique item should go as well. I just don't see why?
Unfair advantage you say?
So effing what? This is EVE. The game built on unfair advantages.
The funniest part is, that the "OMG REMOVE T2 BPO'S NAOW" people, don't seem to think that the T2 holders should be reimbursed if it happens. Not adequately anyways. I mean. Those BPO's are sold for 3-4 YEARS of projected profits.
As I said earlier in this thread.
T2 BPO's should be removed because they are unfair to you, and the owners shouldn't be adequately reimbursed because EVE is an unfair place. (reworded)
Hypocrisy much?
If you use that guardian vextor it can be lost. Unlike T2 BPO. As far as "EVE is not fair" goes, by that statement people usually mean, that if you bring 5 guys against 2 guys you have edge over them. However "rules of play" would be same for both gangs. Unlike with T2 BPO's where "rules of play" favor one side so that "2 guys" beat "5 guys" every single time.
No amount of spinning stuff will hide that and I'm confident that one day they WILL get removed. I'm just asking the devs to take a good look at them now instead of waiting for another 3 years for that.
|
Hollow Confrontation
Decepticle Corp
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 13:21:00 -
[85]
NO.
This has to stop, how easy do people want it? Some want it too easy, you're playing the wrong game.
|
Black Dranzer
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 13:27:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Hollow Confrontation
NOYES.
This has to stop, how easy do people want it? Some want it too easy, you're playing the wrong game.
I can take your post and change the entire meaning by altering one word, it's probably not a very good post.
|Bounty Fix|Mining Makeover| |
Sadior
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 13:39:00 -
[87]
supported |
Nicky's Tomb
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 14:37:00 -
[88]
Supported.
Either make a mechanic where people can get them in game or remove all of them.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 14:51:00 -
[89]
There.
Let the only person employed by CCP with the actual credentials in order do the assessment.
Enough of these ridiculous threads that always end up with fence-sitting monkeys throwing faeces at each other.
|
AGirlInThisWorld
Dereliction of Duty
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 18:04:00 -
[90]
Supported on the grounds that we will never know for sure which devs were handing out how many t2 bpos, and on the grounds that the lottery was a dumb idea in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |