These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

I need a reliable CSM candidate

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Schmacos tryne
Norsk Testosteron
#1 - 2012-02-08 15:16:39 UTC
Short andsimple:


I need a CSM candidate whom support the removal or reseeding of T2 BPOs. I need your word that this will be put on the agenda with CCP.

I am not interested in arguing about my view in this matter, I just need to know whom I can vote on to get this done once and for all. I have previously not participated in CSM voting as I francly don't believe in a system where the majority decides (as we all know most people are idiots) but as they say: can't beat them, join them.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2 - 2012-02-08 15:22:41 UTC
And yet another T2 BPO rage thread from someone who still incorrectly believes that T2 BPOs have any influence anymore since invention was introduced.

Also, Jita park speaker's forum is that way ---->

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Shazzam Vokanavom
Doomheim
#3 - 2012-02-08 15:35:58 UTC
CSM candidacy details and discussions are held in: Jita Park

There is a rumour however that a member of the CSM recently disclosed against NDA aggreements that T2 BPO will be removed from the game in the near future.

I'd state who, but considering there was no linking evidence other than knowledge of these details it seems unfair to make a link as a result.
CCP Spitfire
C C P
C C P Alliance
#4 - 2012-02-08 15:46:43 UTC
Moved from "EVE General Discussion".

CCP Spitfire | Marketing & Sales Team @ccp_spitfire
Schmacos tryne
Norsk Testosteron
#5 - 2012-02-08 15:57:21 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
And yet another T2 BPO rage thread from someone who still incorrectly believes that T2 BPOs have any influence anymore since invention was introduced.

Also, Jita park speaker's forum is that way ---->


Rage? Your a dumbass. If you can't figgure out why a fully researched T2 BPO is better than a crappy ME BPC then kindly go **** yourself untill you do understand it.

You know nothing, therefore you are nothing.

Shazzam: Good news. Thanx.

Spitfire: thank you for moving the thread into the appropriate location.

Still waiting for CSM candidates to come forth though


Not waiting for more trolls.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#6 - 2012-02-08 16:37:59 UTC
Schmacos tryne wrote:

Still waiting for CSM candidates to come forth though.

Like you will find one Roll


CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Leontyne Gaterau
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2012-02-08 16:48:40 UTC
Mintrolio is your man.
Andrea Griffin
#8 - 2012-02-08 16:55:56 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
And yet another T2 BPO rage thread from someone who still incorrectly believes that T2 BPOs have any influence anymore since invention was introduced.
I can't be bothered to dig up the old QEN, but some markets for T2 items were (and very likely still are) dominated by T2 BPOs.

Mind, I don't particularly care - it does help keep the costs down for consumers.

CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer.
Rixiu
PonyTek
#9 - 2012-02-08 17:54:45 UTC
Andrea Griffin wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
And yet another T2 BPO rage thread from someone who still incorrectly believes that T2 BPOs have any influence anymore since invention was introduced.
I can't be bothered to dig up the old QEN, but some markets for T2 items were (and very likely still are) dominated by T2 BPOs.

Mind, I don't particularly care - it does help keep the costs down for consumers.


Confirming this, especially on the ship department T2 BPOs have a big advantage over invention. Don't care much about it though.
The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-02-08 18:07:48 UTC
t2 bpos are **** but from a political perspective ccp isn't likely to do anything about it and there's very little momentum behind any push to change the status quo

feel free to get mad about it, it won't matter. comes up in literally every csm election, is irrelevant in practice

(**** the old guard, **** t20, **** t2 bpos)

~hi~
The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-02-08 18:08:37 UTC  |  Edited by: The Mittani
i'd support a major invention buff if the suggestion crossed my desk in a heartbeat, because screw t2 bpo holders

invention buff is probably your best bet

reseeding t2 bpos is a terrible idea and you should feel ashamed for even suggesting it in your OP, god damn son, god damn

~hi~
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#12 - 2012-02-08 18:26:00 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
i'd support a major invention buff if the suggestion crossed my desk in a heartbeat, because screw t2 bpo holders

invention buff is probably your best bet

reseeding t2 bpos is a terrible idea and you should feel ashamed for even suggesting it in your OP, god damn son, god damn


I have to agree, when you look at the realities of the small number of the exisitng T2 BPOS and the overall effect on the market, it is hard to get worked up about them from a purely ecconomic perspective.

However, revamp of invention and maybe finally alchemy for Technetium to give T2 some luvin', count me in!!

Issler
Schmacos tryne
Norsk Testosteron
#13 - 2012-02-08 19:10:19 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
i'd support a major invention buff if the suggestion crossed my desk in a heartbeat, because screw t2 bpo holders

invention buff is probably your best bet

reseeding t2 bpos is a terrible idea and you should feel ashamed for even suggesting it in your OP, god damn son, god damn


First of all, I'm not your dam son.


If they are so crap as you want me to believe, there are no reason to keep them in the game. I also find it hard to belive that this is an issue during each CSM meeting and nothing happens? Either someone are working really hard to keep them in game or the whole CSM stuff is bullshit coz it can't rid the game of ancient dinosaurs.

If they are crap - Render them inert and buff invention <- Problem solved
If they are uber - Reseed / remove / render inert, Whichever you prefer, Just DO SOMETHING. <- Problem solved

The only reason they exist is because the owners would shait bricks if something happened to their beloved possessions.

Why is reseeding a terrible idea? Why not buff invention with a per-mill or per-bill chance of getting a BPO, this way almost no-one gets them but any joker interested in doing some science has a chance of obtaining one. Oh wait, you mean it's a terrible idea for the ones who own them since their value and market advantage is threatened... I get it.

ps. Did you know that science has 55 skills? Spacship command covering all races and special ships has 60...
Velicitia
XS Tech
#14 - 2012-02-08 20:26:37 UTC
At this point, the T2 BPO have been going through the secondary market (i.e. being traded between players) for YEARS. They represent an investment of (sometimes) significant amounts of capital from their owners, and straight up removing them from the game helps no one.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Schmacos tryne
Norsk Testosteron
#15 - 2012-02-08 21:00:44 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
At this point, the T2 BPO have been going through the secondary market (i.e. being traded between players) for YEARS. They represent an investment of (sometimes) significant amounts of capital from their owners, and straight up removing them from the game helps no one.


/Off Topic
Like learning skills? They got removed even though a lot of people had invested a lot of time into perfectionizing their toons and invested in books. But thank god this happened coz now the time to get a bot up and running is shorter then ever. Permaban??? No problem!!!
/Back on topic

I dissagree since the players who don't have access to these fine gems (and let's face it, who has the cash to aquire these things? cashual players? semi-active coorporations?) will out-compete any BPC manufactorer based on the materials needed (ME remeber!?).

So re-seed them slowly (through invention like mentioned above) and let the prices adjust over time or let them be collector items unusable for production but worth a bunch to collectors. But don't let T2 BPOs interfere with a market where the players can't get their hands on them.

This is not rocket scientist stuff I assure you.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#16 - 2012-02-10 10:21:51 UTC
So I agree there could be some merit to your concern. Would you consider changes in invention that could with small odds of success produce either a BPO or a much better in terms of loss or max runs BPC as a reasonable alternative to their removal?

Just trying to start a discussion on the topic that explores this in more depth.

Issler
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#17 - 2012-02-10 12:00:28 UTC
I suppose you werent there to scoop any of the T2BPO's that dropped from the CCP loot caravan they did, too bad.

Since so many people like the idea of T2BPOs guess give out the idea I had.

I was thinking of a invention buff pretty much. I thought T2BPOs are rare or should be hard to get, so I thought of force sensitive in Star Wars Galaxies, where having the appropiatly skills and stuff would unlock T2BPOs much like unlocking force sensitive worked. I really dont have much more to add sadly, except what role research agents would serve and I also though tech would have to be figured out as well. Right now as I see it the way tech works, it can only support the invention and limited T2BPOs that are out now. Thought that moon **** would have to go through change or be sorted out as well for an invention buff.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#18 - 2012-02-10 12:18:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Smoking Blunts
Schmacos tryne wrote:
Velicitia wrote:
At this point, the T2 BPO have been going through the secondary market (i.e. being traded between players) for YEARS. They represent an investment of (sometimes) significant amounts of capital from their owners, and straight up removing them from the game helps no one.


/Off Topic
Like learning skills? They got removed even though a lot of people had invested a lot of time into perfectionizing their toons and invested in books. But thank god this happened coz now the time to get a bot up and running is shorter then ever. Permaban??? No problem!!!
/Back on topic

I dissagree since the players who don't have access to these fine gems (and let's face it, who has the cash to aquire these things? cashual players? semi-active coorporations?) will out-compete any BPC manufactorer based on the materials needed (ME remeber!?).

So re-seed them slowly (through invention like mentioned above) and let the prices adjust over time or let them be collector items unusable for production but worth a bunch to collectors. But don't let T2 BPOs interfere with a market where the players can't get their hands on them.

This is not rocket scientist stuff I assure you.



nothing was lost during learning skill changes as the sp's were avalible to move around as people saw fit.

just because people have more game time than others they should be punished for buying t2bpo's? dosnt make much sence to me tbh. you put the time in you get the benfits for it, same as RL.

t2 bpos are a mistake, but are not relivent in the market place in all but a very few cases where the t2 item is so shite that it dosnt sell, t2 armour plates are an example of these.

if you cant make isk from the current invention system you are doing it wrong, while i agree ship invents could use a tweak in the base % chance, mods invents are working as intended imo.

making changes base on security lvl's to the base chance of invents as touched apon in the csm minuets is also a mistake and easy exploited. stick alt in 0.0 alliance, invent there then ship back and build in empire. only way to remove that issue would be to make t2 production 0.0 only, but that would create to many t2 min supply issue to count as well as many other issues.

currently we have a system that isnt perfect, but works well in almost all cases and while a small tweak here and there in the basic industry interfaces is needed there is no need to fix what currently isnt broken.

OMG when can i get a pic here
Schmacos tryne
Norsk Testosteron
#19 - 2012-02-10 20:41:23 UTC
Smoking Blunts wrote:
Schmacos tryne wrote:
Stuff



nothing was lost during learning skill changes as the sp's were avalible to move around as people saw fit.

WRONG-> Investments made into skillbooks was never reimbursed. Several players whom had maxed out their learning skills actually get their training speed nerfed compared to now. So if you don't know, kindly shovel it.


just because people have more game time than others they should be punished for buying t2bpo's? dosnt make much sence to me tbh. you put the time in you get the benfits for it, same as RL.
Stupid argument. This is the same as saying: "If you are a new player you can never have the same benefits as old players.


t2 bpos are a mistake, but are not relivent in the market place in all but a very few cases where the t2 item is so shite that it dosnt sell, t2 armour plates are an example of these.

Coudn't you try to find a worse example then this? Noone does invention for something which doesen't sell. seriously, you don't understand this?

if you cant make isk from the current invention system you are doing it wrong, while i agree ship invents could use a tweak in the base % chance, mods invents are working as intended imo.

It's not a matter of making isk it's a matter of what I am competing with.

making changes base on security lvl's to the base chance of invents as touched apon in the csm minuets is also a mistake and easy exploited. stick alt in 0.0 alliance, invent there then ship back and build in empire. only way to remove that issue would be to make t2 production 0.0 only, but that would create to many t2 min supply issue to count as well as many other issues.

In which way does this differ from someone who is sitting on a T2 BPO in empire?

currently we have a system that isnt perfect, but works well in almost all cases and while a small tweak here and there in the basic industry interfaces is needed there is no need to fix what currently isnt broken.

Sais you. I say it's unfair game advantage between owners and non owners. Which category do you belong to (considering the fact you desperatly try to cough up a post to protect T2 BPO monopoly)?


Nothing in your post justifies the existance of T2 BPOs and in no way does it show any balance between T2 BPO's and Invention. You throw about random arguments and hope to hit the nail head.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#20 - 2012-02-10 22:11:00 UTC
you havnt come up with a rational resason as to why you cant compeat with t2 bpo holders? your spouting the 25million isk cost removal of learning skills and comparing it to the multi billion isk investment people have made into t2 bpo's like there the same thing. which clearly isnt true.

i invent daily and out produce the t2 bpos massivly and make many iskies doing so.
new players have as much chance as getting a t2 bpo as anyone these days, they have all changed hands many times. i was here for the lottery, i didnt take part in the lottery.
you and anyone else can buy t2 bpo's and i dont understand your self intitlement to them or there removel.

OMG when can i get a pic here
12Next page