These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Remove T2 BPOs

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
F'elch
Wall Street Trading
#21 - 2012-10-12 13:17:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:
F'elch wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, you have a good set of rebuttals to Akita T's points about T2 BPOs, presumably?


^^^ T2 BPC owner spotted. ^^^
^^^ Person without any resemblance of an argument for his case spotted. ^^^

Also, FYP.

Quote:
Everyone defending T2 BPO has one, otherwise you would want to get rid of them too.
No. Everyone defending them have done the maths and realised that there is no need and no reason to get rid of them. In fact, as weak an argument as it might be, keeping them around as memorabilia is a far stronger argument than any that exist for their removal.


No, my mine BPOs are memorabilia. My snowball launchers are memorabilia. A T2 BPO is a license to print money.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#22 - 2012-10-12 13:19:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
F'elch wrote:
No, my mine BPOs are memorabilia. My snowball launchers are memorabilia. A T2 BPO is a license to print money.
Funnily enough, mine BPOs and snowball launchers are easier to make money with than T2 BPOs, and the reason to get a T2 BPO these days is much the same as getting one of those items. They're pretty much the same.

Anyway, I expect an eight-point rebuttal and/or a three-point reasoning why T2 BPOs should be removed. Good luck. You're going to need it.
F'elch
Wall Street Trading
#23 - 2012-10-12 13:21:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
F'elch wrote:
No, my mine BPOs are memorabilia. My snowball launchers are memorabilia. A T2 BPO is a license to print money.
Funnily enough, mine BPOs and snowball launchers are easier to make money with than T2 BPOs, and the reason to get a T2 BPO these days is much the same as getting one of those items. They're pretty much the same.

Anyway, I expect an eight-point rebuttal and/or a three-point reasoning why T2 BPOs should be removed. Good luck. You're going to need it.


I don't think you will get what you expect, sorry for you. Anyone can see it is unfair to have these items in game.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#24 - 2012-10-12 13:25:03 UTC
Anyone that can count to potato can figure out that invention is just as, if not more, profitable than T2 BPOs

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
#25 - 2012-10-12 13:30:01 UTC
I own a siege missile launcher II....erm...torpedo launcher II BPO. The profit margin and production speed on building torp II's is so low that I think I've only built something like 200 in the last two years. It's just not worth the hassle since invention came out.

So no, I don't think T2 BPOs should be removed. Personally, my torp II BPO is more of a collectors item these days than anything else, and I rather like having it.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-10-12 13:30:33 UTC
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
I have a better idea. Introduce T3 modules and munitions. Don't make BPO's for them.

Solved that problem quick...

This sounds like an excellent idea. I like this guy. He is smart.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#27 - 2012-10-12 13:43:36 UTC
F'elch wrote:
I don't think you will get what you expect, sorry for you.
So there is no conceivable reason why T2 BPOs should be remove then, since that's what I expected to get.

Well too bad. Like I said: you were going to need a bit of luck on that one and obviously it didn't pan out.
highonpop
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#28 - 2012-10-12 13:46:27 UTC
Christy D Floyd wrote:
Is it fair to new players who have joined the game after the lottery.



Is EVE a fair game?

FC, what do?
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#29 - 2012-10-12 13:47:38 UTC
No, don't remove T2 BPOs...

Boost Invention!
F'elch
Wall Street Trading
#30 - 2012-10-12 13:49:51 UTC
Tippia wrote:
F'elch wrote:
I don't think you will get what you expect, sorry for you.
So there is no conceivable reason why T2 BPOs should be remove then, since that's what I expected to get.

Well too bad. Like I said: you were going to need a bit of luck on that one and obviously it didn't pan out.


I didn't even read the link because I do not recognise your authority on this subject. Nor an any other, for that matter.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#31 - 2012-10-12 13:52:04 UTC
F'elch wrote:
I didn't even read the link
That's your problem and the reason why you fail to come up with the slightest shred of an argument to support your position.

But I'll level with you: I did get what I expected. Pretty much exactly and completely so.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2012-10-12 13:55:32 UTC
F'elch wrote:
Everyone defending T2 BPO has one, otherwise you would want to get rid of them too.


Making sweeping generalizations like this is a sure sign that your argument is nothing more than rat excrement. It only takes one counterexample to show that it's wrong, and then you're left there looking like a git.

I don't have a Tech II BPO, nor do I feel they need to be removed from the game. If you're convinced they are so much better, buy one or two and print your own isk for a while.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
F'elch
Wall Street Trading
#33 - 2012-10-12 14:10:34 UTC
Well, I'm this close to quitting right now. With the inflating costs of PLEX and ships and the unfairness that has gone on for so many years with the T2 BPOs and CCP favourites, probably in your pockets. Maybe it is time to say goodbye to Eve. Sorry it comes to this because I have invested a lot of time in this game to be put out now.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#34 - 2012-10-12 14:20:06 UTC
Good, get out.
RaTTuS
BIG
#35 - 2012-10-12 14:30:38 UTC
eve is fair ?
since when?
if you're this close contract me all your stuff before you hit the big button ...

http://eveboard.com/ub/419190933-134.png http://i.imgur.com/kYLoKrM.png

William Sedgwick Vyvorant
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#36 - 2012-10-12 14:38:30 UTC
I'll be honest I've only been playing for a few months and one thing I've learned is EVE isn't a fair and balanced game, just like life, there are haves and have not, to me iot sounds like the OP is just trolling as I can't see how its a license to print money, run the numbers and you'll see its not.

Personally I'm just getting into invention, mainly for T2 frigates, but I hold no grudge against anyone who happens to have a T2 BPO, why? Because those that have them have either invested significant time and/or money to get them so why not let them have them, who are any of us to say that its highly unfair? I guess the test would be if a T2 BPO you really wanted went on sale, would you buy it or refuse to do so on principle?
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2012-10-12 14:43:52 UTC
F'elch wrote:
Well, I'm this close to quitting right now. With the inflating costs of PLEX and ships and the unfairness that has gone on for so many years with the T2 BPOs and CCP favourites, probably in your pockets. Maybe it is time to say goodbye to Eve. Sorry it comes to this because I have invested a lot of time in this game to be put out now.


I will now refer you to my forum signature.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Tragedy
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-10-12 14:51:22 UTC
F'elch wrote:
RaTTuS wrote:
S'Way wrote:
This topic comes up every few weeks / months, was wondering when it would appear again.

Most T2 BPO's aren't even in the hands of the original owners anymore, anyone buying one now will take a very long time (years) to re-coup that outlay and start making a decent profit.
Removing them now is kind of pointless, those who got them from the BP lottery era have probably cashed in by selling them on. The majority of owners now have thrown a few billion into one, good luck to them - should CCP see fit to introduce new modules, that costly BPO could be rendered almost worthless. (and if that happens before the break-even time for the holder, they'll actually take a loss overall).

Do they give an advantage over invention ? sure. Are they game breaking ? no.
Even with a T2 BPO sat copying 24/7 you can't supply the markets full demand for items, there's plenty of room for inventors to still make a good income if they know what they're doing.

they take longer to copy than to build - it's always been the case
invention is far more profitable
run the figures
t2 BPo is just easier on the clicking


Yeah and it never fails, unlike invention. And the supply is unlimited. Everyone defending T2 BPO has one, otherwise you would want to get rid of them too. If we all speak out CCP will have to listen as it is only the few who have these items.

I don't have one. I think they should stay. Quit your whining.
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-10-12 14:58:17 UTC
instead make t2 BPOs worthless - keep items in game, but make production impossible under current free licensing laws.

"Gallente Feds hate unfair markets and restrict production under BPO exclusive rights to patented invention"

Even better, make BPO t2 so widely available and exchangeable for datacores - it will sure hurt everyone except the buyers.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
F'elch
Wall Street Trading
#40 - 2012-10-12 15:05:12 UTC
Opertone wrote:
instead make t2 BPOs worthless - keep items in game, but make production impossible under current free licensing laws.

"Gallente Feds hate unfair markets and restrict production under BPO exclusive rights to patented invention"

Even better, make BPO t2 so widely available and exchangeable for datacores - it will sure hurt everyone except the buyers.


Someone who gets it.