open All Channels
seplocked Science and Industry
blankseplocked To people that want to remove T2 BPOs : give a GOOD reason why
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 ... : last (40)

Author Topic

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.08.24 02:50:00 - [271]
 

Originally by: Greyson Stone
I just kept forgetting to add the smiley faces.

[sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags would be better Wink

Alexandra Lingwa
Caldari
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.08.24 02:53:00 - [272]
 

Edited by: Alexandra Lingwa on 24/08/2010 02:52:50
The fail is strong in this thread. T2 BPOs are fine move along already. Rolling Eyes

Nahkep Narmelion
Gallente
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE
Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
Posted - 2010.08.24 02:57:00 - [273]
 

Originally by: Greyson Stone
Nahkep, my point was well made, Akita asked for a good reason why T2 BPOs should be removed. Whether you like democracy or not isn't even relavent.


You brought it up. And your post is OT, as it not a reason, but some dopey notion of letting people vote. Would you let them vote on whether your account is kept or flushed? Whether or not your assets are stripped and given out equally to everyone or not? When you vote on robbing Peter to pay Paul you can always count on Paul's vote.

Quote:
In the end, I was just having fun, I got bored, my clone was stuck in high sec, an I was reading the forums, an decided to add my opinion, we all know opinions are like A-holes, everybody has one an they all stink.

Take what I say with a grain of salt, an then add sarcasim to it, an you might find my arguments over this amusing.

Besides, could you imagine the fallout if CCP did leave it up to all of the EvE players to decide?


We wouldn't have Eve anymore. Crying or Very sad

Greyson Stone
Amarr
Scientia Consortio Angustus
The Donkey Rollers
Posted - 2010.08.24 03:30:00 - [274]
 

Edited by: Greyson Stone on 24/08/2010 03:31:03
Nahkep, thats the whole point, its a dopey notion, its absurd, it was suppose to be silly.

Like CCP would leave it up to the players.

As for voting for my account an items, thats a little bit out of scope of the topic, an as sadistic as some people are in this game, I rather not have a vote for it.

Oh, an the reason was because all the EvE players decided to get rid of T2 BPOs, aka the vote.

Celia Therone
Posted - 2010.08.24 07:54:00 - [275]
 

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion

Yes, some markets are currently dominated by T2 BPOs. These are markets where I suspect that the profit margin is too low for inventors. As such, the T2 BPOs keep this market supplied. If we removed the T2 BPOs two things would happen.

Case 1: Prices rise and inventors re-enter the market.

In this case, non-inventors would lose out over the status quo since higher prices mean an overall decline in player welfare. You have less isk to spend on stuff and thus have less fun. This is a bad thing, IMO.


Higher prices are higher because of the overhead of invention. Datacores and decryptors cost isk. Invented BPC's are also less efficient and thus require more raw materials. Thus the isk isn't vanishing from the game (apart from the minor effect of more market taxes) it is instead being spread around more people - miners, explorers and datacore farmers rather than just the BPO holder and fewer miners. One could argue that an explorer selling decryptors is probably more likely to re-spend that money quickly than the holder of a T2 BPO who probably already has a big stash of cash in the bank.

I think that this is also somewhat of a false test case. If the margins on the items are really so low that they can only be sold with a T2 BPO subsidy then the T2 BPO owner can almost certainly make more money by producing something else in that production slot. Therefore you'd expect the market in that good to die out anyway.

If the market is going to die out anyway then it's probably better to have it die out now rather than after CCP re-balances items to make them more desirable only doesn't bother with that item because it has 'niche sales' due to the temporary T2 BPO subsidy. This rather assumes that CCP is going to re-balance items at some point of course which admittedly might be over optimistic.

Jurinak
Posted - 2010.08.24 08:06:00 - [276]
 

let the people vote about this is like let my daughter vote about "free icecream" when ever she wants, she simply doesnt see that no one will buy a truck and drive around the neigbourhood when they forced to give the icecream 4free to every kid and she doesnt see that it isnt a good thing that she allways get icecream ;)

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.08.24 22:40:00 - [277]
 

Originally by: Jurinak
let the people vote about this is like let my daughter vote about "free icecream" when ever she wants, she simply doesnt see that no one will buy a truck and drive around the neigbourhood when they forced to give the icecream 4free to every kid and she doesnt see that it isnt a good thing that she allways get icecream ;)

The real tragedy is that some girls do not go through this phase at an age when icecream meant everything, but when it is the internet and everyone on it gets to see it.

Nahkep Narmelion
Gallente
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE
Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
Posted - 2010.08.24 23:39:00 - [278]
 

Your mom called, she wants you to come up out of the basement to take your medication. Rolling Eyes

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.08.25 06:46:00 - [279]
 

Originally by: Nahkep Narmelion
Your mom called, she wants you to come up out of the basement to take your medication. Rolling Eyes

Your mom called, too. She said you are hiding in the basement.

Brian Ballsack
Posted - 2010.08.25 11:58:00 - [280]
 

Edited by: Brian Ballsack on 25/08/2010 12:03:14
.

Jovialmadness
Posted - 2010.08.25 13:10:00 - [281]
 

Guys ive already removed whitehound from the ranks of the United Trolls of EvE Association. It was determined that he was awful and his only true skill was MAYBE baiting.

Please, for the sake if trolls everywhere(we gotta have work), stop feeding this dude.

Caza Dor
Crossroads Research
Posted - 2010.08.25 19:16:00 - [282]
 

I'll give you a good reason to get rid of T2 BPOs...

Remove them from the game to avoid whine threads and anti-whine threads like this one.

And slightly off-topic idea:

put in a system where you can purchase T2 BPOs for some ridiculously large number of research points + isk;

i.e. use the points to buy cores for immediate sale or invention, or save points for a year or longer and trade for a random t2 bpo based on the associated science you were researching.

mental maverick
Percussive Diplomacy
Posted - 2010.08.25 21:18:00 - [283]
 

Originally by: Caza Dor
I'll give you a good reason to get rid of T2 BPOs...

Remove them from the game to avoid whine threads and anti-whine threads like this one.
This has got to be the best reason so far...


In my early days of trading and manufacturing I was all for the removal of t2 BPOs because i thought it was such an unfair advantage over invention.

Now that im in a position that i could buy one or two of them I struggle to see any advantage of sinking that much isk into anything with those kind of returns and the effort that goes with it when there are so many other and better options to put that isk to work.

On the other hand, I wouldnt touch invention with a ten foot pole these days either so...Rolling Eyes

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.08.26 00:36:00 - [284]
 

Originally by: Caza Dor
I'll give you a good reason to get rid of T2 BPOs... Remove them from the game to avoid whine threads and anti-whine threads like this one.

Right... [sarcasm]Let's also remove everything else that's subject to controversy ![/sarcasm] Whoops, where exactly did EVE go ?

Quote:
And slightly off-topic idea: put in a system where you can purchase T2 BPOs for some ridiculously large number of research points + isk;i.e. use the points to buy cores for immediate sale or invention, or save points for a year or longer and trade for a random t2 bpo based on the associated science you were researching.

It would have to be a truly ridiculously high cost, so that nobody in his right mind would bother getting one from this particular source, or else it won't be long before invention becomes an extinct profession. Even so, I would not exclude the possibility of some people purchasing one every now and then.

Edith Bunker
Posted - 2010.08.26 16:31:00 - [285]
 

Originally by: Widemouth Deepthroat
Edited by: Widemouth Deepthroat on 29/07/2010 14:49:53
I own a X-L shield booster and photon scattering field bpo. If they got nerfed I going to quit Eve so fast and sned an envelope full of my waste to CCP office you won't believe it. That is how strongly I and other T2 BPO holder feel about our well deserved advantage over the rest of you.

edit: how is well deserved? We had to train for about 2 week to get chance for lottery and grind some standings. I feel we deserving something for this effort not just a little tickle of isk called datacore.


Wow? Two weeks?
Yippy skippy..............

Caldreis
Caldari
Forward Thinking Industries
Universal Consortium
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:57:00 - [286]
 

Akita T, you have provide a good reason based on fact why tech 2 bpo should remain. Niche market where inventor can't manufacture at a reasonable cost. So I thought why not do something in between both extreme, keep tech 2 bpo exact like they are and completely remove of tech 2 bpo.

Reduce or readjust how decryptor affect lower end invent *covert op, interdictor, electronic warfare, etc...* to make it possible to actually produce them at a price that player would want to buy. Keep the me/pe the same for cruiser/hulk and above for inventor. Keep tech 2 bpo exact as they are today like all other limit one time items. Therefore their "collector" value remain in and make it possible to expand inventor to involve more items. A similar analogy would be removing meta zero module from npc loot to allow tech 1 module to remain competitive with mission runner sold items.

I think it is possible to approach this problem almost the same way as rig bpo was readjust to 3 different size rig bpo to allow smaller rig to be cost effective.

Just for those who don't know me. I am a multi-profession player. I can invent and manufacture capital and run missions. As long it involve ISK I can do it, with some excepts such as pvp.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.08.27 02:42:00 - [287]
 

Originally by: Caldreis
Akita T, you have provide a good reason based on fact why tech 2 bpo should remain. Niche market where inventor can't manufacture at a reasonable cost. So I thought why not do something in between both extreme, keep tech 2 bpo exact like they are and completely remove of tech 2 bpo.[...snip...]

*ahem*
Originally by: Akita T
[...]If anything, instead of arguing for the REMOVAL of T2 BPOs, all those starry-eyed unrealistic idealists should better focus on something else entirely : how to make INVENTION itself suck less[...]

Wink

Caldreis
Caldari
Forward Thinking Industries
Universal Consortium
Posted - 2010.08.27 12:55:00 - [288]
 

Originally by: Akita T

*ahem*
Originally by: Akita T
[...]If anything, instead of arguing for the REMOVAL of T2 BPOs, all those starry-eyed unrealistic idealists should better focus on something else entirely : how to make INVENTION itself suck less[...]

Wink



Heh Didn't see that only had like 10 min to post it yesterday disregard my post then.

Bellac
Posted - 2010.08.28 11:17:00 - [289]
 

Well - i got lucky in the lottery and didn't turn down any BP I was offered so I have a couple of good prints and a couple of rotten prints. However I can make a few copies and sell them and they do all right for me so I think T2 BPO's are fine as they are - Wink

However on a serious point I think that it wouldn't hurt to give the inventors a bit of a leg up in the market by making it possible for them to invent copies with better efficiency figures. How this would be done in a way that didn't completely break the fine balance of supply and demand I will let others muse over, but this would surely help everyone out along the way

Narfas Deteis
Posted - 2010.08.28 11:44:00 - [290]
 

Originally by: Bellac

stuff



1. Copying T2 BPOs is ridiculous idea because of copying time. You are doing it wrong.

2. Increasing ME/PE of invention copies would NERF invention badly, because of reduced profits. Demand is more stable then supply. Lower production costs will NOT increase inventor's profits - quite opposite, because of competition.

To sum things up: you are wrong.

Rip Minner
Gallente
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
Posted - 2010.08.28 15:22:00 - [291]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 29/07/2010 00:38:14
Originally by: TooFatToFish
6.I do not have any so no one should

[sarcasm]
I don't have any State Issue Ravens nor Mimirs nor Frekis nor any other number of limited edition ships either, so nobody else should.
For that matter, I have no capital ship nor barge BPOs, so nobody else should have any either.
What, you say you can buy those from NPCs ? Ok, what about barge BPOs then ? I don't want to go to 0.0 ! So I can't buy those from NPCs and I have to buy them for players ? You can't force me to go to 0.0, but I sure a hell can force you to never have any such BPOs yourself !
[/sarcasm]
Rolling Eyes



Ya I know your smarter then that Akita. But everything you put on that list any and every player can set as a goal and get one. There are only a limited number of T2 bpo's in the game making it imposable for everyone seting them as a goal to get one to realy get one. Thats the problem with t2bpo's in a nutshell and you know it. But no I dont think there going to add any more to the game nor will they remove the ones that are here.

Personly I wish they would add 2tech bpo's seeds to the market and just add datacores as part of the build cost to them.

SurrenderMonkey
Posted - 2010.08.28 15:30:00 - [292]
 

Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 28/08/2010 15:31:16
Originally by: Rip Minner


Ya I know your smarter then that Akita. But everything you put on that list any and every player can set as a goal and get one. There are only a limited number of T2 bpo's in the game making it imposable for everyone seting them as a goal to get one to realy get one.


LOLWAT? Everything he put on that list is FAR rarer than T2 BPOs, except for caps/barge BPOs.

There are, what, two state issue ravens in the game?

Rip Minner
Gallente
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
Posted - 2010.08.28 15:47:00 - [293]
 

Edited by: Rip Minner on 28/08/2010 15:57:27
Edited by: Rip Minner on 28/08/2010 15:57:00
Originally by: Akita T
So, I repeat...

I CHALLENGE YOU TO :
A) FIND A GOOD REASON WHY T2 BPOs MUST BE REMOVED
B) DETERMINE A FAIR SYSTEM FOR THEIR REMOVAL
C) ARGUE WHY THE RESULTING SITUATION WOULD BE BETTER OVERALL THAN THE CURRENT ONE.


I posit that:
a) There are only invalid reasons, greedy/envious reasons, or misguided reasons.
b) Just about any possible "solution" to the non-existent "T2 BPO problem" are worse than the current situation.
c) The current situation is both fair and balanced from most possible viewpoints.
[/quote


A. Having only a limited number of them makes it impossable for everyone to own one that wants one. No matter the amount of isk needed to get one. New players that I know of see the elite of the elite in there minds having this and knowing it is impossable for everyone to get one are turned off on the game by it.

B. The best solution to Tech 2 bpo's is not removing them but seeding them at high cost and adding datacores onto the build cost.

C. I have to say C is mostly right. The isk you can make off t2 bpo's is close to want you can make off of t2 bpc's. Only you dont have to go though all the added work of making t2 bpc's with a t2 bpo.ugh

Edit: As a side note I dont personly have any real problem with how things are right now but I do love a good debate so I will take a side I dont belive in and do my best :)ugh

Rip Minner
Gallente
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
Posted - 2010.08.28 15:50:00 - [294]
 

Originally by: SurrenderMonkey
Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 28/08/2010 15:31:16
Originally by: Rip Minner


Ya I know your smarter then that Akita. But everything you put on that list any and every player can set as a goal and get one. There are only a limited number of T2 bpo's in the game making it imposable for everyone seting them as a goal to get one to realy get one.


LOLWAT? Everything he put on that list is FAR rarer than T2 BPOs, except for caps/barge BPOs.

There are, what, two state issue ravens in the game?


My bad that shows how closely I was reading but even so you can get your state issue raven blown up when using it. But not your Tech 2 bpo. The risk in using any ship balances out all the one time ships. If they take them out there gank magnets if they just colect dust in the hanger there not being used. The same is not true of Tech 2 bpo's.ugh

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.08.28 21:15:00 - [295]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 28/08/2010 21:20:24
Originally by: Rip Minner
My bad that shows how closely I was reading but even so you can get your state issue raven blown up when using it. But not your Tech 2 bpo. The risk in using any ship balances out all the one time ships. If they take them out there gank magnets if they just colect dust in the hanger there not being used. The same is not true of Tech 2 bpo's.ugh

True, but we were talking about each and every individual aspect//argument of people that insist T2 BPOs must be eliminated. The standpoint that they have to be eliminated for the sole reason of their limited nature is invalid because there are plenty of other things that are available in even more limited numbers, and nobody in their right mind would ever ask for those items to be eliminated. The rarity//limited nature is not a good enough standalone argument.

Originally by: Rip Minner
Quote:
A) FIND A GOOD REASON WHY T2 BPOs MUST BE REMOVED
B) DETERMINE A FAIR SYSTEM FOR THEIR REMOVAL
C) ARGUE WHY THE RESULTING SITUATION WOULD BE BETTER OVERALL THAN THE CURRENT ONE.[/b]


A. Having only a limited number of them makes it impossable for everyone to own one that wants one. No matter the amount of isk needed to get one. New players that I know of see the elite of the elite in there minds having this and knowing it is impossable for everyone to get one are turned off on the game by it.

B. The best solution to Tech 2 bpo's is not removing them but seeding them at high cost and adding datacores onto the build cost.

C. I have to say C is mostly right. The isk you can make off t2 bpo's is close to want you can make off of t2 bpc's. Only you dont have to go though all the added work of making t2 bpc's with a t2 bpo.ugh

A) New people are turned off by a lot of things when looking at older players.
For instance, they are turned off by the fact ALL older players have so much more SP, and the uneducated newbie thinks he can never compete with any of the older guys. Thankfully, there are plenty of people that realize just how wrong that line of reasoning is, and in most cases, somebody will soon educate the newbie about the lack of relevance of massively more SP on somebody else's character, thanks to how the skill system is designed. Yes, there are some advantages, but not quite those the newbie first thought, and there are plenty of disadvantages too.
It's the same story with T2 BPOs, the uneducated science&industry newbie (which may even be an older player) will also wrongfully believe he can't compete with people holding T2 BPOs, but this time, there are far less people there to correct and educate him about how T2 BPOs on somebody else's character are not that much different from many more SP on somebody else's character.
The misplaced discontent of people lacking all necessary info about how things stand is never a good reason to destroy anything.

B) The problem with that type of solution is that eventually, some people will still keep buying T2 BPOs they desire out of convenience (let's just call it that and nothing worse) directly from the NPC source even if the price is noticeably above the current T2 BPO going rate, therefore, in time, the T2 BPO value will plummet as more and more enter the system and their profitability drops... which in itself might not be such a bad thing, but the side-effect will be that the inventor market share will keep dwindling... datacore prices would plummet, T2 BPO purchase from NPCs will become cheaper... and in the end, invention would be rendered practically useless for all items T2 BPOs are being sold.

C) The final situation WOULD end up being noticeably worse overall in time, so, thanks, but no thanks.

Quote:
Edit: As a side note I dont personly have any real problem with how things are right now but I do love a good debate so I will take a side I dont belive in and do my best :)ugh

Fair enough, no problem, no hard feelings... I love a good argument too Wink

Rip Minner
Gallente
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
Posted - 2010.08.29 04:11:00 - [296]
 

Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 04:33:52
Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 04:33:18
Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 04:26:59
Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 04:26:23
Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 04:23:58
Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 04:13:57
B) The problem with that type of solution is that eventually, some people will still keep buying T2 BPOs they desire out of convenience (let's just call it that and nothing worse) directly from the NPC source even if the price is noticeably above the current T2 BPO going rate, therefore, in time, the T2 BPO value will plummet as more and more enter the system and their profitability drops... which in itself might not be such a bad thing, but the side-effect will be that the inventor market share will keep dwindling... datacore prices would plummet, T2 BPO purchase from NPCs will become cheaper... and in the end, invention would be rendered practically useless for all items T2 BPOs are being sold.


I made B) short but I thought the ideal would be to remove inventor's from tech 2 and get them set up with tech 3. I also belive that datacores would be consumed at a higher rate with them in each tech 2 iteams build cost. Add to it with CCP finaly puting gost cores down here shortly they would fly much higher in cost with more cores being used in build cost and no gost. It will take time for people to train acitve accounts or for the prices to rise to a price were the gost accounts can pay for themselfs. Not counting every sleeper account geting picked clean before the patch.

Thats more what I was thinking with B.

I see tech 3 as the next level and would make tech 2 easyer for new players to get into. Thats just what I was thinking and beliving. Dont make it right I did not run numbers or anything like that it's just a raw ideal I had when trying to come up with a way that would stop the remove Tech 2 bpo speechs. But keep the kind of over all balance of it and make it easyer for new players to get into as isk is not much of a real bearier in EVE with some smart thinking and forthought.ugh

Edit: You could even work the other invention skills and iteams into a full tech 2 bpo market with having to use them to do Research and copying with tech 2 bpo's. And then that easly sets the stage for tech 3 invention for tech 3 mods and ships with stuff out of wormholes and using tech 2 bp copys.

Edit: Last one. I'm talking about non-modular tech 3 ships here thoughs would still be done the same as now and with more of them in time to come.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.08.29 05:42:00 - [297]
 

Ah, you meant include datacores in T2 item production, as opposed to include datacore costs in T2 BPO purchases from NPCs... gotcha. Yeah, that makes a lot more sense.

About "invention of non-modular T3 stuff"... hmm... there are a few problems with that (not impossible, but still a lot of work).

For ships, you will want at least different skins (if not completely new models), which gives quite a few bits of work for the art team (which is allegedly pretty busy anyway).
Also, you will want to have most, if not all of those non-modular T3 ships filling some role that is not already filled by some other type of ship, and that could prove difficult. If you make them fill an already-filled niche, without extremely delicate balance, they would either be never used because they're too expensive, or they could completely displace the non-T3 variants... and let's just say "delicate balance" is not something CCP is extremely fond of achieving.
As far as T3 items (mods, drones, ammo, whatever) goes, a similar argument can be made that they'll need delicate balancing to avoid both of the possible bad scenarios.
On top of this all, they NEED to be attractive enough to be used in a noticeable percentage of cases, or else there would be no market for them, so adding them would be pointless.
And last but not least... the matter of what they'd be built from. Should it be a mix of existing resources (minerals, salvage, PI stuff, T2/T3 components and/or wormhole materials), or should they mainly use some newly introduced resources (created specifically for them, either with a new gathering mechanic or within some of the established mechanics, as some soft of add-on) ?

Let's just say, even if it's decided that idea would be a go, we'll probably have to wait more than just a while for any of that (2 years is actually a pretty optimistic estimate, heh).

Rip Minner
Gallente
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
Posted - 2010.08.29 06:38:00 - [298]
 

Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 16:29:21
Edited by: Rip Minner on 29/08/2010 06:42:13
Originally by: Akita T
Ah, you meant include datacores in T2 item production, as opposed to include datacore costs in T2 BPO purchases from NPCs... gotcha. Yeah, that makes a lot more sense.

About "invention of non-modular T3 stuff"... hmm... there are a few problems with that (not impossible, but still a lot of work).

For ships, you will want at least different skins (if not completely new models), which gives quite a few bits of work for the art team (which is allegedly pretty busy anyway).
Also, you will want to have most, if not all of those non-modular T3 ships filling some role that is not already filled by some other type of ship, and that could prove difficult. If you make them fill an already-filled niche, without extremely delicate balance, they would either be never used because they're too expensive, or they could completely displace the non-T3 variants... and let's just say "delicate balance" is not something CCP is extremely fond of achieving.
As far as T3 items (mods, drones, ammo, whatever) goes, a similar argument can be made that they'll need delicate balancing to avoid both of the possible bad scenarios.
On top of this all, they NEED to be attractive enough to be used in a noticeable percentage of cases, or else there would be no market for them, so adding them would be pointless.
And last but not least... the matter of what they'd be built from. Should it be a mix of existing resources (minerals, salvage, PI stuff, T2/T3 components and/or wormhole materials), or should they mainly use some newly introduced resources (created specifically for them, either with a new gathering mechanic or within some of the established mechanics, as some soft of add-on) ?

Let's just say, even if it's decided that idea would be a go, we'll probably have to wait more than just a while for any of that (2 years is actually a pretty optimistic estimate, heh).



hehe ya I was thinking mybe in the next 4 years. With Dust 514 and PI geting ironed out and all ugh

And at some point if they want to add new content to the game that people love its going to be the next better newer hotness. At some point newer ships are just going to replace older ships. In much the same way tech 2 replaced alot of older ships too.

Edit: The ships Tech 2 replaced still get used becouse there a cheaper witch is a good thing for pvp or if you pvp alot.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.09.09 22:11:00 - [299]
 

Originally by: Rip Minner
In much the same way tech 2 replaced alot of older ships too.

Not quite that much. In PvP, you still see a truckload of T1 ships. Even if T2 BSs do exist, T1 BSs are still among the most used PvP ships, and Tech 1 tier 2 BCs are also very popular.

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2010.09.09 23:04:00 - [300]
 

I thought I'd struck lucky when I got a Tech 2 Akita T BPO.

Apparently the T1 variant has a far higher logic per rant ratio so my BPO is useless. Buff T2 BPO's!


Pages: first : previous : ... 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 ... : last (40)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only