| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Yves DeFleur
   |
Posted - 2006.06.13 05:26:00 -
[91]
CCP is depriving me. Not another player. I have a HAC and can buy more anytime I want. I just want to be able to buy one for a reasonable price. (ie_ what it is actually worth.
|
Wendat Huron
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 12:03:00 -
[92]
You just don't get it, it's worth whatever you can buy it for, there is no true value, supply and demand, supply and freaking demand, this isn't some regulated soviet marketplace!
|
DarkCEO
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 12:40:00 -
[93]
 Originally by: Wendat Huron
You just don't get it, it's worth whatever you can buy it for, there is no true value, supply and demand, supply and freaking demand, this isn't some regulated soviet marketplace!
Agreed and to all those going on about resellers and comparing it to RL situations, do you think the shop that you bought that can of pop from made the can of pop? or is the shop reselling it on?.
|
Selena 001
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 12:56:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Hunters Presence
Kali. Reverse-Engineering.
That's all the devs are going to say.
Thats another half arsed plan to fix a problem... Destroy 1 T2 Item, just to get a multiple (which in reality will mean 2) run BPC? The process between having the item go into reverse engineering, and it emerging as a BPC will probably take days as well, assuming there aren't any problems with insufficent testing/deployment... 
Eventually, we'll see a 'work-around' for the 'work-around' of the overview bug
___________
Dont mind me, I'm Forum-Whoring cause I dont have anything better to do with my life... |
Khatred
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 13:04:00 -
[95]
Really, let's just make everything available on market at 0.01 isk, give everyone 220 mil skillpoints, all ships to have the same tanking capabilities and damage output.
Ta da. No more T2, macro mining, nerf this, buff that topics. We'll just stick with the bugs complains.
_______________________________________________
Every time you whine a little HAC is destroyed. Please think of the little HACs |
Yves DeFleur
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 16:42:00 -
[96]
bah humbug to the whole situation........just wanted to vent a bit...I'm good now :)
|
Tristan Acoma
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 16:53:00 -
[97]
The one thing you don't hear on here is anyone talking about the relation between cost of buying a ship and willingness to bring that ship into frivilous combat.... cheaper HACs mean that they're more common in more battles, making T1 ships even more of a....redundancy.
I guess what I'm getting at (but not very well  ) is that the more people that have HACs (multiples), well....
|
Drizit
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 17:20:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Drizit on 13/06/2006 17:21:27
Quite honestly those BPO's should have been BPC's. let more people have 10 run BPC's rather than a limited number having BPO's and the problem would not have arisen to start with. Now we have a few people that can pretty much control the market while the rest already know that practically all the T2 BPO's have gone so there's not much point in doing research to get into the lottery any more.
A continual supply of limited run BPC's would have been far better since they could be released indefinitely at a rate that could be raised or lowered to suit the market.
Wendat Huron: Yours is a typically British view of pricing structure and one that many in the UK want to get away from. It stems from basic greed and a very low respect of their customers.
- Sell item for what it is worth¦ - respectable business.
- Vastly overprice goods - Greed + You think the buyer is a dope and will pay anything for it.
¦Goods are worth cost + a reasonable profit margin. There is no possible way that 120% can be considered reasonable.
--
|
Ruffio Sepico
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 17:33:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Yves DeFleur
I know...I shortly quit Lineage2 after this fact came to light for me. I rerolled first and made another toon, but quickly found myself in the same position being that if I wanted the high-end game...I'd have to pay real money for it. Is the same thing gonna happen to EVE players?
You could ask yourself how many t2 prints been bought for time card money.
Its already happening. The RL rich people buy themselfs ahead ingame with the blessing of CCP.
Home: http://www.hidden-agenda.co.uk
|
Ruffio Sepico
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 17:36:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Wendat Huron
Here's a clue for you, people getting a BPO are getting a patent to build.
As for the one talking about knock-offs made in China, those are called BPCs.
We have them both you just have to think and realize.
Yeah and look what good things bpc's did to t1 market 
Home: http://www.hidden-agenda.co.uk
|
ZzeusS
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 17:39:00 -
[101]
Did you guys all miss the roadmap to seed BPC's and BPO's in explorer space, rat loot, and reverse engineering? Seems to me all your concerns have already been addressed.
|
Steppa
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 19:19:00 -
[102]
Has anyone heard of a situation in which all or most of the owners of a given tech2 ship BPO have found each other? Oligarchy, anyone?
|
Wendat Huron
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 21:22:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Drizit
Edited by: Drizit on 13/06/2006 17:21:27
Quite honestly those BPO's should have been BPC's. let more people have 10 run BPC's rather than a limited number having BPO's and the problem would not have arisen to start with. Now we have a few people that can pretty much control the market while the rest already know that practically all the T2 BPO's have gone so there's not much point in doing research to get into the lottery any more.
A continual supply of limited run BPC's would have been far better since they could be released indefinitely at a rate that could be raised or lowered to suit the market.
Wendat Huron: Yours is a typically British view of pricing structure and one that many in the UK want to get away from. It stems from basic greed and a very low respect of their customers.
- Sell item for what it is worth¦ - respectable business.
- Vastly overprice goods - Greed + You think the buyer is a dope and will pay anything for it.
¦Goods are worth cost + a reasonable profit margin. There is no possible way that 120% can be considered reasonable.
How and why could/should there be any respect for my customer when I have no option to passively regulate whom I want to sell to but in order to control this have to spend hours in trade channels, boards and escrow because the market functions doesn't allow for me to treat the customers I respect with just that while ****ing on the rest?
|
Alzion
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 23:41:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Drizit
Edited by: Drizit on 13/06/2006 17:21:27
Quite honestly those BPO's should have been BPC's. let more people have 10 run BPC's rather than a limited number having BPO's and the problem would not have arisen to start with. Now we have a few people that can pretty much control the market while the rest already know that practically all the T2 BPO's have gone so there's not much point in doing research to get into the lottery any more.
A continual supply of limited run BPC's would have been far better since they could be released indefinitely at a rate that could be raised or lowered to suit the market.
Wendat Huron: Yours is a typically British view of pricing structure and one that many in the UK want to get away from. It stems from basic greed and a very low respect of their customers.
- Sell item for what it is worth¦ - respectable business.
- Vastly overprice goods - Greed + You think the buyer is a dope and will pay anything for it.
¦Goods are worth cost + a reasonable profit margin. There is no possible way that 120% can be considered reasonable.
The only time a product becomes overpriced is when it is no longer selling at a reasonable rate. If the product is selling at a steady rate then the price is fitting the demand adaquately.
---------------------------------------------
I hear Linux can cure cancer and raise your sperm count. - Dionysus Davinci
|
Daddy's Princess
|
Posted - 2006.06.13 23:55:00 -
[105]
Oh look, I found another hac BPO thread.
I am beyond being annoyed with the stupidity and hypocrisy of the clue deprived whiners. It's just half hearted chuckle now...
|
Wolfgang Jager
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 00:43:00 -
[106]
I wouldn't worry about it. The tier two battlecruisers and tier 3 battleships will take a lot of the wind out of HAC sales.
|
Oisin
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 02:03:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Drizit
Wendat Huron: Yours is a typically British view of pricing structure and one that many in the UK want to get away from. It stems from basic greed and a very low respect of their customers.
- Sell item for what it is worth¦ - respectable business.
- Vastly overprice goods - Greed + You think the buyer is a dope and will pay anything for it.
¦Goods are worth cost + a reasonable profit margin. There is no possible way that 120% can be considered reasonable.
Goods are worth exactly what the people buying them are prepared to pay for them. No more, no less. Would anyone sell a faction scrambler they got in an npc drop for only the cost of the ammo they shot at the npc plus 30%?
|
Wendat Huron
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 02:23:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Wolfgang Jager
I wouldn't worry about it. The tier two battlecruisers and tier 3 battleships will take a lot of the wind out of HAC sales.
Tech I items readily available on the market denting the HAC market? I think you're comparing apples and verbs.
|
Traxman
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 03:34:00 -
[109]
Why not train for Command ships, they tend to be cheaper
or atleast the same price as a HAC and a Commando ship
is atleast 1.5x-2x better than a HAC. I guess laziness
of training skills are the key to failure.
The market are and will be as the buyers are, if a lot
of them want the same product the price will go up, its
not that hard to understand - so go train command ships
instead!
|
Alucia Gebir
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 06:33:00 -
[110]
Command ships are only better than Hacs in certain situations! A command ship should pwn a Hac in 1v1 much like a Battlecruiser should pwn a cruiser, but against Battleships, the Hac has a smaller size and larger speed, making it much harder to damage, while the command ship takes much more damage from BS weapons due to larger size and slower speed, while not being able to put out enough damage to kill the bs before it goes pop (even though it has better HP than a HAC).
Personally, I'd like to fly a Hac, and when the time comes that I have the sp in the right areas, I will probably just buy one from the market at it's going price. No whining on the forums that it is overpriced, I'll just have to suck it up (much like standard assault frigates, you see much less return on your investment from an insurance payout). Because people believe these are wtf uber pwn mobiles (and in many cases seem to be), they still have flaws, and can be killed. It is part of owning this powerull ship that they are hard to come buy, and as such I intend to be careful with it, and not risk it in pvp untill I can afford to replace it and its mods (in fact I may have to aquire 2 fully kitted out hacs before I consider risking one) It is how the game currently works, more supply would be nice, and as the no. of HAC capable pilots goes up, so should the bpos (to keep the same sort of ratio that CCP envisioned when the bpos were originally seeded), but untill that day comes to pass, hac prices are going to rise as more and more people learn to fly them, and subsequently lose them.
Ramble Over
Alucia
|
Khatred
|
Posted - 2006.06.14 09:13:00 -
[111]
^ With this point of view I can agree. If devs considered that the bpos released in 2004 will be enough taking in consideration their growth expectations, fair enough. However, if the expecations were exceeded, more bpos seeded at agents are in order.
_______________________________________________
Every time you whine a little HAC is destroyed. Please think of the little HACs |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |