These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Summer Patch nerfs T2 BPOs?

First post
Author
gas guzzler
i'm from the government and i'm here to help
#61 - 2014-05-05 03:11:23 UTC
Gamer4liff wrote:
gas guzzler wrote:

lol t2 bpo holder spotted, here to defend his ME and PE advantage over us inventing plebs.

amazingly this one doesnt know that PLEX purchases and monthly subscription purchases are basically interchangeable most of the time, and totally interchangeable when PLEX goes on sale, which is the only time people with brains buy them.

let me spell this out for you... 1 less PLEX used = 1 more monthly subscription purchased. understand?

Assuming no spoiled t2 bpo holders like yourself quit, the removal of t2 bpos from the game will be REVENUE NEUTRAL

kthnxbye

EDIT: also what Steve Ronuken said when they are not on sale :D

There are valid reasons to want an end to T2 BPOs.

That is not one of them.


i didn't give a reason to get rid of t2 bpos in that post, i was trolling Loraine Gess. What reason do you think i was trying to present?
sodney
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#62 - 2014-05-05 05:27:29 UTC  |  Edited by: sodney
Geezelbub wrote:
They've disappeared months of skill training in astrometrics so why not T2 BPO's?


nice comparison there, removing a skill tree that affects everyone and costs litherally nothing, is totally compareable to removing extremely valuable items from hangars just of individual playersRoll you might aswell mention the dinosaurs instead

the only (sort of) valid reason to remove T2 BPO's is to make all the jelly belly's stop whining. There has been so many analysis (even by CCP) that the current T2 BPO Holder have no real negative effect to the economy.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#63 - 2014-05-05 05:50:00 UTC
gas guzzler wrote:


i didn't give a reason to get rid of t2 bpos in that post, i was trolling Loraine Gess. What reason do you think i was trying to present?



Some very bad math, from what I can see
Iwan Pawlow
North Korea Illicit Trade
#64 - 2014-05-05 09:14:15 UTC
Why not reduce the ME and PE levels of T2 BPOs to the max levels of T2 BPCs? That would be a solution without causing massive tears.
Kylar Renpurs
Dusk Blade
#65 - 2014-05-05 12:03:01 UTC
Good to see in the time I've been away, T2 BPO's haven't relinquished their title of "The Blight on EVE".

There's really cool stuff that could've been done with the way industry in EVE works, if it weren't for pandering to the precious few who don't want to lose the ISK they've sunk into a T2 BPO. Too bad. You make it sound like up til now CCP have never made changes that have made people lose significant amounts of ISK.

T2 BPOs serve little purpose within EVE's industry except to be a giant anomaly. There is *zero* industrial reason to purchase them, as there's far cheaper stuff that brings in a far better ROI than a T2 BPO ever would. The one flaw to this is the resale value of them, which is basically just a reverse bottle-imp scenario, with people trying to flog them off for just a little more than they bought them. A bit of inflation here and there helps that along the way, but on the whole they're just overpriced collectors items. Old mate sooking about losing 20% of his T2 BPO value is only upset because there's no way he'll ever recover that by manufacturing with the T2 BPO. That's how ridiculous they are in terms of utility within industry.

There is some merit to an argument that purchasing/holding them for strategic purposes, but that's quickly diluted by the fact we have invention (ugh, I won't start on the problems T2 BPOs cause for that) which almost eliminates any strategic denial/sole-production of a T2 item.

Continually avoiding the issue of removing or seeding T2 BPOs (I don't even care which, though seeding makes more sense from an "evolution of technology" perspective) hog-ties sensible development of industry and tech within eve.

Only reason I'd buy a T2 BPO right now is to trash it.
virm pasuul
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#66 - 2014-05-05 12:27:54 UTC
How about his for a solution:

Tech 2 BPOs, and BPCs copied off T2 BPOs can only be used in destructible stations.
For the rest of this post where I refer to BPCs I specifically mean T2 BPCs generated by copies from T2 BPOs and NOT T2 invention BPCs.

This allows collectors to still hold T2 BPOs in complete safety until the end of time - but as soon as a T2 BPO is used for profit it is put at risk, and it's only the use of T2 BPOs for profit that causes a problem, not collection.
To research, copy, or produce from a T2 BPO it would have to be in a destructible station.

This would also have the added benefit of adding more meta to the game. If you are doing anything with a T2 BPO / T2 BPC in a station then that information becomes valuable intel. You would want it done in as much secrecy as possible. If others found out that T2 BPO would be at significant risk.
For small groups/solo players that's a problem in terms of having sufficient manpower to defend the T2 BPO.
For large groups that have no manpower problems, keeping the information secret becomes the problem.

If the structure is destroyed the T2 BPO drops according to the normal whims of the loot fairy. It might drop or might be destroyed forever.


That alone is my primary idea.
On top of that other additional things could be done to tweak ( nerf ) T2 BPOs and copies IF necessary :

T2 BPO and BPC jobs once installed in destructible station could not be cancelled. This would mean loading a job was a commitment to defend that station for the life of the job. No cancelling at the first sign of danger and running away.

Teams don't affect T2 BPO and BPCs = no additional material bonus given that T2 BPOs are probably heavily researched.
Variation; the multipliers used to work out the job costs are many factors higher for T2 BPOs and T2 BPCs. e.g. 100 times higher.
Another variation; the time required to run T2 BPO and T2 BPC copy jobs are longer. This works nicely with the can't cancel T2 jobs in progress rule to ensure maximum risk where T2 BPOs are used.

There could be a limit to how many jobs of any sort involving T2 BPOs maybe a limit of 1 or 2 could be run at the same time per destructible ( back to slots :( unfortunately ) for T2 BPOs and T2 BPCs to prevent heavily defended station being set up deep in held territory. Forcing T2 BPOs to be spread out would make defense much harder and intel on finding them much easier.



I feel this sort of solution fits into the risk versus reward ethos. If you want to profit from a broken mechanic you would have to put significant ISK at risk. Those who want to collect T2 BPOs purely to gloat over are not affected.
Eventually over time T2 BPOs will be removed from the game as the loot fairy claims her due.
As the pool of T2 BPOs dwindles the ISK risked to generate profit from them increases exponentially. At the end only collectors will own them and they will never be used for production.

The above still allows T2 BPOs to make profit, at a greatly increased risk, AND a chance of permanent destruction.
It allows collectors who don't affect the market to collect in peace.
It will allow some very juicy killmails and some huge laughter and tears when T2 BPOs are involved, and we all like reading those kill mails :)
gas guzzler
i'm from the government and i'm here to help
#67 - 2014-05-05 13:26:42 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
gas guzzler wrote:


i didn't give a reason to get rid of t2 bpos in that post, i was trolling Loraine Gess. What reason do you think i was trying to present?



Some very bad math, from what I can see



ROFL where did I do math? do u guys even bother to read my posts?
virm pasuul
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#68 - 2014-05-06 11:00:05 UTC
Has this thread already degenerated to the point where constructive ideas are pointless?