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


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Ariane VoxDei
Posted - 2010.07.29 09:50:00 - [1]
 

Apparently Akita is bored and likes to entertain himself, so lets run the mirror thread, just in case.
Nothing trolling about this thread, as the more enlightened lurkers will acknowledge.

I CHALLENGE YOU TO :
A) FIND A GOOD REASON WHY T2 BPOs MUST STAY AT THE STATUS QUO.
B) ARGUE WHY ANY CHANGED SITUATION(*) WILL BE WORSE OVERALL THAN THE STATUS QUO.
(i.e. argue why the current situation is the best there can ever be.)


*: A number of scenarios have previously been put on the forums. I will list some of them and I deliberately omit any of the "compensation" or transition suggestions, since the whole point of this excercise is having a discussion about what the longterm goal should be concerning availability and profitability of T2 BPOs vs the T2 BPCs resulting from invention, given that the status quo not desirable and on the premise that CCP will insist on keeping invention and refusing to kill off that profession (and throw the datacore, decryptor, etc. market into limbo until a new use will be introduced).

List as follows, but not necessarily exhaustive:
1) Complete removal of all T2 BPO, making invention the only path to T2 items.
2) equalizing BPO and BPC efficiency: removing the ME and PE advantages, either by BPO nerfing or BPC improvement.
3) as #2, but going much further by giving BPO a huge manufacture time penalty, in addition to voiding any research done on them and making research on them impossible (e.g. 1000 years per PE or ME level if you are a lazy dev)
4) Opening new way for T2 BPOs to enter the game, usually combined with #3 and making it very costly (isk, LP, sleeperbits, whatever) so invention won't be killed off.

There are more, and more detailed, ideas out there, but the above roughly cover most of those that deal with removing/changing/adding T2 BPOs, as opposed to merely supplementing the system (e.g. adding new ways to get BPCs or putting T2 items in LP stores, both of which could be isk sinks, directly or indirectly).

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.29 10:19:00 - [2]
 

The reply is easy:

"Give a good reason why you should keep your assets."

To explain it: if you want to remove something from the game you should give a reason why doing that will make the game better, not a reason why it should not make it worse.

Removing the T2 BPO will not make the game better.

It will make your liver feel better, but that is a problem with your personality, not a problem of the game.

You are stating "given that the status quo not desirable a" without any proof or argument backing that.

Sorry, but even if you claim to be the Voice of the God in your name, you are a single player and the voice of nothing more than yourself.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.07.29 10:21:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/07/2010 10:25:52

Originally by: Ariane VoxDei
[...]A) FIND A GOOD REASON WHY T2 BPOs MUST STAY AT THE STATUS QUO[...]

The same reason why you should get to keep your SPs, your implants, your ISK in the wallet and your hangar contents, your PI colonies, your corp, your alliance, your POSes, your sov space, your outposts.
BECAUSE YOU EARNED THEM, doesn't matter how you got them... and you deserve to keep them just because you have them.

Quote:
[...]A number of scenarios have previously been put on the forums. I will list some of them and I deliberately omit any of the "compensation" or transition suggestions, since the whole point of this excercise is having a discussion about what the longterm goal should be[...]

Not really fair, but then again I guess if you wish to sidestep the most PROBLEMATIC issue of this entire debacle... meh, let's try.

Quote:
1) Complete removal of all T2 BPO, making invention the only path to T2 items.

In case nothing else changes, the most immediate and obvious result will be the catastrophic collapse of the markets (volume-wise) for a significant amount of T2 item types thanks to horrible price/performance ratio.
Prices of all T2 items go up, not just of those that had their markets collapse, thanks to increased demand for moon materials due to increased invention waste.
Customers unhappy, inventors don't really see any difference, we see an even faster resurgence of the old prom/dyspro problem but this time with tech/neo (mostly tech since neo has alchemy).
Overall, worse.

Quote:
2) equalizing BPO and BPC efficiency: removing the ME and PE advantages, either by BPO nerfing or BPC improvement.

Leaving aside compensation issues for massive devaluation (as you started claiming), if you do it the "kill BPO ME/PE levels" way you end up pretty much in the same problem of scenario #1.
If you do it the "boost BPC ME/PE levels" way (and maybe even boost copies obtained), to achieve relative parity with BPOs (other than datacore and T1 BPC costs), you reduce the advantages of T2 BPOs so much that their removal becomes nearly completely pointless. In other news, you get a situation almost completely reversed from scenario #1, with low T2 prices, delayed moon mineral ISK-point-source problems (you still get them, but later)... yet inventors STILL don't get any noticeable advantages since
Still, adequate compensation would mean huge ISK influx and inflation, and it's not exactly the best thing to have. Inadequate compensation would stir up quite a crapstorm.
Either way, AT BEST it's not worse, but it's certainly not better either.

Quote:
3) as #2, but going much further by giving BPO a huge manufacture time penalty, in addition to voiding any research done on them and making research on them impossible (e.g. 1000 years per PE or ME level if you are a lazy dev)

Exactly the same problem as above, but even worse in the compensation department.

Quote:
4) Opening new way for T2 BPOs to enter the game, usually combined with #3 and making it very costly (isk, LP, sleeperbits, whatever) so invention won't be killed off.

The only problem with that being that invention WILL eventually be as good as killed off if you DO NOT put a cap on the number of T2 BPOs that can enter the game. There's a truckload of disposable ISK reserves (and even more of a truckload of ISK earning potential, and everything-else-earning-potential) that new T2 BPOs will keep entering the system.
The only question is how long until that happens.
Still, I suppose it's one of the least annoying ways to do it, ESPECIALLY if you make the T2 BPOs cost not just ISK and/or LP but also DATACORES AND DECRYPTORS (to provide an alternative sink for them once invention goes the way of the dodo).
However, that's not exactly removing T2 BPOs, now is it ? It's quite the opposite...
Laughing

Quote:
There are more, and more detailed, ideas out there

Link some that you consider decent enough then.

Dr Nefarius
Posted - 2010.07.29 10:48:00 - [4]
 

Yes, I'm also envious of the bastards who got t2 BPO:s from the lottery.
I am however not envious (ok maybe a little) of those who bought a t2 BPO for 50 billion isk, and are likely to earn back that isk in about 3 years(with some work involved as well).

GOOD REASON WHY T2 BPOs MUST STAY AT THE STATUS QUO: there is no good reason to why it MUST stay at status quo. The problem is that the benefits of not having any t2 BPO:s is outweighed by the negative impact of ****ing over people who perhaps invested 5 years of eve income into a t2 BPO... the damage t2 BPOs has done to Eve cannot be undone without messing things up even further.

fakeedit:OK, I just came up with a solution that would not upset t2 BPO holders that much, and would remove t2 BPOs:
Make it so the t2 BPO:s has a limited ammount of runs left. Enough runs so the BPO could be used for 5 years consecutively before it runs out. There problem solved. This I first considered a joke, but would likely be the best solution to the situation IMO. I don't think you will be happy about it, since I assume you WANT THEM GONE NAOW. But the projected profits of these BPOs has already become a part of the eve economy. Just ripping that away would somewhat benefit one group of players, while completely **** over a slightly smaller group of people.

/Dr Nefarius

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2010.07.29 11:22:00 - [5]
 

T2 BPOs must remain because those are the only items profitable to invent. Everyone thinks that because BPOs exist they are not profitable so they don't invent those items.

Do the math for yourself on items with and without a BPO and see which is more profitable to invent and build.

Jovialmadness
Posted - 2010.07.29 16:12:00 - [6]
 

Removing them at this point would be like banning alcohol. They have been around too long and if they were removed ccp would feel it in the pocket book.

"not enough players own them to worry ccp about that" you say?

Give me 25% of your monthly income. Go ahead bro its all good. You can still live off the rest you make im sure. Its not even close to your full income. If it ****es you off well tough, im mad cause you make more than me so i want a more even playing field. Dont argue its not fair im getting some of your hard earned money its just the way it is!

Its FAIR!

Sharlandra
Caldari
Zandathorn Industries
Posted - 2010.07.29 16:26:00 - [7]
 

If you wanna remove T2 BPO's find where they are being kept, or who is carrying them, then kill them or blow up whatever contains them, and if it isn't destroyed, you could trash it, sell it, then kill the buyer and do it again, or drop it into a secure can in the m iddle of no where in Worm Hole Space and laugh at people's failed attempts in trying to recover it.

EvilCheez
That's Retarded
FIGHT CLUB INC
Posted - 2010.07.29 16:29:00 - [8]
 

Because as soon as they are removed and the players holding them are reimbursed 100B for their hulk bpo, we are going to have to sit through thread after thread about how unfair it is that some people have more isk or are able to fly capital ships (a newb can't fly a mothership why should anyone be able to!).

The game you are looking for is called tic-tac-toe.

TooFatToFish
Posted - 2010.07.29 16:37:00 - [9]
 

Another post about removing learning skills? Really? Rolling Eyes

Durnin Stormbrow
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:08:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Durnin Stormbrow on 29/07/2010 17:14:33
IMO, the only reason for T2 BPOs to be left in the game is that investment & profit are a significant part of this game for a large portion of the player base.

Having the future be somewhat predictable is the only way to foster investment. We expect changes to game mechanics, and accept that as a risk to any investment; but to intentionally destroy the value of an entire block of assets, without good cause, is not the way to demonstrate a predictable future, and will drive the bulk of players out of long term investing.

If you accept that, then the burden of proof has to be on BPOs needing to be removed to improve the overall game.

Edit:
Like I said in the other thread...
In the interest of disclosure: I don't own a T2 BPO, have never actually seen one, and have no interest in buying one at multiple years ROI. Invention works well enough for me without the outrageous front end costs.
If one dropped out of the sky and landed in my lap, I would most likely sell it.

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:23:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: LHA Tarawa on 29/07/2010 17:32:34
Originally by: Ariane VoxDei

I CHALLENGE YOU TO :
A) FIND A GOOD REASON WHY T2 BPOs MUST STAY AT THE STATUS QUO.
B) ARGUE WHY ANY CHANGED SITUATION(*) WILL BE WORSE OVERALL THAN THE STATUS QUO.
(i.e. argue why the current situation is the best there can ever be.)




A) They enjoy playing EVE in easy mode.
B) They don't want to have to compete with the great unwashed masses.

Don't you know, EVE has a caste system of the elite few haves, and the vast majority of have-nots. Why should the elite few have to compete on a level playing field.

Why don't we all just accept that they deserve to be elite, they deserve the special advantage that they won half a decade ago in the T2 BPO lottery? It would be so much nicer if we newer players would just accept that they are better than us and that they should never have to compete on a level playing field.


Jovialmadness
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:30:00 - [12]
 

LHA -------------> Sad


Jovial ------------->Cool



Jovial to LHA----------->Twisted Evil

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:34:00 - [13]
 

@everyone requesting the removal of the T2 BPOs

You realize that you're the ones requesting a change, right? Therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove a change is necessary otherwise the status quo stands.

Additionally, I don't have any T2 BPOs and I don't see the problem; as an inventor I know that they don't set the price, they just have a better margin than I do,

T2 BPOs will never set the price unless the number of BPOs for a given item can (and do) produce more of that item than the market has demand for it

Thoughts?

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:46:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Sigras
@everyone requesting the removal of the T2 BPOs

You realize that you're the ones requesting a change, right? Therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove a change is necessary otherwise the status quo stands.


That argument has been won.

The existinace of T2 BPOs creates an unacceptable class system of haves and have-nots that creates anger and discontent among the have nots. The elitest mechanism by which newer players will never have a reasonible chance of competing on a level playing field must be removed for the future growth of the game.... You're not gowing to grow the player base when the newer players will forever be at such a disadvantage.

The debate now is how to reasonibly compensate the current holders when the T2 BPOs are removed.


Originally by: Sigras

Additionally, I don't have any T2 BPOs and I don't see the problem; as an inventor I know that they don't set the price, they just have a better margin than I do,



An unacceptable eliteism that must be removed.

Either no one should have access to easy mode, or everyone should.

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:53:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa

That argument has been won.

The existinace of T2 BPOs creates an unacceptable class system of haves and have-nots that creates anger and discontent among the have nots.



Again I call bull****!

There are hundreds of thousands of items in EVE that follow in that group

I don't have a mine BPO, remove them from the people that own them!

I can't Train Mobile Refinery Operation, remove it from those you have it trained!

Chribba and several others have highsec capital ships, remove them!!

I don't have a Freki, or a Utu, remove them!

I don't have a Guardian Vexxor, remove them!

Shall I keep going on.

Durnin Stormbrow
Posted - 2010.07.29 17:56:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa
The existinace of T2 BPOs creates an unacceptable class system of haves and have-nots that creates anger and discontent among the have nots.

Every player that bought a T2 BPO was a 'Have' before they bought the thing. Simply getting rid of BPOs will not suddenly turn a player that can't figure out how to earn a profit on invention into an industrial mogul, and it will not change any perception of "Wahh, this is unfair".

Every MMO has it's rich, and every MMO has it's poor that can't figure out how to not be poor.

Jovialmadness
Posted - 2010.07.29 18:03:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa
Originally by: Sigras
@everyone requesting the removal of the T2 BPOs

You realize that you're the ones requesting a change, right? Therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove a change is necessary otherwise the status quo stands.


That argument has been won.

The existinace of T2 BPOs creates an unacceptable class system of haves and have-nots that creates anger and discontent among the have nots. The elitest mechanism by which newer players will never have a reasonible chance of competing on a level playing field must be removed for the future growth of the game.... You're not gowing to grow the player base when the newer players will forever be at such a disadvantage.

The debate now is how to reasonibly compensate the current holders when the T2 BPOs are removed.


Originally by: Sigras

Additionally, I don't have any T2 BPOs and I don't see the problem; as an inventor I know that they don't set the price, they just have a better margin than I do,



An unacceptable eliteism that must be removed.

Either no one should have access to easy mode, or everyone should.



There are simply no words LHA that can describe the tears im sucking on right now. None whatsoeva

Jovialmadness
Posted - 2010.07.29 18:13:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Durnin Stormbrow
Originally by: LHA Tarawa
The existinace of T2 BPOs creates an unacceptable class system of haves and have-nots that creates anger and discontent among the have nots.

Every player that bought a T2 BPO was a 'Have' before they bought the thing. Simply getting rid of BPOs will not suddenly turn a player that can't figure out how to earn a profit on invention into an industrial mogul, and it will not change any perception of "Wahh, this is unfair".

Every MMO has it's rich, and every MMO has it's poor that can't figure out how to not be poor.


Extremely true. The only difference i would add is that every other mmo has a fairly equal footing for all players. What i mean by that is yes i agree 100% there are rich players but they got that way by investing ALOT of time in the game. Eve is unique in that players are able to circumvent time by investing isk to make isk....something LHA and gang totally despise.

Basically this dude wants to fundamentally change the game and what makes it TOTALLY unique to other mmo's. What he doesnt realize and if he had a shred of brains is the ENTIRE game revolves around uniqueness.

How this dude and others like him cant see this i cant understand unless they are recent converts from city of heros or WoW.

captain foivos
Posted - 2010.07.29 18:56:00 - [19]
 

You can't fix what isn't broken.

Bryg Philomena
Don't Taze Me Bro
Posted - 2010.07.29 19:04:00 - [20]
 

1) Why should ccp come in and just change your assets and take away your stuff. Thats ludicrous. Also, it means you CAN MAKE CONTACTS IN GAME. Get to know people to get stuff cheaper in bulk.

2) Wrong. You are trying to change the status quo. The burden of proof is on you.

Magnus Orin
Minmatar
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.29 19:39:00 - [21]
 

Because they earned them, either a) with isk, or b) with RPs in the original lottery.

STFU, HTFU and stop crying about T2BPOS.

Dzil
Caldari
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District
Posted - 2010.07.29 19:42:00 - [22]
 

One way to reintroduce T2 BPOs in a way that benefited the perfect customer:

Give any invention process a tiny chance to produce a BPO instead of a BPC.

This would also prevent invention from becoming obsolete, as it would be the single source of new T2 BPOs.


Pantload
Gallente
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Flatline.
Posted - 2010.07.29 20:18:00 - [23]
 

So...the topic for this thread is...give a good justification why should be allowed to keep stuff you already have. What if you don't? Who decides on the fitness of your reasoning? Then what? "Too bad for you...you didn't justify why you get to keep your **** so we're taking it because someone *****ed about you having it"?!

This thread is selfishly motivated. Guaranteed! There is not greater good in this person's agenda.

Is the number of whiny bull**** threads like this going up and up and up?! WTF is going on recently?

Umega
Solis Mensa
Posted - 2010.07.29 21:02:00 - [24]
 

Heres one reason..

Diversity and complexity.

There has been too much of the 'Well this has this, but that doesn't have it, so it should, cause balance balance balance balance is always right.' When actually no, it isn't a good thing.

Diversity allows people to change up what they are doing, go after something else, set several varying goals to accomplish. Allows people to change their tactics, their approach. Just like say flying a gallente ship then having the option to fly caldari.. two widely varying styles. But if to make them 100% balanced would need to make equal in every way from dps, ew abilities, shield/armor amounts, yada-yada.. where is the diversity? What happens to the complexion of the landscape and the game?

Where is the diversity when remove an aspect of Industry? The varying different layers and fabric that help make a game more exciting, different, rewarding across a multitude of facets. T2 BPOs give people another option to go about their business. Sure it takes some work to require one, this is actually more so the result of the rariety of them. Some view them as tokens, trophies, a plaque on the wall, a 'first currency' framed on the wall of their successful business. Why shouldn't it take work to achieve something of a rare nature? A inventor can make more in a set span of time, and have other avenues to drop n go. A T2 BPO holder can make higher profit margins, but not higher sums while being locked into one specific item. Why shouldn't players have the option to do one or the other, or even go down both paths if they want?

People don't want to be forced to do anything. Removing T2 BPOs is forcing the player base to tread along one path. Diveristy disappears, complexity desolves. Whiners will still whine when their profit margins dip lower, complaining about how older inventors have advantage of better success and wider resources and/or options to explore than younger, newer. Fierce cycles rages on..

To open the door T2 BPO removal, opens a huge door to essential give CCP permission to swing one hell of a heavy nerf bat on whatever the 'majority' whines about. Sadly, whiners have the loudest screaming voice, cause that's just the nature of the beast and they can appear to be a majority when such really isn't the case.

As I have brought up several times now recently.. all one has to do is examine the end result of such an event that took place several years ago, in a galaxy far far away..

Star Wars Galaxies.

Water something down enough, and it becomes bland, it becomes clear, no uncertainity, no adrenline, no unknown results, no chance for success, no chance for failure.. it just becomes, water. Plain, boring, water.

Intar Medris
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2010.07.29 21:34:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Intar Medris on 29/07/2010 21:35:24
Edited by: Intar Medris on 29/07/2010 21:34:38
Edited by: Intar Medris on 29/07/2010 21:34:09
I don't own T2 BPOs, and I am a new player. But I do own plenty of T2 fittings,mods, and one T2 ship. **** cost enough already and I can't even imagine how much more it would cost if T2 BPOs were suddenly removed from the game due to a bunch of crybabies whining they don't own any. Want to build a T2 item then buy a damn BPC. Quit crying and ****ing deal with it or quit the ****ing game.

Mr LaForge
Posted - 2010.07.29 22:06:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa


An unacceptable eliteism that must be removed.

Either no one should have access to easy mode, or everyone should.


We better ban all those that have a trillion ISK or more like F900EX who has over 25 trillion. I mean he can buy at any time anything he wants. Thats easy mode in the extreme.

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.07.29 22:58:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Intar Medris
Quit crying and ****ing deal with it or quit the ****ing game.


I'm not crying, I'm arguing.

And I have no intention of quitting the game. I'd much rather talk about ways that it can be greatly improved while offering fair compensation for those effected by the change.

If you don't want to be exposed to my arguemtns, then quit reading the ****ing threads.

Jovialmadness
Posted - 2010.07.29 23:34:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa
Originally by: Intar Medris
Quit crying and ****ing deal with it or quit the ****ing game.


I'm not crying, I'm arguing.

And I have no intention of quitting the game. I'd much rather talk about ways that it can be greatly improved while offering fair compensation for those effected by the change.

If you don't want to be exposed to my arguemtns, then quit reading the ****ing threads.


The only reason i make my presence known on these forums over this issue is to make sure our side of the story is heard. Letting morons like you go unchecked is not a good thing. Your points are stupid. Your views on equality make me want to laugh. I want to make real damn sure no one reads your nonsense without atleast seeing me and others shred your points to pieces.

You are sounding like a parrot at this point. Take your Socialistic views and go play WoW or something dude. Eve isnt a place for you. I dont like you and neither does most everyone else.

Why dont you do us all a favor and leave? CCP isnt going to change the game because you want them too. Do you think they will? This issue isnt motherships gate camping in low sec guys. this is a fundamental piece of what eve stands for that wont get removed.

Go away LHA you cant argue for ****.

XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
Posted - 2010.07.30 03:23:00 - [29]
 

obvious troll is obvious

Ophelia Ursus
Posted - 2010.07.30 05:25:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Ophelia Ursus on 30/07/2010 05:30:04
Originally by: Akita T
If you do it the "boost BPC ME/PE levels" way (and maybe even boost copies obtained), to achieve relative parity with BPOs (other than datacore and T1 BPC costs), you reduce the advantages of T2 BPOs so much that their removal becomes nearly completely pointless. In other news, you get a situation almost completely reversed from scenario #1, with low T2 prices, delayed moon mineral ISK-point-source problems (you still get them, but later)... yet inventors STILL don't get any noticeable advantages since
Still, adequate compensation would mean huge ISK influx and inflation, and it's not exactly the best thing to have. Inadequate compensation would stir up quite a crapstorm.
Either way, AT BEST it's not worse, but it's certainly not better either.

If it were to be done, this would be the way to do it. CCP have already demonstrated a willingness to screw people out of non-trivial investments in response to perceived game balance issues (the nano nerf did horrible things to expensive speed implants, tyrannis drop rate changes did similar things to people with large stocks of high-meta MWDs). I can also see this actually happening if pressure on moon minerals increases to unacceptable levels, as a "we're too lazy to fix this properly so here's a half-assed measure that will allow us to ignore the problem for another few years" trick.

The only genuinely good way of fixing it would be to build a time machine, go back to the point at which the BPO lottery was conceived, and whack the dev responsible on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper while shouting "No! Bad dev! No introduction of terrible and random game mechanics!" over and over until he agreed to abandon it and come up with something better.


Pages: [1] 2

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