These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

T2BPO why they should be removed and how.

First post
Author
Jajas Helper
#381 - 2012-05-25 09:47:16 UTC
Lara Dantreb wrote:
Hi guys,

I want to advertise this auction :

T2 BPO E.A.N.M. II - a quite good print

1) buy the print
2) produce items
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy !


already have one... but i'll see what i can do

Inferno do _stuff _with _stuff _to imitate the _stuff _you could do faster with the old stuff

-stuff-

lol fourm troll
Doomheim
#382 - 2012-05-25 12:32:09 UTC
Lara Dantreb wrote:
Hi guys,

I want to advertise this auction :

T2 BPO E.A.N.M. II - a quite good print

1) buy the print
2) produce items
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy !

Can I not try,
1) buy T1 print
2) invent T2
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy!
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#383 - 2012-05-25 12:37:35 UTC
lol fourm troll wrote:
Lara Dantreb wrote:
Hi guys,

I want to advertise this auction :

T2 BPO E.A.N.M. II - a quite good print

1) buy the print
2) produce items
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy !

Can I not try,
1) buy T1 print
2) invent T2
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy!


Try that with T2 ships you'll be unhappy, say a popular line of T2 ships like umm interceptors where the T2BPO crushes inventors ROI.
lol fourm troll
Doomheim
#384 - 2012-05-25 12:40:55 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
lol fourm troll wrote:
Lara Dantreb wrote:
Hi guys,

I want to advertise this auction :

T2 BPO E.A.N.M. II - a quite good print

1) buy the print
2) produce items
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy !

Can I not try,
1) buy T1 print
2) invent T2
3) ???
4) make Brewlar unhappy!


Try that with T2 ships you'll be unhappy, say a popular line of T2 ships like umm interceptors where the T2BPO crushes inventors ROI.

This is just crazy but, well I can't tell if it is a troll or a suggestion, it really won't work with your mind set but here goes,
DO NOT INVENT INTERCEPTORS
Glad I managed to say that.
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#385 - 2012-05-25 12:46:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Brewlar Kuvakei
So you think it's fair that players are ruled out of entire inventions due to the fact that CCP has created and gifted out T2BPO's which are far to efficent at creating those line of T2 items?

If T2BPO is so great please seed a bunch more, oh wait CCP understands the error of T2BPO and no longer seeds them. If only they got off their ass and nerfed/removed the ones still in game to have lower stats than invented BPC's.
lol fourm troll
Doomheim
#386 - 2012-05-25 12:59:46 UTC
Try this then, wine to have interceptors nerfed so that more of them blow up and it increases the market for them.
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#387 - 2012-05-25 13:07:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Lara Dantreb
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
....

If T2BPO is so great please seed a bunch more

, oh wait CCP understands the error of T2BPO and no longer seeds them. If only they got off their ass and nerfed/removed the ones still in game to have lower stats than invented BPC's.


I believe it's your entire point : as you are too lazy or unimaginative to be able to afford one, or you want another seeding or you prefer they not exist.

I said unimaginative because you are still after interceptors which are not profitable to invent at this moment, which were profitable in the past, which are NOT popular hence the UNPROFITABILITY to invent them

T2 Bpos are still seeded, in the sell order forum. Watch there.

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---

Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#388 - 2012-05-25 13:15:31 UTC
Another nice deal I wanted to show (another bpo seed in the sell order forum)

Cyclone BPO the best command ship

One day or another Cyclones may receive a buff to support the comparison with T3 counter parts

Cyclones gang bonuses are the most wanted : speed, disruptor,scramblers and webber range, and signature radius bonus

Quite a cheap deal imo

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---

Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#389 - 2012-05-25 13:18:40 UTC
Lara Dantreb wrote:
Another nice deal I wanted to show (another bpo seed in the sell order forum)

Cyclone BPO the best command ship

One day or another Cyclones may receive a buff to support the comparison with T3 counter parts

Cyclones gang bonuses are the most wanted : speed, disruptor,scramblers and webber range, and signature radius bonus

Quite a cheap deal imo



Cool can I purchase it using research points? Oh wait no I can't then I'm not intrested. Oh wait can I get one from a dropped rat, eh no? OK, How about a dev just give me one you know just because?

Naw if I'm not going to be able to get these items through corrupt means or just plain gifted then I'm not really happy.
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#390 - 2012-05-25 16:50:11 UTC
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Cool can I purchase it using research points? Oh wait no I can't then I'm not intrested. Oh wait can I get one from a dropped rat, eh no? OK, How about a dev just give me one you know just because?

Naw if I'm not going to be able to get these items through corrupt means or just plain gifted then I'm not really happy.



Otherwise you can follow the rules and purchase it with the isks you collected playing the game. (you pretend to be a trader, you should be able to)

There were at least 8000 T2 bpos seeded. (I don't know the exact number, if someones knows, please tell us)

What you speak of is a tiny minority. (let's say 50 bpos including Miner II bpos)

99,37% were acquired following the rules.

What you want is to change the rules using a fallacious argument and flawed cases.

Adeptio Gloriae ? lol pathetic puppet yeah.

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#391 - 2012-05-25 17:39:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
popular line of T2 ships like umm interceptors

I think you have an odd definition of "popular". Interceptors stopped being really popular a good while back. And when they used to be really popular, inventing them was quite profitable.
So, you were saying, again, what exactly ?

Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
So you think it's fair that players are ruled out of entire inventions

It's about as fair as many other things in EVE which are intentionally unfair to some degree.
T2 BPOs are intentionally slightly unfair, and what makes them more fair rather than unfair is the fact people can trade the BPOs freely between themselves.
If anything, the current situation is far, far fairer than back in the day the lottery was still active.

Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
Cool can I purchase it using research points?

Yes, you can. Indirectly.
Buy datacores with RP, sell datacores, use ISK to buy BPO.
Problem solved !
If you want more of a lottery feel, be my guest and use that ISK to enter player-organized lotteries to multiply it to the levels you'd need to purchase a T2 BPO. Or maybe even enter a player-organized lottery that offers T2 BPOs as prizes !

I even figured with back-of-envelope guesstimations that it is quite probable that the total value of RPs that were used up post-lottery on datacores already exceeds the sum of RP that were spent acquiring T2 BPOs back in the days of the lottery (and will keep going up), so in a twisted sense, you're better off doing research today than you were back in the day when the lottery was still active, and it's only getting better.


You keep saying that some people gamed the lottery with info from devs. Where is the hard proof of that ? I'd wager CCP Internal Affairs would love some leads regarding that. Oh, wait, you have none, it's just wild speculations and baseless conjectures.
And even if some people did get some degree of assistance, unless you want to claim some dev actually manually manipulated the draw of the lottery, it doesn't really matter even if some of them did get some hints as to what would be easier. It's not like a regular player couldn't have figured the same thing, just with no certitude.
You also keep saying that some people got blueprints from rat drops. Guess what, those were Miner II BPOs, and there's only a handful of them, it happened BEFORE the lottery was introduced (it's actually THE reason the lottery was introduced, because people complained it was "too unfair" towards active event participating combat pilots), and they represent something like roughly 20 out of over 10000 blueprints after the end of the lottery (i.e. less than 0.2% of the grand total, so that leaves 99.8% initially earned via lottery).
At least you don't keep droning about BPOs allegedly handed directly over to players (see: t20) because you probably realized those were all removed (and they kind of sucked to begin with, and there were very few too).
THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF PEOPLE OBTAINED THEIR T2 BPOs INITIALLY FAIR AND SQUARE - AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF CURRENT OWNERS PURCHASED THEM WITH ISK FROM THE PEOPLE THAT WON THEM IN THE LOTTERY or other former owners who purchased them with ISK (as opposed to having won them in the lottery themselves).

Even in the extremely unlikely case that you would be right about any of the distribution unfairness topics (and I can only repeat that I am of the opinion that you are almost totally wrong), how exactly would removing T2 BPOs TODAY solve any of the issues regarding how they were first introduced ?
The obvious answer is that it wouldn't solve nor fix anything except give some people with entitlement issues a very brief sense of accomplishment which will soon fade as they find other issues they feel self-conscious about, while the core veteran player base just shakes their head in disbelief at a major CCP blunder in caving in to unreasonable demands.
Again, there's no way to "safely" remove T2 BPOs from the game without causing a whole lot more trouble than simply letting them in.
You used to agree that buffing invention massively would be a better alternative - what happened to that position you eventually agreed on - did you completely forget about it ?
Katja Faith
Doomheim
#392 - 2012-05-25 18:23:30 UTC
AkitaT, you realize you're being trolled, yeah?
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#393 - 2012-05-25 20:07:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Brewlar Kuvakei
AkitaT I considered the invention buff ie allowing invented T2BPC's to inherit their t1bpo stats but that idea is flawed as it would generate a problem akin to T2BPO but on an even larger scale. Allowing inventions to inherent stats would close margins and prevent newbie inventors from competing with inventors who have a highly researched t1bpo.

Buffing invention run levels and success chance is an option yes also reducing material needs to insure that it falls equal to T2BPO or slightly less is an option too.

The easiest and fairest method that I feel CCP should implement would be to insure that a T2BPO falls shortly behind a T2BPC on material efficiency taking into account invention chance. This would allow T2BPO's to retain value and continue to be an attractive item in fields that have demand while still allowing inventors to produce items. The T2BPO would be attractive in the fact that it is afk isk slowly churning out items 23/7 but in a sligtly less efficient manner while t2bpc's require a click fest of operations.

Another option would be to allow invention not to create T2 items alone but have a chance at creating a new set of faction called 'inventions' that have higher stats than T2 items.
Haulie Berry
#394 - 2012-05-25 20:09:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:


Buffing invention run levels




This already happened in the last patch. Most people have chosen to ignore it in favor of crying about one thing or another because they're incompetent lackwits who don't know how to capitalize on opportunities.

Coupled with the rapidly-falling decryptor prices, invention got a whole lot cheaper and faster in the last patch.
IgnatiusReilly esq
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#395 - 2012-05-25 20:41:12 UTC
I like bacon
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#396 - 2012-05-25 21:07:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Katja Faith wrote:
AkitaT, you realize you're being trolled, yeah?

I only mind the quality of the trolling P
As long as it's self-consistent, from the exterior, there's no noteworthy difference between arguing with somebody with an inaccurate view or arguing with a decent intentional troller, and there's no reason to treat either differently when your actual target is the lurking audience, not the person you argue with.
I would argue a whole lot more if I would have more spare time, as it is right now I'm actually arguing while taking brief breaks from work. Arguing about something very familiar which I have spent a lot of time examining in the past is quite relaxing to me, since it temporarily clears my mind of stuff I was thinking too much about that don't quite fit right yet, allowing me to start over with a slightly different and possibly more useful perspective if I'm lucky. But I digress.

Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:
The easiest and fairest method that I feel CCP should implement would be to insure that a T2BPO falls shortly behind a T2BPC on material efficiency taking into account invention chance. This would allow T2BPO's to retain value

Hogwash.
How exactly would that allow T2 BPOs to retain any non-negligible ECONOMIC value ?
Their collector item status would have their value so far outstrip any feasible ROIs into the ground even at material waste vs invention extras ISK parity, but at even a slight disadvantage almost nobody would have a good reason to bother with BPO manufacture anymore ever again, instead buying from inventors from the market being the almost always much better alternative in terms of effort.
And how exactly do you propose to make that "accounting for invention chance" adjustment anyway when prices of datacores, decryptors and even T1 BPCs is never constant ? It would periodically flip from slight advantage to slight disadvantage if fixed, and would run a very significant risk of actually amplifying the fluctuations if done dynamically with a delay or averaging.

No, T2 BPOs are supposed to result in cheaper goods after all things are considered.
A T2 BPO is not the end product, it's a tool. The T2 item is the end product. If you can't make it cheaper than market price, don't make it, BUY IT. If you want to make money manufacturing/inventing something, there are plenty of things to manufacture/invent for a profit.

If you want to have a T2 BPO, just buy one.
If your opinion is that they're too expensive, then proceeding logically, the owners are at a disadvantage by NOT selling them, so you have nothing to complain about.
If your opinion is that they're priced right, why are we arguing ? Having or not having it would be the same darn thing.
If your opinion is that they're too cheap, what's stopping you from buying some ? And "I don't have that much ISK" is not a good excuse for this thing. There are plenty of other ways to make truckloads of ISK. And that includes (among countless other methods) inventing stuff while using your brain and spreadsheets to select those things that are profitable to invent.
Salo Aldeland
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#397 - 2012-05-26 13:46:28 UTC
I'm still confused as to why everything has to be completely fair, all the time, and how that would somehow make EVE more 'real'.
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#398 - 2012-05-26 13:48:37 UTC
I think CCP should tweak T2 BPO manufacturing times so that they cant supply more than 20% of the long term demand for any product.

No drama about compensation as profits still there, but not enouhg to saturate market, would make some T2 BPO's more valuable and some less i expect.
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#399 - 2012-05-26 15:07:50 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:


Buffing invention run levels




This already happened in the last patch. Most people have chosen to ignore it in favor of crying about one thing or another because they're incompetent lackwits who don't know how to capitalize on opportunities.

Coupled with the rapidly-falling decryptor prices, invention got a whole lot cheaper and faster in the last patch.


I missed something, what has changed exactly about invention mechanics with the last patch ? more runs ? cheaper datacores ? More decryptor drops ? I don't get it, please someone tell me.

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---

shar'ra matcevsovski
Doomheim
#400 - 2012-05-26 15:14:56 UTC
Lara Dantreb wrote:


I missed something, what has changed exactly about invention mechanics with the last patch ? more runs ? cheaper datacores ? More decryptor drops ? I don't get it, please someone tell me.


you dont need max run copies to use decryptors anymore, 1 run copies will allow usage of dycrptors already.
Datacores dropped in price aswell, but hard to say how its gona be on long a long term.

shar'ra phone home