| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Joe
   |
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:37:00 -
[1]
I refer to the policy of reseeding Tech II bpo that are on banned or inactive accounts:
 Originally by: Wrangler, Posted - 2005.06.24 14:59:00
As Oveur has stated, many times, they keep a close eye on the tech 2 BPOs in game, they see how they are used or not used etc. If tech 2 BPOs gets inactive or lost, they make sure the agent system gives out another one.
This however is not the case, as I've now learnt of two different players with inactive aco****s that have Idle bp.
I understand GM's intentionly cap the amount of Tech II bpo's sseeded to limit production, but is it now policy to allow producers to gain Monopolys simply by waiting for competitors to leave eve? (yes there is a 1 True Tech II mod monopoly atm, and no, its not cap II)
Should monopolys be allowed to form this way, and Could a GM please confirm if this policy has been changed.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:41:00 -
[2]
Whats that monopoly, and how do you know there arent new bpo's seeded and given out already ?
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Tommy Twoguns
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:41:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Tommy Twoguns on 11/11/2005 19:41:42
How do you know that more haven't been distributed?
Beat me ^^
|
Joe
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:44:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Tommy Twoguns
How do you know that more haven't been distributed?
They would have been veiwable in the R&D agents predictable patents lists I assume.
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:47:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Joe
Originally by: Tommy Twoguns
How do you know that more haven't been distributed?
They would have been veiwable in the R&D agents predictable patents lists I assume.
And they would have disappeared just as quickly.
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
SaIIy
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:47:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Joe
but is it now policy to allow producers to gain Monopolys simply by waiting for competitors to leave eve?
I am no mathemetician - but on the basis of 20 tech 2 BPO's per item what are the chances of 19 players leaving eve and the 1 left having been patient enough to wait for it to intentionally gain them a monopoly position ...
And - if such a monopoly does exist which was gained in this way (and this would need to be proved) who was it?
|
Blanke
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:49:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Joe
This however is not the case, as I've now learnt of two different players with inactive aco****s that have Idle bp.
Let's play "Guess the bleeped word!" Ready? Now, how can we mis-type "accounts" to get a bleeped word...
Sorry, just thought it was funny. I'm apparently 9 years old.
-----------------
Warning: The above post and/or sig may contain hyperbole, sarcasm, typographical errors, misspellings, or a blatent disregard for the feelings and/or opinions of others. |
Joe
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:51:00 -
[8]
yeah that confused me too when i spotted it^^
no i will not be discussing the player with the monopoly atm, they're free to post here, but i assume that its a pretty good reason to be wardec'd so i doubt they'll pop in. |
SaIIy
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:55:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Joe
no i will not be discussing the player with the monopoly atm, they're free to post here, but i assume that its a pretty good reason to be wardec'd so i doubt they'll pop in.
So - whilst I accept you will not name them - or presumably the mod in question (as that would be a give away  ) I presume you are saying that you can prove this player (whoever it may be) deliberately created the monopoly situation by waiting for the other 19 BPO holders to leave the game ...
I just gotta meet them whoever they are - I want to know the next years winners for all the horse racing so I can bet on it, they must be beyond Psychic!!!
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 19:56:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Joe
Originally by: Tommy Twoguns
How do you know that more haven't been distributed?
They would have been veiwable in the R&D agents predictable patents lists I assume.
but as BCU2s don't appear on the market yet, its unlikely theyd appear on this list
</wild guess>
|
Joe
|
Posted - 2005.11.11 20:02:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Joe on 11/11/2005 20:05:45
Edited by: Joe on 11/11/2005 20:03:47
[edit=I keep making the same mistake ;/]
Originally by: SaIIy
I presume you are saying that you can prove this player (whoever it may be) deliberately created the monopoly situation by waiting for the other 19 BPO holders to leave the game ...
no, ofcourse they couldn't have deliberetely created it, i'm saying the situation shouldn't have happened in the first place if the Policy of reseeding bpos was actually implemented. (and the origianl tech II bpo's from 18 months ago only came out in 8 bp releases, so its much easier for this situation to occur if the gm's aren't reseeding) |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |