| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Falzone
   |
Posted - 2004.08.11 05:10:00 -
[1]
People are out there buying and losing interceptors and its practically like flushing 5-10 mil isk down the toliet each time. I thought this was gonna be fixed with this patch yet it has not. Why not? I know you guys have to manage your time but this is a serious issue. You want people to specialize in these new ships your introducing (very very slowly mind you) give us something to work with and fix the insurance. make it average maket price payout or a little less. I don't care if you have to make up a little tiny patch all byitself but pls fix this asap. and when i say asap i don't mean 2 months from now.
|
Falzone
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 05:10:00 -
[2]
People are out there buying and losing interceptors and its practically like flushing 5-10 mil isk down the toliet each time. I thought this was gonna be fixed with this patch yet it has not. Why not? I know you guys have to manage your time but this is a serious issue. You want people to specialize in these new ships your introducing (very very slowly mind you) give us something to work with and fix the insurance. make it average maket price payout or a little less. I don't care if you have to make up a little tiny patch all byitself but pls fix this asap. and when i say asap i don't mean 2 months from now.
|
Cruz
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 05:14:00 -
[3]
average market price could easily be exploited, thats the problem with it. They are fixing interceptor insurance, but at the moment, the way they currently are, makes it more fun.
................. |
Cruz
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 05:14:00 -
[4]
average market price could easily be exploited, thats the problem with it. They are fixing interceptor insurance, but at the moment, the way they currently are, makes it more fun.
................. |
Fuujin
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 05:37:00 -
[5]
So they make it average market price payout.
Person produces a interceptor for a lot less, goes and blows it up and gets a lot more money in return.
Good call!
_______________
The sword has to be more than a simple weapon; it has to be an answer to life's questions
|
Fuujin
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 05:37:00 -
[6]
So they make it average market price payout.
Person produces a interceptor for a lot less, goes and blows it up and gets a lot more money in return.
Good call!
_______________
The sword has to be more than a simple weapon; it has to be an answer to life's questions
|
Shia Dai
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 06:01:00 -
[7]
Falzone
Hate to say it bro but I don't think they intend to "fix" it; it is a feature, nota bug. If the insurance worked any other way, it would be highly exploitable.
Shia
|
Shia Dai
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 06:01:00 -
[8]
Falzone
Hate to say it bro but I don't think they intend to "fix" it; it is a feature, nota bug. If the insurance worked any other way, it would be highly exploitable.
Shia
|
Adriana
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 06:24:00 -
[9]
The problem is that the very few interceptor BPOs are in the control of only a few people, and these people jack up the prices far far above production costs. This causes the price of the finished item to be far in excess of it's actual worth.
What this means is that there is no problem with interceptor insurance, only a problem with intercepter supply vs demand.
So you are asking for the wrong thing, what is needed is not an insurance fix, but a change in how BPOs are distributed.
I think the current lottery system is ok, but it needs something added. There needs to be a research point value set to all BPOs such that given enough time anyone can get the BPOs they want. This means that if you want it bad enough you can eventually get it (at a really really high research point cost), but at the same time, you continue to have the chance to "get lucky" with the lottery system.
What this would do is allow people to get the BPOs initially as lucky wins, and capitalize on them, but over time more would enter the market and prices would be forced to drop as competition would occur. Right now, on certain items there is no competition, and until more BPOs are released, there will be none.
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte |
Adriana
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 06:24:00 -
[10]
The problem is that the very few interceptor BPOs are in the control of only a few people, and these people jack up the prices far far above production costs. This causes the price of the finished item to be far in excess of it's actual worth.
What this means is that there is no problem with interceptor insurance, only a problem with intercepter supply vs demand.
So you are asking for the wrong thing, what is needed is not an insurance fix, but a change in how BPOs are distributed.
I think the current lottery system is ok, but it needs something added. There needs to be a research point value set to all BPOs such that given enough time anyone can get the BPOs they want. This means that if you want it bad enough you can eventually get it (at a really really high research point cost), but at the same time, you continue to have the chance to "get lucky" with the lottery system.
What this would do is allow people to get the BPOs initially as lucky wins, and capitalize on them, but over time more would enter the market and prices would be forced to drop as competition would occur. Right now, on certain items there is no competition, and until more BPOs are released, there will be none.
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte |
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 06:29:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Feyd Darkholme on 11/08/2004 06:34:31
You might find it fun to lose a 12 million ISK ship and get a 200k ISK insurance payout, but I sure as heck don't. There's something seriously wrong with a system that bases insurance prices for 100% player made items on NPC styled pricing. I seriously doubt that it was intended to work this way. This should have been thought through before it was implimented. If it was intended to work this way then someone needs to seriously rethink being a MMOG developer... 
... and Adriana is 100% correct, but I wasn't going to bring that up... The developers seem loathe to do anything that threatens their almighty random number generator lottery system.
---------------
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 06:29:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Feyd Darkholme on 11/08/2004 06:34:31
You might find it fun to lose a 12 million ISK ship and get a 200k ISK insurance payout, but I sure as heck don't. There's something seriously wrong with a system that bases insurance prices for 100% player made items on NPC styled pricing. I seriously doubt that it was intended to work this way. This should have been thought through before it was implimented. If it was intended to work this way then someone needs to seriously rethink being a MMOG developer...
... and Adriana is 100% correct, but I wasn't going to bring that up... The developers seem loathe to do anything that threatens their almighty random number generator lottery system.
---------------
|
Falzone
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:17:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Falzone on 11/08/2004 07:19:11
exploitable my ass, just another way of saying we don't give a damn. how about we remove insurance from all ships see how you guys who think its "fun" like that.
|
Falzone
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:17:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Falzone on 11/08/2004 07:19:11
exploitable my ass, just another way of saying we don't give a damn. how about we remove insurance from all ships see how you guys who think its "fun" like that.
|
Lao Tzu
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:28:00 -
[15]
 Originally by: Falzone
exploitable my ass, just another way of saying we don't give a damn. how about we remove insurance from all ships see how you guys who think its "fun" like that.
That would be cool, like the old days
As for inty prices, don't blame the people who make them, it's the people who pay 14 mill for a crow (me included) who keep the price up.
|
Lao Tzu
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:28:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Falzone
exploitable my ass, just another way of saying we don't give a damn. how about we remove insurance from all ships see how you guys who think its "fun" like that.
That would be cool, like the old days
As for inty prices, don't blame the people who make them, it's the people who pay 14 mill for a crow (me included) who keep the price up.
|
Cruz
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:33:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Falzone
Edited by: Falzone on 11/08/2004 07:19:11
exploitable my ass, just another way of saying we don't give a damn.
I dunno but I remembered reading a thread a while back on interceptor insurances and trying to tie it in with component prices, and how it could be exploitable, thas why I say that. You really need to calm down though, the devs are actively working on fixing interceptor insurance at the moment, its just not as easy as you think it is.
................. |
Cruz
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:33:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Falzone
Edited by: Falzone on 11/08/2004 07:19:11
exploitable my ass, just another way of saying we don't give a damn.
I dunno but I remembered reading a thread a while back on interceptor insurances and trying to tie it in with component prices, and how it could be exploitable, thas why I say that. You really need to calm down though, the devs are actively working on fixing interceptor insurance at the moment, its just not as easy as you think it is.
................. |
Cruz
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:36:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Cruz on 11/08/2004 07:45:13
Adriana: thats only half the problem, the other half of the problem is people hording tech II components... Ever see the price on graviton reactor units? they go for around 100k-300k a piece.
Although, Tech II components are more of an issue with tech II ships then with tech II modules, with tech II modules, people just feel like making 1000% profit, but hey, people still buy the parts, and if anyone started selling them for cheaper prices, someone would buy them all out and sell them at a higher price because they know people will buy for that high price.
Either way, tech II components are one of the big issues with interceptor prices, if they dropped more often, or people didnt complete ***** them, then alot of the tech II ships would be much cheaper.
................. |
Cruz
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:36:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Cruz on 11/08/2004 07:45:13
Adriana: thats only half the problem, the other half of the problem is people hording tech II components... Ever see the price on graviton reactor units? they go for around 100k-300k a piece.
Although, Tech II components are more of an issue with tech II ships then with tech II modules, with tech II modules, people just feel like making 1000% profit, but hey, people still buy the parts, and if anyone started selling them for cheaper prices, someone would buy them all out and sell them at a higher price because they know people will buy for that high price.
Either way, tech II components are one of the big issues with interceptor prices, if they dropped more often, or people didnt complete ***** them, then alot of the tech II ships would be much cheaper.
................. |
Sworne
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:38:00 -
[21]
It is a difficult task, Umm, Lets make 100 crows, coet to manufacture each crow, 100,000 isk, insure cost 2mil, take outside and blow up and receive 8mil payback. Why sell.... |
Sworne
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:38:00 -
[22]
It is a difficult task, Umm, Lets make 100 crows, coet to manufacture each crow, 100,000 isk, insure cost 2mil, take outside and blow up and receive 8mil payback. Why sell.... |
Sun Wu
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:39:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Feyd Darkholme
Edited by: Feyd Darkholme on 11/08/2004 06:34:31
You might find it fun to lose a 12 million ISK ship and get a 200k ISK insurance payout, but I sure as heck don't. There's something seriously wrong with a system that bases insurance prices for 100% player made items on NPC styled pricing. I seriously doubt that it was intended to work this way. This should have been thought through before it was implimented. If it was intended to work this way then someone needs to seriously rethink being a MMOG developer...
... and Adriana is 100% correct, but I wasn't going to bring that up... The developers seem loathe to do anything that threatens their almighty random number generator lottery system.
Ummm, you can make 50+ million in an hour, how exactly is a 12 million loss so hard? If you can't take it don't fly em. The insurance system is bad enough already, with most ships loosing them doesnt mean anything anymore, it's practically impossible to blow someone up so badly that they don't have the money to get another bship anymore, simply because of insurance and the ease at which you can make isk these days...
________________________________
|
Sun Wu
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:39:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Feyd Darkholme
Edited by: Feyd Darkholme on 11/08/2004 06:34:31
You might find it fun to lose a 12 million ISK ship and get a 200k ISK insurance payout, but I sure as heck don't. There's something seriously wrong with a system that bases insurance prices for 100% player made items on NPC styled pricing. I seriously doubt that it was intended to work this way. This should have been thought through before it was implimented. If it was intended to work this way then someone needs to seriously rethink being a MMOG developer...
... and Adriana is 100% correct, but I wasn't going to bring that up... The developers seem loathe to do anything that threatens their almighty random number generator lottery system.
Ummm, you can make 50+ million in an hour, how exactly is a 12 million loss so hard? If you can't take it don't fly em. The insurance system is bad enough already, with most ships loosing them doesnt mean anything anymore, it's practically impossible to blow someone up so badly that they don't have the money to get another bship anymore, simply because of insurance and the ease at which you can make isk these days...
________________________________
|
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:44:00 -
[25]
I must say I agree, something needs to be done pretty quickly. Losing 6mil per frig means I don't really like to take many risks in 'em.
Only getting a 5% insurance payout sux tbh.
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:44:00 -
[26]
I must say I agree, something needs to be done pretty quickly. Losing 6mil per frig means I don't really like to take many risks in 'em.
Only getting a 5% insurance payout sux tbh.
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:57:00 -
[27]
Damn, who cares ?
Anyone with the skills to fly inty either has or can make the cost of one in an hour or has a main which can.
Sure it needs a fixxy, but its not urgent.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 07:57:00 -
[28]
Damn, who cares ?
Anyone with the skills to fly inty either has or can make the cost of one in an hour or has a main which can.
Sure it needs a fixxy, but its not urgent.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Horatio Starkiller
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 08:09:00 -
[29]
It's not the average price of the interceptor on the market it's the price of the items used to build it
average price of base ship + average price of mins required + average price of t2 components used, would be a better solution but if market prices keep increasing people who have ships for nothing at the start (before price hikes/self built) can bash them for insurance payouts (of millions of isk).
-----------
|
Horatio Starkiller
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 08:09:00 -
[30]
It's not the average price of the interceptor on the market it's the price of the items used to build it
average price of base ship + average price of mins required + average price of t2 components used, would be a better solution but if market prices keep increasing people who have ships for nothing at the start (before price hikes/self built) can bash them for insurance payouts (of millions of isk).
-----------
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 08:53:00 -
[31]
It doesn't matter one iota if I could make 1 billion ISK an hour, it's still FUBAR. The fact of the matter is, ship insurance was implimented so that if you lost your ship, you would be able to recover at least the cost of the ship (not including installed modules which can also cost in the tens of millions of ISK). With Tech II player made items this system doesn't work, because prices are 100% controlled by human greed. Whether it's the cost of the ores, Tech II parts or the final product, the end result is the same. If they aren't going to impliment it correctly for everything, then they should just completely remove ship insurance.
The only solution that I can think of is to make an actual fair way to research and develop Tech II products to create real competition and drive the prices down on everything. Either that or have a secondary NPC market for Tech II stuff. As it is, R&D and Tech II manufacturing is a cruel joke. I know this is a mainly PvP combat oriented game, but if you're going to have R&D and manufacturing in the game too it should be fair to everyone that wants to put the time and work in to do it, not some half arsed lottery system based on non-existant random number generators and driven by human greed... Other games have done it this way and it doesn't work. You'd think game developers would learn.
---------------
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 08:53:00 -
[32]
It doesn't matter one iota if I could make 1 billion ISK an hour, it's still FUBAR. The fact of the matter is, ship insurance was implimented so that if you lost your ship, you would be able to recover at least the cost of the ship (not including installed modules which can also cost in the tens of millions of ISK). With Tech II player made items this system doesn't work, because prices are 100% controlled by human greed. Whether it's the cost of the ores, Tech II parts or the final product, the end result is the same. If they aren't going to impliment it correctly for everything, then they should just completely remove ship insurance.
The only solution that I can think of is to make an actual fair way to research and develop Tech II products to create real competition and drive the prices down on everything. Either that or have a secondary NPC market for Tech II stuff. As it is, R&D and Tech II manufacturing is a cruel joke. I know this is a mainly PvP combat oriented game, but if you're going to have R&D and manufacturing in the game too it should be fair to everyone that wants to put the time and work in to do it, not some half arsed lottery system based on non-existant random number generators and driven by human greed... Other games have done it this way and it doesn't work. You'd think game developers would learn.
---------------
|
Miso
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 09:08:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Damn, who cares ?
Anyone with the skills to fly inty either has or can make the cost of one in an hour or has a main which can.
Sure it needs a fixxy, but its not urgent.
eeek! I takes me a month to make the price of 1 inty. Thats why I fly rifters.
I don't understand why people are paying these ridiculous prices for them to start with. They aren't that great a ship. They are fun to fly, but not 10m's worth of fun.
--------------------------------------------
Dead
|
Miso
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 09:08:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Damn, who cares ?
Anyone with the skills to fly inty either has or can make the cost of one in an hour or has a main which can.
Sure it needs a fixxy, but its not urgent.
eeek! I takes me a month to make the price of 1 inty. Thats why I fly rifters.
I don't understand why people are paying these ridiculous prices for them to start with. They aren't that great a ship. They are fun to fly, but not 10m's worth of fun.
--------------------------------------------
Dead
|
Hyey
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 09:49:00 -
[35]
Sure Inty's are worth 10m isk of fun, the stuff you can do in an interceptor only because of the increased HP is incredable. But on another note, yes the insurance is not the real problem, its the people who are making the ships and the people hording the tech 2 components. Dont blame it on the insurance its the people that are at fault here. (I personally use rifters, and Ive been blown up in them oh so many times :p)
~~
Hyey
I just payed 15 dollars this month just to be able to respond on the forums... stupid cancellation error.
|
Hyey
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 09:49:00 -
[36]
Sure Inty's are worth 10m isk of fun, the stuff you can do in an interceptor only because of the increased HP is incredable. But on another note, yes the insurance is not the real problem, its the people who are making the ships and the people hording the tech 2 components. Dont blame it on the insurance its the people that are at fault here. (I personally use rifters, and Ive been blown up in them oh so many times :p)
~~
Hyey
I just payed 15 dollars this month just to be able to respond on the forums... stupid cancellation error.
|
Miso
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:07:00 -
[37]
Well, its not that hard to kill an inty in a rifter. I've kiled a fair few 1v1, unless all I've fought is a succession of pvp noobs, as, apparently, I do suck at PvP.
200k versus 10m, for the same firepower, but less HP, I'll take the 200k. When intys retail for 1m, then they'll start being economically viable for people that PvP full time.
Then again, I suppose the old adage of "only fly what you can afford to lose" applies. Which is exactly what I do.
I used to like intys alot, now I'm back in a rifter, intys aren'y looking so hot. Maybe its just me.
--------------------------------------------
Dead
|
Miso
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:07:00 -
[38]
Well, its not that hard to kill an inty in a rifter. I've kiled a fair few 1v1, unless all I've fought is a succession of pvp noobs, as, apparently, I do suck at PvP.
200k versus 10m, for the same firepower, but less HP, I'll take the 200k. When intys retail for 1m, then they'll start being economically viable for people that PvP full time.
Then again, I suppose the old adage of "only fly what you can afford to lose" applies. Which is exactly what I do.
I used to like intys alot, now I'm back in a rifter, intys aren'y looking so hot. Maybe its just me.
--------------------------------------------
Dead
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:21:00 -
[39]
Hmm, I agree to some extent Miso. tho not rifter can hope to match the firepower of an inty with the inty bonusses into play.
I pointed out the relative ease with which isk is made for replacement to make a point about this problem not being priority 1 in my book. I'm not saying there is no problem.
On the other hand, the inty seems like a good ship to start the reduction of insurance coverage to somewhat lower levels. The equipment on it doesnt cost much anyway.
Oh, and Miso. If 10 million takes you a month you are in need of a sponsor baby 
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:21:00 -
[40]
Hmm, I agree to some extent Miso. tho not rifter can hope to match the firepower of an inty with the inty bonusses into play.
I pointed out the relative ease with which isk is made for replacement to make a point about this problem not being priority 1 in my book. I'm not saying there is no problem.
On the other hand, the inty seems like a good ship to start the reduction of insurance coverage to somewhat lower levels. The equipment on it doesnt cost much anyway.
Oh, and Miso. If 10 million takes you a month you are in need of a sponsor baby
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Alexis Machine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:27:00 -
[41]
pft. Get rid of insurance all togeather.
----------------sig----------------------------
Dtai'kai'-dte sa-de nau'gkon dtain'aun bpi-de.
if you don't wake up, i'll have to stop kissing you. all that flailing has made you sleepy. you rest while i untie you. stay here until they find you. My hand made mannequin. i won't let them get you. they'll know you're mine by the fingerprints on your throat. isn't she lovely? isn't she wonderful? like the *****s that we are, swatting flies from the wounds we design. |
Alexis Machine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:27:00 -
[42]
pft. Get rid of insurance all togeather.
----------------sig----------------------------
Dtai'kai'-dte sa-de nau'gkon dtain'aun bpi-de.
if you don't wake up, i'll have to stop kissing you. all that flailing has made you sleepy. you rest while i untie you. stay here until they find you. My hand made mannequin. i won't let them get you. they'll know you're mine by the fingerprints on your throat. isn't she lovely? isn't she wonderful? like the *****s that we are, swatting flies from the wounds we design. |
Miso
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:34:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Oh, and Miso. If 10 million takes you a month you are in need of a sponsor baby
Yeah, Maud sponsored me recently. I am probably one of the worst people in Eve at making money, but its not something that has ever bothered me. I live within my means, which means for me, flying frigates. The thing that really costs me is clone costs. It takes me about a week to earn a new clone in isk.
And yeah, perhaps getting rid of insurance altogether is the best option. Although all the BS pilots would cry about that. Can't please everyone I guess.
--------------------------------------------
Dead
|
Miso
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:34:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Oh, and Miso. If 10 million takes you a month you are in need of a sponsor baby
Yeah, Maud sponsored me recently. I am probably one of the worst people in Eve at making money, but its not something that has ever bothered me. I live within my means, which means for me, flying frigates. The thing that really costs me is clone costs. It takes me about a week to earn a new clone in isk.
And yeah, perhaps getting rid of insurance altogether is the best option. Although all the BS pilots would cry about that. Can't please everyone I guess.
--------------------------------------------
Dead
|
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:45:00 -
[45]
I came back to this game about 1 month ago...
I decided the first thing I'd do is train up for inty and not even train for Minmatar Cruiser...
I was all set to buy my first Inty when a corpmate told me not to bother because of the insurance bug...
I trained for cruiser the next day.
I won't even buy an Inty until they fix this bogus setup. This cannot be how the DEV's intended it to work, if it is, they are even more stupid than I thought.
And for those of you who think it's "fun" this way, buzz off... I'm a part time player and can't afford to replace an Inty once a week... I won't fly them until this bug is fixed...
Yet another way CCP has made this game less fun for me, I was really looking forward to flying one...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 10:45:00 -
[46]
I came back to this game about 1 month ago...
I decided the first thing I'd do is train up for inty and not even train for Minmatar Cruiser...
I was all set to buy my first Inty when a corpmate told me not to bother because of the insurance bug...
I trained for cruiser the next day.
I won't even buy an Inty until they fix this bogus setup. This cannot be how the DEV's intended it to work, if it is, they are even more stupid than I thought.
And for those of you who think it's "fun" this way, buzz off... I'm a part time player and can't afford to replace an Inty once a week... I won't fly them until this bug is fixed...
Yet another way CCP has made this game less fun for me, I was really looking forward to flying one...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:08:00 -
[47]
you people don't get it, do you. the insurance cost for all ships is based on what it takes to create, not how much people sell it for. If it was based on that then people would make them, insure them and get back more than they paid for, plain and simple. If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
|
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:08:00 -
[48]
you people don't get it, do you. the insurance cost for all ships is based on what it takes to create, not how much people sell it for. If it was based on that then people would make them, insure them and get back more than they paid for, plain and simple. If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
|
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:28:00 -
[49]
Originally by: mightygrm
If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up
If you acquire one in another way (purchase from your corp/mate or find one empty) thereÆs one fixed price based on roughly what it costs to make one.
Job done.
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:28:00 -
[50]
Originally by: mightygrm
If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up
If you acquire one in another way (purchase from your corp/mate or find one empty) thereÆs one fixed price based on roughly what it costs to make one.
Job done.
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
DedGuy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:36:00 -
[51]
Interceptors? Pah
500k payout on 100% for my buzzard.....
Rumors of my clones death are greatly exaggerated. But I am still INACTIVE
Millennium Elder |
DedGuy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:36:00 -
[52]
Interceptors? Pah
500k payout on 100% for my buzzard.....
Rumors of my clones death are greatly exaggerated. But I am still INACTIVE
Millennium Elder |
Leonstein
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:37:00 -
[53]
Ceptors are Tech II, i.e new grade technology...
Yes they cost alot and yes they cant be insured for much, but then modules of Tech II and other rare items only mere % better than a lower counterpart sell for magnitudes of the original price. Simply put the situation is complicated but if you want that extra edge you have to lose that extra cash...
The problem is not the insurance but as stated market price, if the price of BS's jack-knifed up to 200mil then the Insurance would stay the same, but BS supply is wide spread thus the price doesnt go up too much. Supply is the problem not insurance...oh and supply is affected by demand so don't blame CCP but the mass of people demanding Ceptors for up to 15mil...
Long Fang Armaments --- Extreme Pain...Express Delivery |
Leonstein
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:37:00 -
[54]
Ceptors are Tech II, i.e new grade technology...
Yes they cost alot and yes they cant be insured for much, but then modules of Tech II and other rare items only mere % better than a lower counterpart sell for magnitudes of the original price. Simply put the situation is complicated but if you want that extra edge you have to lose that extra cash...
The problem is not the insurance but as stated market price, if the price of BS's jack-knifed up to 200mil then the Insurance would stay the same, but BS supply is wide spread thus the price doesnt go up too much. Supply is the problem not insurance...oh and supply is affected by demand so don't blame CCP but the mass of people demanding Ceptors for up to 15mil...
Long Fang Armaments --- Extreme Pain...Express Delivery |
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:38:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Shiakarma
Originally by: mightygrm
If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up
If you acquire one in another way (purchase from your corp/mate or find one empty) thereÆs one fixed price based on roughly what it costs to make one.
Job done.
So you pay 15 million for one and then pay 15 million to insure it thats a total of 30 million with a 15 million return so you pay 15 million anyway!! So why not just leave it uninsured?
Leave the insurance as it is on them, if you can afford to fly one and risk losing the isk but gaining the benefits(and yes there are plenty or the issues like this wouldn't come up)then so be it. Adds for a whole lot more diverse market and combat as they have become a type of ship that is not just thrown into the mix as with most other small ships.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:38:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Shiakarma
Originally by: mightygrm
If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up
If you acquire one in another way (purchase from your corp/mate or find one empty) thereÆs one fixed price based on roughly what it costs to make one.
Job done.
So you pay 15 million for one and then pay 15 million to insure it thats a total of 30 million with a 15 million return so you pay 15 million anyway!! So why not just leave it uninsured?
Leave the insurance as it is on them, if you can afford to fly one and risk losing the isk but gaining the benefits(and yes there are plenty or the issues like this wouldn't come up)then so be it. Adds for a whole lot more diverse market and combat as they have become a type of ship that is not just thrown into the mix as with most other small ships.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:41:00 -
[57]
Its not possible to fix interceptor insurance. I posted this on the ships and modules so ill keep it short here:
Pop quiz:
You are willing to pay 6 million in lost isk to fly an interceptor to destruction. If suddenly you get +10 million for just destroying said interceptor how much then are you willing to pay for the interceptor?
16 million is the price your going to end up paying... You certainly cant say less then 10 cause the manufacturer would just insure it and blow it up. And if you think your getting it for 11 million your just going to find out that there is someone that is willing to loose 2 million after insurance we know that because before there were people willing to pay 6 million above and beyond insurance. And that person is going to find that those people willing to pay 6 million above insurance still exist even after insurance is raised to 10 million profit. Just like before.
And lastly let me note that the more insurance pays out the more people are induced to build interceptors cause of the amount of isk generated per an interceptor destruction. But the tech2 components to produce interceptors that get funneled to interceptors and not other things will make other things in the universe cost more via opportunity cost.
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 11:41:00 -
[58]
Its not possible to fix interceptor insurance. I posted this on the ships and modules so ill keep it short here:
Pop quiz:
You are willing to pay 6 million in lost isk to fly an interceptor to destruction. If suddenly you get +10 million for just destroying said interceptor how much then are you willing to pay for the interceptor?
16 million is the price your going to end up paying... You certainly cant say less then 10 cause the manufacturer would just insure it and blow it up. And if you think your getting it for 11 million your just going to find out that there is someone that is willing to loose 2 million after insurance we know that because before there were people willing to pay 6 million above and beyond insurance. And that person is going to find that those people willing to pay 6 million above insurance still exist even after insurance is raised to 10 million profit. Just like before.
And lastly let me note that the more insurance pays out the more people are induced to build interceptors cause of the amount of isk generated per an interceptor destruction. But the tech2 components to produce interceptors that get funneled to interceptors and not other things will make other things in the universe cost more via opportunity cost.
|
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:05:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Pychian Vanervi
So you pay 15 million for one and then pay 15 million to insure it thats a total of 30 million with a 15 million return so you pay 15 million anyway!! So why not just leave it uninsured?
I said "payout", set the payout at the same amount which you paid for the ship. The insurance cost would be the same percentage of the payout as it is for every other ship (about 25% is it for platinum?).
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:05:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Pychian Vanervi
So you pay 15 million for one and then pay 15 million to insure it thats a total of 30 million with a 15 million return so you pay 15 million anyway!! So why not just leave it uninsured?
I said "payout", set the payout at the same amount which you paid for the ship. The insurance cost would be the same percentage of the payout as it is for every other ship (about 25% is it for platinum?).
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:17:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Shiakarma
I said "payout", set the payout at the same amount which you paid for the ship. The insurance cost would be the same percentage of the payout as it is for every other ship (about 25% is it for platinum?).
Still will not work.
You pay 15 million for it, insurance is 25%(3.5 million). you get back 15 million so a loss of 3.5 million.
So the manufactures sells it to his mate for 30 million insurance is 7.5 million cost to build is 5million(not sure just a random number) profit to builder is 25 million guy splits that with his mate covering the 7.5 million insurance so the total made each is 8.75million each.
Selling for more would only increase the profit.
If my maths are correct.
I thought these guys made enough off them as it is at least this way they sell them to us. You way we would never see them.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:17:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Shiakarma
I said "payout", set the payout at the same amount which you paid for the ship. The insurance cost would be the same percentage of the payout as it is for every other ship (about 25% is it for platinum?).
Still will not work.
You pay 15 million for it, insurance is 25%(3.5 million). you get back 15 million so a loss of 3.5 million.
So the manufactures sells it to his mate for 30 million insurance is 7.5 million cost to build is 5million(not sure just a random number) profit to builder is 25 million guy splits that with his mate covering the 7.5 million insurance so the total made each is 8.75million each.
Selling for more would only increase the profit.
If my maths are correct.
I thought these guys made enough off them as it is at least this way they sell them to us. You way we would never see them.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:17:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Qutsemnie on 11/08/2004 13:21:21
30% for platinum but that didnt change the value of his point.
Right now people are willing to pay 15 million for the value of using a crow until it is destroyed. Say they raise insurance to a 15 million payoff with a 5 million insurance fee. Now the same people that were willing to pay 15 million for the value of a crow are willing to pay 25 million for the value of a crow + 10 million dollars in pay off. Theres no reason they wouldnt. You might have some stubborn people but the value of using a crow isnt the same after you add insurance.
Ultimately though the 15 million in insurance would prolly induce more firms to produce but then you would always be paying out 5 million in losses till the end of time to fly a crow as the price would be floored at roughly its insured value. Also it would be a tad inflationary.
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:17:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Qutsemnie on 11/08/2004 13:21:21
30% for platinum but that didnt change the value of his point.
Right now people are willing to pay 15 million for the value of using a crow until it is destroyed. Say they raise insurance to a 15 million payoff with a 5 million insurance fee. Now the same people that were willing to pay 15 million for the value of a crow are willing to pay 25 million for the value of a crow + 10 million dollars in pay off. Theres no reason they wouldnt. You might have some stubborn people but the value of using a crow isnt the same after you add insurance.
Ultimately though the 15 million in insurance would prolly induce more firms to produce but then you would always be paying out 5 million in losses till the end of time to fly a crow as the price would be floored at roughly its insured value. Also it would be a tad inflationary.
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:22:00 -
[65]
Interceptors are a luxury really compared to most figates, better overall but still not so far out of reach regular frigates cant compete when flown by somone with a brain cell.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:22:00 -
[66]
Interceptors are a luxury really compared to most figates, better overall but still not so far out of reach regular frigates cant compete when flown by somone with a brain cell.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:24:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Shiakarma
I said "payout", set the payout at the same amount which you paid for the ship. The insurance cost would be the same percentage of the payout as it is for every other ship (about 25% is it for platinum?).
Player 1 builds a ship for 1 grobble (a fictional currency invented for this example).
Player 2, working with Player 1, buys the ship off the market for 20 grobbles (far above what most people think it is worth).
Player 1 now has +19 grobbles, Player 2 now has -20 grobbles.
Player 2 gets the ship blown up, and recieves, say 19 grobbles insurance (95% insurance).
Player 1 gives Player 2 back 19 grobbles that he made in sale profit, and now Player 1 is back where he started, but Player 2 has -20+19+19 grobbles, which would be 18 grobbles profit.
Even taking out 25% of 20 grobbles for insurance (5 grobbles) Player 2 has made money out of nothing.
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:24:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Shiakarma
I said "payout", set the payout at the same amount which you paid for the ship. The insurance cost would be the same percentage of the payout as it is for every other ship (about 25% is it for platinum?).
Player 1 builds a ship for 1 grobble (a fictional currency invented for this example).
Player 2, working with Player 1, buys the ship off the market for 20 grobbles (far above what most people think it is worth).
Player 1 now has +19 grobbles, Player 2 now has -20 grobbles.
Player 2 gets the ship blown up, and recieves, say 19 grobbles insurance (95% insurance).
Player 1 gives Player 2 back 19 grobbles that he made in sale profit, and now Player 1 is back where he started, but Player 2 has -20+19+19 grobbles, which would be 18 grobbles profit.
Even taking out 25% of 20 grobbles for insurance (5 grobbles) Player 2 has made money out of nothing.
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:26:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Qutsemnie on 11/08/2004 14:13:45
Its interesting.
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:26:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Qutsemnie on 11/08/2004 14:13:45
Its interesting.
|
Sahshioh
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:39:00 -
[71]
Redundancy, can i have your grobbles?
|
Sahshioh
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:39:00 -
[72]
Redundancy, can i have your grobbles?
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:44:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Redundancy
Player 1 builds a ship for 1 grobble (a fictional currency invented for this example).
Player 2, working with Player 1, buys the ship off the market for 20 grobbles (far above what most people think it is worth).
Player 1 now has +19 grobbles, Player 2 now has -20 grobbles.
Player 2 gets the ship blown up, and recieves, say 19 grobbles insurance (95% insurance).
Player 1 gives Player 2 back 19 grobbles that he made in sale profit, and now Player 1 is back where he started, but Player 2 has -20+19+19 grobbles, which would be 18 grobbles profit.
Even taking out 25% of 20 grobbles for insurance (5 grobbles) Player 2 has made money out of nothing.
There is always one who steals your thunder(and explains it better than me )
Just think yourself lucky your a dev!! 
Note. Joke, sorry Mr Redundancy sir.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:44:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Redundancy
Player 1 builds a ship for 1 grobble (a fictional currency invented for this example).
Player 2, working with Player 1, buys the ship off the market for 20 grobbles (far above what most people think it is worth).
Player 1 now has +19 grobbles, Player 2 now has -20 grobbles.
Player 2 gets the ship blown up, and recieves, say 19 grobbles insurance (95% insurance).
Player 1 gives Player 2 back 19 grobbles that he made in sale profit, and now Player 1 is back where he started, but Player 2 has -20+19+19 grobbles, which would be 18 grobbles profit.
Even taking out 25% of 20 grobbles for insurance (5 grobbles) Player 2 has made money out of nothing.
There is always one who steals your thunder(and explains it better than me)
Just think yourself lucky your a dev!!
Note. Joke, sorry Mr Redundancy sir.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:46:00 -
[75]
Oh, sorry, didn't see your example when I was writing mine. 
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:46:00 -
[76]
Oh, sorry, didn't see your example when I was writing mine.
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:49:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Redundancy
Oh, sorry, didn't see your example when I was writing mine.
I will let you off this time, just don't let it happen again.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 13:49:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Redundancy
Oh, sorry, didn't see your example when I was writing mine.
I will let you off this time, just don't let it happen again.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:18:00 -
[79]
If it only costs 1 grobble to build a ship and the guy sells it for 20 grobbles heÆs surely making money for nothing anyway?
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:18:00 -
[80]
If it only costs 1 grobble to build a ship and the guy sells it for 20 grobbles heÆs surely making money for nothing anyway?
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:23:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Shiakarma
If it only costs 1 grobble to build a ship and the guy sells it for 20 grobbles heÆs surely making money for nothing anyway?
Except he's not really selling it for 20 grobbles, that's just what the receipt shows. He gives his mate back 19 of those grobbles, give or take his 'commission' and...
...Bah, it's explained above clear enough. If you can't understand it, there's no helping you.
|
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:23:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Shiakarma
If it only costs 1 grobble to build a ship and the guy sells it for 20 grobbles heÆs surely making money for nothing anyway?
Except he's not really selling it for 20 grobbles, that's just what the receipt shows. He gives his mate back 19 of those grobbles, give or take his 'commission' and...
...Bah, it's explained above clear enough. If you can't understand it, there's no helping you.
|
GlimmerMan
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:24:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Shiakarma
If it only costs 1 grobble to build a ship and the guy sells it for 20 grobbles heÆs surely making money for nothing anyway?
He used a poor example with small numbers that actually looks legit if you're talking about a 20 Million ISK Crow, the fact is you can almost double wallet by doing this once.
My Examples
Example 4 is the most extreme case where Player 1 gave all his money to Player 2 before starting the 'exploit' 2 Billion isk becomes nearly 4 Billion. 
__________________
- GlimmerMan |
GlimmerMan
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:24:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Shiakarma
If it only costs 1 grobble to build a ship and the guy sells it for 20 grobbles heÆs surely making money for nothing anyway?
He used a poor example with small numbers that actually looks legit if you're talking about a 20 Million ISK Crow, the fact is you can almost double wallet by doing this once.
My Examples
Example 4 is the most extreme case where Player 1 gave all his money to Player 2 before starting the 'exploit' 2 Billion isk becomes nearly 4 Billion.
__________________
- GlimmerMan |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:48:00 -
[85]
lol why is everyone misinterpreting what I'm saying today?
I know you're only going to it's simple supply and demand but what I meant was that a profit of 2000% is pretty much money for nothing and a sploit in itself
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:48:00 -
[86]
lol why is everyone misinterpreting what I'm saying today?
I know you're only going to it's simple supply and demand but what I meant was that a profit of 2000% is pretty much money for nothing and a sploit in itself
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:57:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Shiakarma
lol why is everyone misinterpreting what I'm saying today?
I know you're only going to it's simple supply and demand but what I meant was that a profit of 2000% is pretty much money for nothing and a sploit in itself
Trust what the figures say, with your 25% of cost of purchase insurance there is no need to sell just get a mate and its money for nothing.
The only way it can work is to have a base figure for a ship which it currently is now. The market dictates what price you pay for the ship so insurance will not cover costs.
CCP can't change it(unless they up reactor drops, but then that just screws the market totally), individules can't change it. Unless there was a mass non buy of inty throughout Eve then it won't stop.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 14:57:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Shiakarma
lol why is everyone misinterpreting what I'm saying today?
I know you're only going to it's simple supply and demand but what I meant was that a profit of 2000% is pretty much money for nothing and a sploit in itself
Trust what the figures say, with your 25% of cost of purchase insurance there is no need to sell just get a mate and its money for nothing.
The only way it can work is to have a base figure for a ship which it currently is now. The market dictates what price you pay for the ship so insurance will not cover costs.
CCP can't change it(unless they up reactor drops, but then that just screws the market totally), individules can't change it. Unless there was a mass non buy of inty throughout Eve then it won't stop.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
stinky fecker
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 15:00:00 -
[89]
can we please replace ISK with Grobbles in the next patch?
thanks |
stinky fecker
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 15:00:00 -
[90]
can we please replace ISK with Grobbles in the next patch?
thanks |
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:19:00 -
[91]
He's not making money for nothing if he sells it normally, because another player loses money in the transaction.
In the method outlined above, two players working together starting with X grobbles and the ability to produce a ship in the example, are creating X grobbles out of thin air each time, minus the ever-relatively-decreasing cost of producing the insured ship (you might as well do it with a newbie ship that's free that you sell to a friend).
Each doubling in their cash would allow them to double the money in the scheme, providing them with exponential cash growth. You'd wipe out the eve economy with inflation in a matter of hours, if not less.
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:19:00 -
[92]
He's not making money for nothing if he sells it normally, because another player loses money in the transaction.
In the method outlined above, two players working together starting with X grobbles and the ability to produce a ship in the example, are creating X grobbles out of thin air each time, minus the ever-relatively-decreasing cost of producing the insured ship (you might as well do it with a newbie ship that's free that you sell to a friend).
Each doubling in their cash would allow them to double the money in the scheme, providing them with exponential cash growth. You'd wipe out the eve economy with inflation in a matter of hours, if not less.
|
Hakera
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:31:00 -
[93]
I think insurance must get more complex, you need to introduce either player run insurance or make a no claims discount or multiple claims modifier.
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
Hakera
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:31:00 -
[94]
I think insurance must get more complex, you need to introduce either player run insurance or make a no claims discount or multiple claims modifier.
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:33:00 -
[95]
If interceptors could be made fast enough to use that "exploit" there wouldnt be an issue of scarcity in the first place.
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:33:00 -
[96]
If interceptors could be made fast enough to use that "exploit" there wouldnt be an issue of scarcity in the first place.
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:50:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Qutsemnie
If interceptors could be made fast enough to use that "exploit" there wouldnt be an issue of scarcity in the first place.
who says you'd need to do it with interceptors though? if that were a general form of new insurance you could mass produce any normal frigate and get the same results.
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 17:50:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Qutsemnie
If interceptors could be made fast enough to use that "exploit" there wouldnt be an issue of scarcity in the first place.
who says you'd need to do it with interceptors though? if that were a general form of new insurance you could mass produce any normal frigate and get the same results.
|
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 18:55:00 -
[99]
If this is how it's going to be with insurable Tech II stuff, and CCP just ignores it, it's total crap...
What a fubar'ed setup...
Can't believe there is a DEV in here defending it too, what a joke...
Builders should not be able to make 2000% if they are going to put something on the market... There may be a few dumb asses willing to pay that stupid markup, but that should not destroy insurance on that ship for the entire EVE community... Wake up DEVS!
You'd think the SCC would step in and stop the price gouging now b4 it happens to any ship that is not NPC produced as well... Total BS CCP...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 18:55:00 -
[100]
If this is how it's going to be with insurable Tech II stuff, and CCP just ignores it, it's total crap...
What a fubar'ed setup...
Can't believe there is a DEV in here defending it too, what a joke...
Builders should not be able to make 2000% if they are going to put something on the market... There may be a few dumb asses willing to pay that stupid markup, but that should not destroy insurance on that ship for the entire EVE community... Wake up DEVS!
You'd think the SCC would step in and stop the price gouging now b4 it happens to any ship that is not NPC produced as well... Total BS CCP...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:00:00 -
[101]
One could argue that none of the Corporations building Tech II items have any contracts with SCC and are therefore more then justified in asking whatever they want.
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:00:00 -
[102]
One could argue that none of the Corporations building Tech II items have any contracts with SCC and are therefore more then justified in asking whatever they want.
Join the IC! |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:03:00 -
[103]
Quote:
One could argue that none of the Corporations building Tech II items have any contracts with SCC and are therefore more then justified in asking whatever they want.
HAHA O, you're real clever...
Fine, just let this problem stew...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:03:00 -
[104]
Quote:
One could argue that none of the Corporations building Tech II items have any contracts with SCC and are therefore more then justified in asking whatever they want.
HAHA O, you're real clever...
Fine, just let this problem stew...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:08:00 -
[105]
There's no problem at all.
Only possible insurance you could hope for is Mineral cost + Component Mineral cost + NPC Trade good price. That number will never be close to the actual cost, there's no predicting what player-built items are going to cost.
So, if you want to fly an Elite Frigate (or any T II ship, i think), better be prepared to cry when it's destroyed
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:08:00 -
[106]
There's no problem at all.
Only possible insurance you could hope for is Mineral cost + Component Mineral cost + NPC Trade good price. That number will never be close to the actual cost, there's no predicting what player-built items are going to cost.
So, if you want to fly an Elite Frigate (or any T II ship, i think), better be prepared to cry when it's destroyed
Join the IC! |
Turyleon Caddarn
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:20:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Turyleon Caddarn on 11/08/2004 19:23:06
Originally by: Miso
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Damn, who cares ?
Anyone with the skills to fly inty either has or can make the cost of one in an hour or has a main which can.
Sure it needs a fixxy, but its not urgent.
eeek! I takes me a month to make the price of 1 inty. Thats why I fly rifters.
I don't understand why people are paying these ridiculous prices for them to start with. They aren't that great a ship. They are fun to fly, but not 10m's worth of fun.
Yep, same here.
I love the Incursus, gets me over 2km/sec and only 200k.
i like beign able to not worry about losing frigs because they're so damn cheap, but still fun to fly. like Miso said, until the price drops, i wont be getting one.
The price will fall in due time, just like the miner2s did.
"I know this game, it's called Cat and Mouse. There's only one way to win......... Don't be the mouse." |
Turyleon Caddarn
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:20:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Turyleon Caddarn on 11/08/2004 19:23:06
Originally by: Miso
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Damn, who cares ?
Anyone with the skills to fly inty either has or can make the cost of one in an hour or has a main which can.
Sure it needs a fixxy, but its not urgent.
eeek! I takes me a month to make the price of 1 inty. Thats why I fly rifters.
I don't understand why people are paying these ridiculous prices for them to start with. They aren't that great a ship. They are fun to fly, but not 10m's worth of fun.
Yep, same here.
I love the Incursus, gets me over 2km/sec and only 200k.
i like beign able to not worry about losing frigs because they're so damn cheap, but still fun to fly. like Miso said, until the price drops, i wont be getting one.
The price will fall in due time, just like the miner2s did.
"I know this game, it's called Cat and Mouse. There's only one way to win......... Don't be the mouse." |
Xavier Cardde
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:32:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Bhaal
If this is how it's going to be with insurable Tech II stuff, and CCP just ignores it, it's total crap...
What a fubar'ed setup...
Can't believe there is a DEV in here defending it too, what a joke...
Builders should not be able to make 2000% if they are going to put something on the market... There may be a few dumb asses willing to pay that stupid markup, but that should not destroy insurance on that ship for the entire EVE community... Wake up DEVS!
You'd think the SCC would step in and stop the price gouging now b4 it happens to any ship that is not NPC produced as well... Total BS CCP...
1.) its Free Market, you sell at whatever price you want if you make a profit.
2.) Tech 2 is supposed to be rare, not a cheap upgrade from tech 1. tech 1 is supposed to be the norm while tech 2 is SUPPOSED to be CRAZY expensive... the higher the better. This isnt EQ.
3.) you are a tard.
|
Xavier Cardde
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:32:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Bhaal
If this is how it's going to be with insurable Tech II stuff, and CCP just ignores it, it's total crap...
What a fubar'ed setup...
Can't believe there is a DEV in here defending it too, what a joke...
Builders should not be able to make 2000% if they are going to put something on the market... There may be a few dumb asses willing to pay that stupid markup, but that should not destroy insurance on that ship for the entire EVE community... Wake up DEVS!
You'd think the SCC would step in and stop the price gouging now b4 it happens to any ship that is not NPC produced as well... Total BS CCP...
1.) its Free Market, you sell at whatever price you want if you make a profit.
2.) Tech 2 is supposed to be rare, not a cheap upgrade from tech 1. tech 1 is supposed to be the norm while tech 2 is SUPPOSED to be CRAZY expensive... the higher the better. This isnt EQ.
3.) you are a tard.
|
Falzone
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:33:00 -
[111]
Problem is ccp tends to think its better not to implement something that will help many legitimate player cause of what a few people might exploit. yea some people will probably exploit it but is it right to screw the 90 out of 100 that wouldn't cause what the 10% of people might do. Thats like saying lets rip up the constitution cause the few criminals might abuse the system and screwing all the innocent people out of their lives
|
Falzone
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:33:00 -
[112]
Problem is ccp tends to think its better not to implement something that will help many legitimate player cause of what a few people might exploit. yea some people will probably exploit it but is it right to screw the 90 out of 100 that wouldn't cause what the 10% of people might do. Thats like saying lets rip up the constitution cause the few criminals might abuse the system and screwing all the innocent people out of their lives
|
Mara Nobars
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:46:00 -
[113]
It isn't price gouging if people are willing to pay the price.
If you have anything you are going to sell (say, a motorcycle) ... are you going to sell it for whatever it has cost you up 'til now? No, you are going to set the price at what people are willing to pay for it ... or you'll decide that it isn't worth it to you to sell it and keep it.
Same goes for everything in the "real world". Charge what the market will bear, prices only come down because somebody else will undercut you ... once there is enough competition in selling tech 2 items, the prices will come down. |
Mara Nobars
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:46:00 -
[114]
It isn't price gouging if people are willing to pay the price.
If you have anything you are going to sell (say, a motorcycle) ... are you going to sell it for whatever it has cost you up 'til now? No, you are going to set the price at what people are willing to pay for it ... or you'll decide that it isn't worth it to you to sell it and keep it.
Same goes for everything in the "real world". Charge what the market will bear, prices only come down because somebody else will undercut you ... once there is enough competition in selling tech 2 items, the prices will come down. |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:53:00 -
[115]
Face it, CCP screwed up, defend them if you must...
No one in the real world gets away with selling for a 2000% markup unless what they are selling is a fake of some kind...
A handful of powergamers who can afford to waste this kind of ISK are ruining this for everyone else...
I simply won't buy one until this issue is resolved...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:53:00 -
[116]
Face it, CCP screwed up, defend them if you must...
No one in the real world gets away with selling for a 2000% markup unless what they are selling is a fake of some kind...
A handful of powergamers who can afford to waste this kind of ISK are ruining this for everyone else...
I simply won't buy one until this issue is resolved...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:58:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Falzone
Problem is ccp tends to think its better not to implement something that will help many legitimate player cause of what a few people might exploit. yea some people will probably exploit it but is it right to screw the 90 out of 100 that wouldn't cause what the 10% of people might do. Thats like saying lets rip up the constitution cause the few criminals might abuse the system and screwing all the innocent people out of their lives
Your analogy is incorrect. It would only take 1 person to exploit it and flood the market with billions of isk, wrecking the economy.
|
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 19:58:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Falzone
Problem is ccp tends to think its better not to implement something that will help many legitimate player cause of what a few people might exploit. yea some people will probably exploit it but is it right to screw the 90 out of 100 that wouldn't cause what the 10% of people might do. Thats like saying lets rip up the constitution cause the few criminals might abuse the system and screwing all the innocent people out of their lives
Your analogy is incorrect. It would only take 1 person to exploit it and flood the market with billions of isk, wrecking the economy.
|
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:00:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Bhaal
Face it, CCP screwed up, defend them if you must...
No one in the real world gets away with selling for a 2000% markup unless what they are selling is a fake of some kind...
A handful of powergamers who can afford to waste this kind of ISK are ruining this for everyone else...
I simply won't buy one until this issue is resolved...
Things sell at huge markups all the time. Take diamonds for example. They are very cheap to mine out of the ground, the organizations that mine them dont pay crap to the miners. But people will glady pay hundreds of dollars for a worthless rock.
|
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:00:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Bhaal
Face it, CCP screwed up, defend them if you must...
No one in the real world gets away with selling for a 2000% markup unless what they are selling is a fake of some kind...
A handful of powergamers who can afford to waste this kind of ISK are ruining this for everyone else...
I simply won't buy one until this issue is resolved...
Things sell at huge markups all the time. Take diamonds for example. They are very cheap to mine out of the ground, the organizations that mine them dont pay crap to the miners. But people will glady pay hundreds of dollars for a worthless rock.
|
Alexis Machine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:11:00 -
[121]
I was just curious.. why would an insurance company insure a ship designed to be put into direct combat situations?
I always thought that if you insure a ship, and you're the agressor of a fight, and you lose said fight, your next insurance plan should cost more. At some point it would become just plain silly to even bother with insurance.
And how can people with bad standings insure their ships to begin with? I highly doubt a pirate corp (npc) would actually insure ships for people who aren't in their corp, and what law abiding (npc) corp would insure the ships of (player) pirates?
anyway, it's my turn to hit the bong and my real life friends are now talking about how much their car insurance costs. Thank you eve. 
----------------sig----------------------------
Dtai'kai'-dte sa-de nau'gkon dtain'aun bpi-de.
if you don't wake up, i'll have to stop kissing you. all that flailing has made you sleepy. you rest while i untie you. stay here until they find you. My hand made mannequin. i won't let them get you. they'll know you're mine by the fingerprints on your throat. isn't she lovely? isn't she wonderful? like the *****s that we are, swatting flies from the wounds we design. |
Alexis Machine
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:11:00 -
[122]
I was just curious.. why would an insurance company insure a ship designed to be put into direct combat situations?
I always thought that if you insure a ship, and you're the agressor of a fight, and you lose said fight, your next insurance plan should cost more. At some point it would become just plain silly to even bother with insurance.
And how can people with bad standings insure their ships to begin with? I highly doubt a pirate corp (npc) would actually insure ships for people who aren't in their corp, and what law abiding (npc) corp would insure the ships of (player) pirates?
anyway, it's my turn to hit the bong and my real life friends are now talking about how much their car insurance costs. Thank you eve.
----------------sig----------------------------
Dtai'kai'-dte sa-de nau'gkon dtain'aun bpi-de.
if you don't wake up, i'll have to stop kissing you. all that flailing has made you sleepy. you rest while i untie you. stay here until they find you. My hand made mannequin. i won't let them get you. they'll know you're mine by the fingerprints on your throat. isn't she lovely? isn't she wonderful? like the *****s that we are, swatting flies from the wounds we design. |
Jazz Bo
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:12:00 -
[123]
Solution:
Make t2 components available on the market for NPC mineral value + something (say 20%), and base the insurance pay-out on that value.
Then the people who make them can still ask for rip-off prices, but at least everyone will know exactly how much profit they're making (and will be less willing to pay exorbitant prices is my guess).
I love the Crow but I'm not paying 10m+ for one.
Originally by: DB Preacher
Celestial Apocalypse - Brave souls fighting the endless smak.
|
Jazz Bo
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:12:00 -
[124]
Solution:
Make t2 components available on the market for NPC mineral value + something (say 20%), and base the insurance pay-out on that value.
Then the people who make them can still ask for rip-off prices, but at least everyone will know exactly how much profit they're making (and will be less willing to pay exorbitant prices is my guess).
I love the Crow but I'm not paying 10m+ for one.
Originally by: DB Preacher
Celestial Apocalypse - Brave souls fighting the endless smak.
|
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:13:00 -
[125]
The only feasible remedy to this problem is to give out more t2 blueprints and comps, thus increasing the supply and driving down prices. Or CCP could make NPC corps sell them, but this has problems of its own. The insurance system is not the problem here, it works exactly as it should.
|
mightygrm
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:13:00 -
[126]
The only feasible remedy to this problem is to give out more t2 blueprints and comps, thus increasing the supply and driving down prices. Or CCP could make NPC corps sell them, but this has problems of its own. The insurance system is not the problem here, it works exactly as it should.
|
Zeranna Lords
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:25:00 -
[127]
Please Fix this, otherwise this should be considered a bug. In that case we should be able to petition replacement of said interceptor. Crow 9-16Mill and insurance gives you 200K??? Please Fix Asap.
rock on.
|
Zeranna Lords
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:25:00 -
[128]
Please Fix this, otherwise this should be considered a bug. In that case we should be able to petition replacement of said interceptor. Crow 9-16Mill and insurance gives you 200K??? Please Fix Asap.
rock on.
|
Sonjeir
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:46:00 -
[129]
Okay maybe this is a stupid idea, but I think it would work for insurance on any type ship at any cost and should be relatively free of exploits.
1)Buy ship
2) Insure ship for some percentage of purchase cost at time of purchase. If ship cost 100 grobbles and insurance was 25% then 25 grobbles to insure at 100%
3) Get ship destroyed.
4) Instead of recieving a cash payout you get a new ship of the same type you lost at the next station you dock in.
In case of less than 100% coverage the ship would have damage that needed to be repaired. If you only buy 50% insurance then all ship systems are 50% damaged. Hull and armor could be repaired with modules yes but other systems could have damage that still required a payout to repair.
|
Sonjeir
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:46:00 -
[130]
Okay maybe this is a stupid idea, but I think it would work for insurance on any type ship at any cost and should be relatively free of exploits.
1)Buy ship
2) Insure ship for some percentage of purchase cost at time of purchase. If ship cost 100 grobbles and insurance was 25% then 25 grobbles to insure at 100%
3) Get ship destroyed.
4) Instead of recieving a cash payout you get a new ship of the same type you lost at the next station you dock in.
In case of less than 100% coverage the ship would have damage that needed to be repaired. If you only buy 50% insurance then all ship systems are 50% damaged. Hull and armor could be repaired with modules yes but other systems could have damage that still required a payout to repair.
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:54:00 -
[131]
The problem with the solution of replacing the items is that it puts the ship manufacturers out of business, which is also bad the the economy.
Also, don't forget that armour and hull repairers are free, and that you get 40% insurance all of the time at the moment.
With this system, taking out a the battleship of someone you were at war with would be nigh on meaningless, since you know they can be back in it (regardless of how difficult it might be in practical terms to get a new one) in no time at all and at minimal cost.
|
Redundancy
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:54:00 -
[132]
The problem with the solution of replacing the items is that it puts the ship manufacturers out of business, which is also bad the the economy.
Also, don't forget that armour and hull repairers are free, and that you get 40% insurance all of the time at the moment.
With this system, taking out a the battleship of someone you were at war with would be nigh on meaningless, since you know they can be back in it (regardless of how difficult it might be in practical terms to get a new one) in no time at all and at minimal cost.
|
Sonjeir
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:59:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Redundancy
The problem with the solution of replacing the items is that it puts the ship manufacturers out of business, which is also bad the the economy.
That didn't occur to me till you said it.
My first reaction to that would be a voucher system, but with no way to control what each person sells for it could lead to exploits as well. If the voucher was set at the price you paid then we're basically back at the payout matches price exploit.
Maybe it could just dump all the materials for said ship into your hangar, minus a percentage based on coverage. then you would need to at least find someone to build it.... Still hurts the miners and agent runners that sell T2 compontents.
|
Sonjeir
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 20:59:00 -
[134]
Originally by: Redundancy
The problem with the solution of replacing the items is that it puts the ship manufacturers out of business, which is also bad the the economy.
That didn't occur to me till you said it.
My first reaction to that would be a voucher system, but with no way to control what each person sells for it could lead to exploits as well. If the voucher was set at the price you paid then we're basically back at the payout matches price exploit.
Maybe it could just dump all the materials for said ship into your hangar, minus a percentage based on coverage. then you would need to at least find someone to build it.... Still hurts the miners and agent runners that sell T2 compontents.
|
Sonjeir
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 21:04:00 -
[135]
Edited by: Sonjeir on 11/08/2004 21:06:06
Slightly off-topic but one solution to several insurance gripes, at least those about how easy it is to get back into a ship.
In real life when I have an accident it takes days, if not weeks for my insurance company to settle.
Delay the payout of any percentage of insurance for at least 24 hours.
|
Sonjeir
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 21:04:00 -
[136]
Edited by: Sonjeir on 11/08/2004 21:06:06
Slightly off-topic but one solution to several insurance gripes, at least those about how easy it is to get back into a ship.
In real life when I have an accident it takes days, if not weeks for my insurance company to settle.
Delay the payout of any percentage of insurance for at least 24 hours.
|
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 21:18:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Redundancy
With this system, taking out a the battleship of someone you were at war with would be nigh on meaningless, since you know they can be back in it (regardless of how difficult it might be in practical terms to get a new one) in no time at all and at minimal cost.
Not much change from the current system, where insurance is so easy to get, there's almost no point in blowing up a ship =|
At least with interceptors, it hurts
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 21:18:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Redundancy
With this system, taking out a the battleship of someone you were at war with would be nigh on meaningless, since you know they can be back in it (regardless of how difficult it might be in practical terms to get a new one) in no time at all and at minimal cost.
Not much change from the current system, where insurance is so easy to get, there's almost no point in blowing up a ship =|
At least with interceptors, it hurts
Join the IC! |
GlimmerMan
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 22:22:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Bhaal
Builders should not be able to make 2000% if they are going to put something on the market...
Lay off the Mindflood dude, nobody is making 2000% profit on ships and if you think they are you're retarded. If you actually look at the facts the T2 item makers are making a far greater percentage of profit on sales than the T2 ship builders are, so how about you give them a break? The Tech II components needed to build a single Crow, for example, will cost you:
Gravimetric Sensor Clusters = 23 = ~225,000
Graviton Reactor Units = 35 = ~10,000,000
Magpulse = 46 = ~500,000
Quantum Microprocessors = 23 = ~575,000
Scalar Capacitor Units = 29 = ~250,000
Sustained Shield Emitters = 29 = ~200,000
Trimorphite Armor Plates = 35 = ~450,000
That's 12.2 Million ISK just in components, add the orginal ship's cost, then add the mineral costs and suddenly that ~20 Million price tag looks a lot more like 40 to 50% profit. If want to blame someone for the price of Interceptors, blame CCP for not increasing the rate at which all types of reactor are given to agent runners as bonuses.
__________________
- GlimmerMan |
GlimmerMan
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 22:22:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Bhaal
Builders should not be able to make 2000% if they are going to put something on the market...
Lay off the Mindflood dude, nobody is making 2000% profit on ships and if you think they are you're retarded. If you actually look at the facts the T2 item makers are making a far greater percentage of profit on sales than the T2 ship builders are, so how about you give them a break? The Tech II components needed to build a single Crow, for example, will cost you:
Gravimetric Sensor Clusters = 23 = ~225,000
Graviton Reactor Units = 35 = ~10,000,000
Magpulse = 46 = ~500,000
Quantum Microprocessors = 23 = ~575,000
Scalar Capacitor Units = 29 = ~250,000
Sustained Shield Emitters = 29 = ~200,000
Trimorphite Armor Plates = 35 = ~450,000
That's 12.2 Million ISK just in components, add the orginal ship's cost, then add the mineral costs and suddenly that ~20 Million price tag looks a lot more like 40 to 50% profit. If want to blame someone for the price of Interceptors, blame CCP for not increasing the rate at which all types of reactor are given to agent runners as bonuses.
__________________
- GlimmerMan |
Servo
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 22:51:00 -
[141]
You people are the reason we can't have nice things! 
|
Servo
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 22:51:00 -
[142]
You people are the reason we can't have nice things!
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 23:15:00 -
[143]
So back to square one. The root of the problem is the same. If the only way to aquire something in the game is through another player, people will charge as much as they can get away with for it, which considering human nature will be way too much. This problem is never going to be solved unless everything in the game is available through the NPC market, and/or the "drop rate" on said items is significantly boosted. If the insurance for ships is going to be based on the NPC prices of building the ship, then they should be at least close to the same amount... The funny thing is, even if components were dirt cheap, the builders would likely still charge highly inflated prices for their wares... but at least then they couldn't lay the blame for their prices on anyone or anything but their own personal greed...
---------------
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.11 23:15:00 -
[144]
So back to square one. The root of the problem is the same. If the only way to aquire something in the game is through another player, people will charge as much as they can get away with for it, which considering human nature will be way too much. This problem is never going to be solved unless everything in the game is available through the NPC market, and/or the "drop rate" on said items is significantly boosted. If the insurance for ships is going to be based on the NPC prices of building the ship, then they should be at least close to the same amount... The funny thing is, even if components were dirt cheap, the builders would likely still charge highly inflated prices for their wares... but at least then they couldn't lay the blame for their prices on anyone or anything but their own personal greed...
---------------
|
BobGhengisKhan
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 00:02:00 -
[145]
Edited by: BobGhengisKhan on 12/08/2004 00:04:53
Quote:
Not much change from the current system, where insurance is so easy to get, there's almost no point in blowing up a ship =|
I only wish you could convince the devs, it's really lame the amount of times somebody responds to our request for ransom "**** off *******, I have insurance"
|
BobGhengisKhan
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 00:02:00 -
[146]
Edited by: BobGhengisKhan on 12/08/2004 00:04:53
Quote:
Not much change from the current system, where insurance is so easy to get, there's almost no point in blowing up a ship =|
I only wish you could convince the devs, it's really lame the amount of times somebody responds to our request for ransom "**** off *******, I have insurance"
|
Celticjim
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 00:18:00 -
[147]
Edited by: Celticjim on 12/08/2004 00:29:29
Now..I am only a broker and not an underwriter, but some basic principles of insurance:
1. You must have an insurable interest in the said item. Ie, you cannot insure someone else's piece of property unless you have an interest in that piece of property and you have to have the owner's agreement to insure that item. Pretty straightforward, but thought it needed stating as it is one of the basics.
2. You cannot "profit" from the payout of insurance. Insurance is to only cover the cost of the item, and not to pay for more than the item is worth. So..irl..that's why so many people spend a few hundred dollars to get assessments done on older vehicles that don't appear to have a huge value, but actually do in terms of vintage, upgrades, extra's etc. This valuation "proves" the worth of the item although all common sense knowledge dictates it should actually be worth less than it assessed as. However, insurers take the appraiser accredited report, and accepts the determined value.
The first point is addressed ingame, and not worth really debating as you just can't do it.
It's the second point that needs attention. The guys at CCP would needs mounds of formulae in order to properly calculate the value of things, and it would just be a time/code sink. A pretty simple thing to do, would be to have a price approximation, on what the npc price, or market price the higher tech items cost. You then calculate the base cost, do the appropriate percentage costing, and you have the different levels of insurance. Unfortunately, with this policy, you are going to have periods where things are either underinsured, or overinsured. The underinsured scenario stinks, and the overinsured one leads to exploit.
However, I do think people would be willing to spend some isk to receive some monetary value greater than the purchase price of the insurance than nothing at all. If it gets to the point where the previous values leads to an overinsured value, I would pose this question:
Could the dev's change the npc pricing on their insurance code during a daily downtime to reflect the new value once the this was discovered and payout > purchase price?
If the answer is yes, then I think I would be in favour of having a set price, and start monitoring the purchase prices of some of the newer ships. Hell...I would volunteer to help with this if possible.
If the answer is no, then unfortunately, the npc insurance price has to be set so low to ensure this type of scenario never occurs.
If one of the devs is open to this, they could email me and pass on the formula for insurance values and I would take it to some irl underwriters to get some help. Not the code, but just the formulae. Loads of them are gamers, and I am sure their expertise would help. I work for a pretty large brokerage, and would be willing to sign off on whatever is required.
Anyway, this insurance topic is pretty boring to some, but interesting to me. Heck, , as it stands right now I find the insurance premiums hugely excessive considering irl standards. If I tried to sell any of my customers these types of policies, I would pretty much be lynched.
Summary, currently not a bad system, but one that could use with some tweaking, especially in the situation of the new tech 2 items coming onto the market.
edit - additional point.
I forgot about this part, insurance is a separate purchase, and not part of the overall purchase of the ship. IE, interceptor costs 6 mill, and the insurance costs 2 mill for example sake. The cost of the ship is still only 6 mill. The 2 million is the cost of owning/operating that ship and cannot be added into the cost of the ship. IE..you have vehicle at $20,000 and the insurance costs $2,000. If you wreck the vehicle, you are only going to receive the $20,000 and not the amount you paid for insurance. I think I saw one of the previous posters comment he would be "out" a few million isk due to the insurance premium. Easy to wrap your head around, but hard to stomach. But very important to take into account when coming up with fair values on items.
CJ
I wrote the above in another forum, and as usual, I am will be late off the key.
Didnt realize the comp was calculated using npc pricing. If that's the case, the insurance formula really needs to be examined.
However, if it is really easy to get a market price, monitor it daily through a mass region report, and input the closing price average from the day before into the daily patch, would this be feasible?
Edit...sigh again. The main problem I can determine from the insurance scheme is it is too simplistic in its current model. A few more things need to be taken into account, ie, comp costs, bldg costs, market value...etc.
|
Celticjim
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 00:18:00 -
[148]
Edited by: Celticjim on 12/08/2004 00:29:29
Now..I am only a broker and not an underwriter, but some basic principles of insurance:
1. You must have an insurable interest in the said item. Ie, you cannot insure someone else's piece of property unless you have an interest in that piece of property and you have to have the owner's agreement to insure that item. Pretty straightforward, but thought it needed stating as it is one of the basics.
2. You cannot "profit" from the payout of insurance. Insurance is to only cover the cost of the item, and not to pay for more than the item is worth. So..irl..that's why so many people spend a few hundred dollars to get assessments done on older vehicles that don't appear to have a huge value, but actually do in terms of vintage, upgrades, extra's etc. This valuation "proves" the worth of the item although all common sense knowledge dictates it should actually be worth less than it assessed as. However, insurers take the appraiser accredited report, and accepts the determined value.
The first point is addressed ingame, and not worth really debating as you just can't do it.
It's the second point that needs attention. The guys at CCP would needs mounds of formulae in order to properly calculate the value of things, and it would just be a time/code sink. A pretty simple thing to do, would be to have a price approximation, on what the npc price, or market price the higher tech items cost. You then calculate the base cost, do the appropriate percentage costing, and you have the different levels of insurance. Unfortunately, with this policy, you are going to have periods where things are either underinsured, or overinsured. The underinsured scenario stinks, and the overinsured one leads to exploit.
However, I do think people would be willing to spend some isk to receive some monetary value greater than the purchase price of the insurance than nothing at all. If it gets to the point where the previous values leads to an overinsured value, I would pose this question:
Could the dev's change the npc pricing on their insurance code during a daily downtime to reflect the new value once the this was discovered and payout > purchase price?
If the answer is yes, then I think I would be in favour of having a set price, and start monitoring the purchase prices of some of the newer ships. Hell...I would volunteer to help with this if possible.
If the answer is no, then unfortunately, the npc insurance price has to be set so low to ensure this type of scenario never occurs.
If one of the devs is open to this, they could email me and pass on the formula for insurance values and I would take it to some irl underwriters to get some help. Not the code, but just the formulae. Loads of them are gamers, and I am sure their expertise would help. I work for a pretty large brokerage, and would be willing to sign off on whatever is required.
Anyway, this insurance topic is pretty boring to some, but interesting to me. Heck, , as it stands right now I find the insurance premiums hugely excessive considering irl standards. If I tried to sell any of my customers these types of policies, I would pretty much be lynched.
Summary, currently not a bad system, but one that could use with some tweaking, especially in the situation of the new tech 2 items coming onto the market.
edit - additional point.
I forgot about this part, insurance is a separate purchase, and not part of the overall purchase of the ship. IE, interceptor costs 6 mill, and the insurance costs 2 mill for example sake. The cost of the ship is still only 6 mill. The 2 million is the cost of owning/operating that ship and cannot be added into the cost of the ship. IE..you have vehicle at $20,000 and the insurance costs $2,000. If you wreck the vehicle, you are only going to receive the $20,000 and not the amount you paid for insurance. I think I saw one of the previous posters comment he would be "out" a few million isk due to the insurance premium. Easy to wrap your head around, but hard to stomach. But very important to take into account when coming up with fair values on items.
CJ
I wrote the above in another forum, and as usual, I am will be late off the key.
Didnt realize the comp was calculated using npc pricing. If that's the case, the insurance formula really needs to be examined.
However, if it is really easy to get a market price, monitor it daily through a mass region report, and input the closing price average from the day before into the daily patch, would this be feasible?
Edit...sigh again. The main problem I can determine from the insurance scheme is it is too simplistic in its current model. A few more things need to be taken into account, ie, comp costs, bldg costs, market value...etc.
|
Hakera
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 00:27:00 -
[149]
with the rise in income and players getting progressively richer, i think that more sources of income should be utilised rather than less sinks imo.
restore insurance to the way it was please!
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
Hakera
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 00:27:00 -
[150]
with the rise in income and players getting progressively richer, i think that more sources of income should be utilised rather than less sinks imo.
restore insurance to the way it was please!
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
Acix
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 02:25:00 -
[151]
I don't know if this has been said before. Sorry for repeating it if it has.
Anyway the only sure fix for the entire insurance issue is this:
When a ship is built the average cost of minerals in eve would be used to enter a price into the info for that specific single ship.
When the ship is purchased the purchase price enters into the description for that one ship. Replacing the price cost that the manufacturer built it for with the mineral cost. If it is sold again the price chage is reflected in the info.
Then the insurance for that single ship is calculated in the insurance system at the station. Insurance still operates the same and is lost if the ship is sold or traded. The insurance could actually be changed to allow trading of a ship to a corpmate and still retain the insurance. But thats a big discusion better saved for another time.
This is the only way there could never be an exploit for the destroying of ships to get the insurance money. You can only get 100% of what you paid for it or built it for (using average mineral cost) period.
Even if it is traded to another player the cost of the minerals taken from the market average cost would be used to set the original cost for the insurance. So even if you are a manufacturer you can't exploit this.
This would fix the price problems with the int's and the insurance payouts.
Also this would not effect the market for ships since the price of the ship would be directly related to how much insurance would cost.
Anyone see a problem with this?
|
Acix
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 02:25:00 -
[152]
I don't know if this has been said before. Sorry for repeating it if it has.
Anyway the only sure fix for the entire insurance issue is this:
When a ship is built the average cost of minerals in eve would be used to enter a price into the info for that specific single ship.
When the ship is purchased the purchase price enters into the description for that one ship. Replacing the price cost that the manufacturer built it for with the mineral cost. If it is sold again the price chage is reflected in the info.
Then the insurance for that single ship is calculated in the insurance system at the station. Insurance still operates the same and is lost if the ship is sold or traded. The insurance could actually be changed to allow trading of a ship to a corpmate and still retain the insurance. But thats a big discusion better saved for another time.
This is the only way there could never be an exploit for the destroying of ships to get the insurance money. You can only get 100% of what you paid for it or built it for (using average mineral cost) period.
Even if it is traded to another player the cost of the minerals taken from the market average cost would be used to set the original cost for the insurance. So even if you are a manufacturer you can't exploit this.
This would fix the price problems with the int's and the insurance payouts.
Also this would not effect the market for ships since the price of the ship would be directly related to how much insurance would cost.
Anyone see a problem with this?
|
Golgrath
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 03:35:00 -
[153]
Edited by: Golgrath on 12/08/2004 03:42:58
Originally by: Acix
I don't know if this has been said before. Sorry for repeating it if it has.
Anyway the only sure fix for the entire insurance issue is this:
When a ship is built the average cost of minerals in eve would be used to enter a price into the info for that specific single ship.
When the ship is purchased the purchase price enters into the description for that one ship. Replacing the price cost that the manufacturer built it for with the mineral cost. If it is sold again the price chage is reflected in the info.
Then the insurance for that single ship is calculated in the insurance system at the station. Insurance still operates the same and is lost if the ship is sold or traded. The insurance could actually be changed to allow trading of a ship to a corpmate and still retain the insurance. But thats a big discusion better saved for another time.
This is the only way there could never be an exploit for the destroying of ships to get the insurance money. You can only get 100% of what you paid for it or built it for (using average mineral cost) period.
Even if it is traded to another player the cost of the minerals taken from the market average cost would be used to set the original cost for the insurance. So even if you are a manufacturer you can't exploit this.
This would fix the price problems with the int's and the insurance payouts.
Also this would not effect the market for ships since the price of the ship would be directly related to how much insurance would cost.
Anyone see a problem with this?
People could manipulate the average price of minerals by dumping lots of 100 million isk tritanium on the market
It seems to me, that the only way to make the insurance work is to get the prices of tech 2 components more inline with their actual mineral costs. This would mean agents handing out a lot more of tech 2 and maybe other ways to get them (limited blueprints?). And this method sucks big time.
|
Golgrath
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 03:35:00 -
[154]
Edited by: Golgrath on 12/08/2004 03:42:58
Originally by: Acix
I don't know if this has been said before. Sorry for repeating it if it has.
Anyway the only sure fix for the entire insurance issue is this:
When a ship is built the average cost of minerals in eve would be used to enter a price into the info for that specific single ship.
When the ship is purchased the purchase price enters into the description for that one ship. Replacing the price cost that the manufacturer built it for with the mineral cost. If it is sold again the price chage is reflected in the info.
Then the insurance for that single ship is calculated in the insurance system at the station. Insurance still operates the same and is lost if the ship is sold or traded. The insurance could actually be changed to allow trading of a ship to a corpmate and still retain the insurance. But thats a big discusion better saved for another time.
This is the only way there could never be an exploit for the destroying of ships to get the insurance money. You can only get 100% of what you paid for it or built it for (using average mineral cost) period.
Even if it is traded to another player the cost of the minerals taken from the market average cost would be used to set the original cost for the insurance. So even if you are a manufacturer you can't exploit this.
This would fix the price problems with the int's and the insurance payouts.
Also this would not effect the market for ships since the price of the ship would be directly related to how much insurance would cost.
Anyone see a problem with this?
People could manipulate the average price of minerals by dumping lots of 100 million isk tritanium on the market
It seems to me, that the only way to make the insurance work is to get the prices of tech 2 components more inline with their actual mineral costs. This would mean agents handing out a lot more of tech 2 and maybe other ways to get them (limited blueprints?). And this method sucks big time.
|
Matonius2
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 05:13:00 -
[155]
All, I can say after reading all 4 pages is,
"Ouch...my brains" 
|
Matonius2
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 05:13:00 -
[156]
All, I can say after reading all 4 pages is,
"Ouch...my brains"
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 05:14:00 -
[157]
The only people it would suck for are the ones price gouging the value of Tech II comps and items... That's not a bad thing, it's called healthy competition.
How about another method of obtaining Tech II components... Tech II component BPOs? I don't mean entering them in the FUBAR Tech II lottery system either. I mean make them available through the NPC marketplace. At least that would give builders a chance to set their prices based on the actual component costs rather than the inflated secondary market costs...
---------------
|
Feyd Darkholme
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 05:14:00 -
[158]
The only people it would suck for are the ones price gouging the value of Tech II comps and items... That's not a bad thing, it's called healthy competition.
How about another method of obtaining Tech II components... Tech II component BPOs? I don't mean entering them in the FUBAR Tech II lottery system either. I mean make them available through the NPC marketplace. At least that would give builders a chance to set their prices based on the actual component costs rather than the inflated secondary market costs...
---------------
|
Kyle Kador
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 06:59:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Redundancy
Also, don't forget that armour and hull repairers are free, and that you get 40% insurance all of the time at the moment.
Hmmm " at the moment " why am i getting nervous ?
|
Kyle Kador
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 06:59:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Redundancy
Also, don't forget that armour and hull repairers are free, and that you get 40% insurance all of the time at the moment.
Hmmm " at the moment " why am i getting nervous ?
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 07:25:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Qutsemnie on 12/08/2004 07:42:23
Originally by: Orestes
Not much change from the current system, where insurance is so easy to get, there's almost no point in blowing up a ship =|
At least with interceptors, it hurts
The loss of isk on loosing an insured battleship approaches twice the loss of isk on loosing an interceptor.
|
Qutsemnie
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 07:25:00 -
[162]
Edited by: Qutsemnie on 12/08/2004 07:42:23
Originally by: Orestes
Not much change from the current system, where insurance is so easy to get, there's almost no point in blowing up a ship =|
At least with interceptors, it hurts
The loss of isk on loosing an insured battleship approaches twice the loss of isk on loosing an interceptor.
|
Dray
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 08:29:00 -
[163]
release more interceptor bpo's, im not saying flood the market but enough to make the competition a bit more healthy, and tbh i think the real reason a lot of people are a bit p1ssed off is the retarded lottery, i mean lets be honest how much glue did u guys sniff before you came up with that gem.
I picked up this ace book today everyone rates it as a must buy for the budding military genius, tho ive decided to rename it as "Sun Tzu's art of the bloody obvious" |
Dray
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 08:29:00 -
[164]
release more interceptor bpo's, im not saying flood the market but enough to make the competition a bit more healthy, and tbh i think the real reason a lot of people are a bit p1ssed off is the retarded lottery, i mean lets be honest how much glue did u guys sniff before you came up with that gem.
I picked up this ace book today everyone rates it as a must buy for the budding military genius, tho ive decided to rename it as "Sun Tzu's art of the bloody obvious" |
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:03:00 -
[165]
My love of Eve is the fact most of it is run by players.
The way most of you 'Its not fare, I only get 200k insurance!!' It sounds like you want the game to just make all items available at base cost fully covered against loss and easy to come by.
Does nobody understand that if CCP up the drop rate of T2 components the bottom would fall out the market in most T2 items. It would not be exclusive to fly an interceptor, nobody would fit T1 cap rechargers. The way it is at the moment, it keeps the items something of worth rather than the usual throw away items.
It maybe hard to understand but we need to have the rich and the poor in the game. Just as we need to have the aggressive and the passive. Fighters and industrialists. Some players live on the bread line and will not be able to afford an expensive T2 item or ships, some players are not happy to risk buying one with low insurance.
Clipping the game to bring everyone into the same catagory will kill off any of the diversity of varying prices and availablities that have been built up.
Maybe I am just alone in the fact I like risk, I like to know if I lose a ship I will lose isk. Yes I could jump into a frigate and fit it to almost the same standard as a inty but I would end up having less respect for the ship due to the fact I can replace in minutes.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:03:00 -
[166]
My love of Eve is the fact most of it is run by players.
The way most of you 'Its not fare, I only get 200k insurance!!' It sounds like you want the game to just make all items available at base cost fully covered against loss and easy to come by.
Does nobody understand that if CCP up the drop rate of T2 components the bottom would fall out the market in most T2 items. It would not be exclusive to fly an interceptor, nobody would fit T1 cap rechargers. The way it is at the moment, it keeps the items something of worth rather than the usual throw away items.
It maybe hard to understand but we need to have the rich and the poor in the game. Just as we need to have the aggressive and the passive. Fighters and industrialists. Some players live on the bread line and will not be able to afford an expensive T2 item or ships, some players are not happy to risk buying one with low insurance.
Clipping the game to bring everyone into the same catagory will kill off any of the diversity of varying prices and availablities that have been built up.
Maybe I am just alone in the fact I like risk, I like to know if I lose a ship I will lose isk. Yes I could jump into a frigate and fit it to almost the same standard as a inty but I would end up having less respect for the ship due to the fact I can replace in minutes.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:10:00 -
[167]
Point 1.
Will people stop asking for more bpos to be released. How can additional bpos solve the problem when the current bpos are not being used to full capacity due to high component prices, and low component supply ?
Having more bpos solves nothing.
Point 2.
I don't hear anyone complaining about the prices of mega modulated pulse lasers. They're top of the line, they're this season's must have item, they go for 30 mil+, with NO insurance for them. What's the difference between them and a crow ? Not a lot really.
Okay, so a crow is manufactured, but it's manufactured using items that can only be gained in limited supply by farming agents, named items can only be gained by farming npcs. So again, what's the difference ?
I mean, seriously, there is not a great difference between losing a 15 mil crow, and losing a standard frigate packed with named modules ? How about a punisher, 3 medium modulated pulse, catalyzed cold gas mwd, lose that and I've lost 5 mil+.
So, lets make this simple - you want to fly with elite items - then you have to be prepared to pay the price.
|
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:10:00 -
[168]
Point 1.
Will people stop asking for more bpos to be released. How can additional bpos solve the problem when the current bpos are not being used to full capacity due to high component prices, and low component supply ?
Having more bpos solves nothing.
Point 2.
I don't hear anyone complaining about the prices of mega modulated pulse lasers. They're top of the line, they're this season's must have item, they go for 30 mil+, with NO insurance for them. What's the difference between them and a crow ? Not a lot really.
Okay, so a crow is manufactured, but it's manufactured using items that can only be gained in limited supply by farming agents, named items can only be gained by farming npcs. So again, what's the difference ?
I mean, seriously, there is not a great difference between losing a 15 mil crow, and losing a standard frigate packed with named modules ? How about a punisher, 3 medium modulated pulse, catalyzed cold gas mwd, lose that and I've lost 5 mil+.
So, lets make this simple - you want to fly with elite items - then you have to be prepared to pay the price.
|
Dray
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:18:00 -
[169]
Edited by: Dray on 12/08/2004 09:23:40
Originally by: Toran Mehtar
Point 1.
Will people stop asking for more bpos to be released. How can additional bpos solve the problem when the current bpos are not being used to full capacity due to high component prices, and low component supply ?
Having more bpos solves nothing.
Point 2.
I don't hear anyone complaining about the prices of mega modulated pulse lasers. They're top of the line, they're this season's must have item, they go for 30 mil+, with NO insurance for them. What's the difference between them and a crow ? Not a lot really.
Okay, so a crow is manufactured, but it's manufactured using items that can only be gained in limited supply by farming agents, named items can only be gained by farming npcs. So again, what's the difference ?
I mean, seriously, there is not a great difference between losing a 15 mil crow, and losing a standard frigate packed with named modules ? How about a punisher, 3 medium modulated pulse, catalyzed cold gas mwd, lose that and I've lost 5 mil+.
So, lets make this simple - you want to fly with elite items - then you have to be prepared to pay the price.
more bpos wont solve the problem but they will help, aswell as making more components available, i have a nice little stockpile on my agent runner and im looking at some of the byom deals and i have no problem with a large loss on ships if you dont like risks dont take them, i take your point on not wanting more bpo's but i disagree that a few more wouldnt hurt the competition.
I picked up this ace book today everyone rates it as a must buy for the budding military genius, tho ive decided to rename it as "Sun Tzu's art of the bloody obvious" |
Dray
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:18:00 -
[170]
Edited by: Dray on 12/08/2004 09:23:40
Originally by: Toran Mehtar
Point 1.
Will people stop asking for more bpos to be released. How can additional bpos solve the problem when the current bpos are not being used to full capacity due to high component prices, and low component supply ?
Having more bpos solves nothing.
Point 2.
I don't hear anyone complaining about the prices of mega modulated pulse lasers. They're top of the line, they're this season's must have item, they go for 30 mil+, with NO insurance for them. What's the difference between them and a crow ? Not a lot really.
Okay, so a crow is manufactured, but it's manufactured using items that can only be gained in limited supply by farming agents, named items can only be gained by farming npcs. So again, what's the difference ?
I mean, seriously, there is not a great difference between losing a 15 mil crow, and losing a standard frigate packed with named modules ? How about a punisher, 3 medium modulated pulse, catalyzed cold gas mwd, lose that and I've lost 5 mil+.
So, lets make this simple - you want to fly with elite items - then you have to be prepared to pay the price.
more bpos wont solve the problem but they will help, aswell as making more components available, i have a nice little stockpile on my agent runner and im looking at some of the byom deals and i have no problem with a large loss on ships if you dont like risks dont take them, i take your point on not wanting more bpo's but i disagree that a few more wouldnt hurt the competition.
I picked up this ace book today everyone rates it as a must buy for the budding military genius, tho ive decided to rename it as "Sun Tzu's art of the bloody obvious" |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:43:00 -
[171]
Please people, THERE IS NO PROBLEM.
Maybe inty's are expensive atm, but that will die down later on when more ways of getting components are introduced. (they will be because there is no hope whatoever that tech2 production can keep up once all the bpo's are in without having more building components availiable). In the mean time, tech2 remains expensive elite stuff that makes you lose lots of money if you get killed flying it around or having it fitted.
Nothing is wrong with that, tech2 will always remain expensive, and as such will always result in greater loss over a tech1 fitted ship. Again, nothing wrong with that.
People flying interceptors need to have the isk to back it up, if they don't they fly rifters instead. Easy.
People who fly Raven's fit modules worth two interceptors that arent covered by insurance either. They can afford to, if they don't they fly caracals. Easy.
Nothing wrong here at all, please move on now.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 09:43:00 -
[172]
Please people, THERE IS NO PROBLEM.
Maybe inty's are expensive atm, but that will die down later on when more ways of getting components are introduced. (they will be because there is no hope whatoever that tech2 production can keep up once all the bpo's are in without having more building components availiable). In the mean time, tech2 remains expensive elite stuff that makes you lose lots of money if you get killed flying it around or having it fitted.
Nothing is wrong with that, tech2 will always remain expensive, and as such will always result in greater loss over a tech1 fitted ship. Again, nothing wrong with that.
People flying interceptors need to have the isk to back it up, if they don't they fly rifters instead. Easy.
People who fly Raven's fit modules worth two interceptors that arent covered by insurance either. They can afford to, if they don't they fly caracals. Easy.
Nothing wrong here at all, please move on now.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:02:00 -
[173]
Quote:
People flying interceptors need to have the isk to back it up, if they don't they fly rifters instead. Easy.
I've played this game since launch. I've never owned a BS, cause I could never afford one, I'm a part time player.
I would think an Interceptor should be something I can afford and have fun with. I guess CCP dissagrees...
This game continues to dissappoint the 6-10 hour per week player time & time agian...
I hoped when I came back the Inty would be something I could strive for, trained up for it, then realized how bogus the insurance was, feel like I got kicked in the nads by CCP...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:02:00 -
[174]
Quote:
People flying interceptors need to have the isk to back it up, if they don't they fly rifters instead. Easy.
I've played this game since launch. I've never owned a BS, cause I could never afford one, I'm a part time player.
I would think an Interceptor should be something I can afford and have fun with. I guess CCP dissagrees...
This game continues to dissappoint the 6-10 hour per week player time & time agian...
I hoped when I came back the Inty would be something I could strive for, trained up for it, then realized how bogus the insurance was, feel like I got kicked in the nads by CCP...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:13:00 -
[175]
The whole thing is really stupid. Either have insurance thatÆs relative to the value of the ship, for every ship. Or have insurance thatÆs disproportionate to the value of the ship, every ship.
This is insurance after all. Currently it doesnÆt make any sense to have one ship type that you canÆt insureà the least you could do is make up some story about why that is (something better than æthe code doesnÆt take on board the value of T2 componentsÆ thatÆs just pants imo).
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:13:00 -
[176]
The whole thing is really stupid. Either have insurance thatÆs relative to the value of the ship, for every ship. Or have insurance thatÆs disproportionate to the value of the ship, every ship.
This is insurance after all. Currently it doesnÆt make any sense to have one ship type that you canÆt insureà the least you could do is make up some story about why that is (something better than æthe code doesnÆt take on board the value of T2 componentsÆ thatÆs just pants imo).
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:23:00 -
[177]
Hmm Bhaal, i can understand your feelings of being left out.
The problem remains however, if you can't afford to lose a BS and dont fly one because of it, you won't be able to fly a cruiser fitted with all tech 2 items either will you ?
Soon enough you will need to to compete on a high level.
Tech2 turrets, tech2 rcu's, tech2 shieldboosters etc.
And all just because being onlines means you can make isk and not being online means you cannot.
That simple yet confronting truth is something that cannot be helped I'm afraid.
People around you are making isk faster then you, simple economics dictate that sooner or later you will fall behind in purchasing power due to inflation, or will fall behind in relative quality of living due to raised standards around you. Both are what is happening to you now.
The game cannot protect you against that can it ?
Because if you can afford interceptors, the rest will be able to afford something even better. If there is nothing better, interceptors will rise in price untill you cannot afford them.
I'm afraid Eve is a game that needs time. And altho I would like it otherwise, there is no way to make that work.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:23:00 -
[178]
Hmm Bhaal, i can understand your feelings of being left out.
The problem remains however, if you can't afford to lose a BS and dont fly one because of it, you won't be able to fly a cruiser fitted with all tech 2 items either will you ?
Soon enough you will need to to compete on a high level.
Tech2 turrets, tech2 rcu's, tech2 shieldboosters etc.
And all just because being onlines means you can make isk and not being online means you cannot.
That simple yet confronting truth is something that cannot be helped I'm afraid.
People around you are making isk faster then you, simple economics dictate that sooner or later you will fall behind in purchasing power due to inflation, or will fall behind in relative quality of living due to raised standards around you. Both are what is happening to you now.
The game cannot protect you against that can it ?
Because if you can afford interceptors, the rest will be able to afford something even better. If there is nothing better, interceptors will rise in price untill you cannot afford them.
I'm afraid Eve is a game that needs time. And altho I would like it otherwise, there is no way to make that work.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:31:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Shiakarma
The whole thing is really stupid. Either have insurance thatÆs relative to the value of the ship, for every ship. Or have insurance thatÆs disproportionate to the value of the ship, every ship.
This is insurance after all. Currently it doesnÆt make any sense to have one ship type that you canÆt insureà the least you could do is make up some story about why that is (something better than æthe code doesnÆt take on board the value of T2 componentsÆ thatÆs just pants imo).
Why not ?
Cause it 'doesn't make sense' ?
It does not make sense not to have isk sinks. Tech2 will be the perfect isk sink Eve needs. The isk lost with even a fully insured ship will rise, but since interceptors dont fit a whole lot of stuff relative to their usefulness and price, they can use another way to penalise the loss. Incomplete insurance is as good a way as I can think of.
And please don't act like this means that interceptors are too expensive to be used. They aren't this popular for no reason.
Oh, and there really is no need for an RP reason. But if you want one how about: 'insurance companies refuse to allow full coverage on interceptor-type hulls because of the experimental technology involved'.
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:31:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Shiakarma
The whole thing is really stupid. Either have insurance thatÆs relative to the value of the ship, for every ship. Or have insurance thatÆs disproportionate to the value of the ship, every ship.
This is insurance after all. Currently it doesnÆt make any sense to have one ship type that you canÆt insureà the least you could do is make up some story about why that is (something better than æthe code doesnÆt take on board the value of T2 componentsÆ thatÆs just pants imo).
Why not ?
Cause it 'doesn't make sense' ?
It does not make sense not to have isk sinks. Tech2 will be the perfect isk sink Eve needs. The isk lost with even a fully insured ship will rise, but since interceptors dont fit a whole lot of stuff relative to their usefulness and price, they can use another way to penalise the loss. Incomplete insurance is as good a way as I can think of.
And please don't act like this means that interceptors are too expensive to be used. They aren't this popular for no reason.
Oh, and there really is no need for an RP reason. But if you want one how about: 'insurance companies refuse to allow full coverage on interceptor-type hulls because of the experimental technology involved'.
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:41:00 -
[181]
Ok only talking hypothetically lets image this happens in game.
War and I mean big @ss war spreads across the game, every 0.0 alliance fights everyone else. Gates in and out of 0.0 are camped 23/7. 0.0 mining ops are hit repeatedly in every region by attackers. OK so its a little extreme but it serves its purpose. Mega and Zyd become in short supply as alliances are keeping all they can for thier ship replacements and anyone mining finds it a lot of risk to bring it past the camped gates.
So mega and zyd rise to (only for eg.) 30k and 15k respectivly due to short supply. Now tell me how much a Raven could be built for in Empire?
As I am not a manufacturer I can't say for sure but I would guess at them prices it would cost upto 150 million+ just to build. Now we get into a situation where insurance would cost 35 million and return 105 million not close to the 150million build cost. Would you ask CCP to increase the spawn rate of roids in 0.0, or add extra gates in and out of 0.0 or would you ask for faster haulers or miners or ask that insurance is fixed?
Just like the inty cost and the insurance cover, with enough of a strain on a single item cost can be pushed way over the norm and thus making insurance lack the coverage.
Its the dynamic of the game that has created this situation, if in a week or so some guy with x ammount of the build item that is in demand sells up or some noob gets some and flogs them for cheap it will ease the market until then cost will stay high.
I am sure I am not making sense, but I know what I mean.
Rod, make a post to cover me. You seem to explain better than I do!! 
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 10:41:00 -
[182]
Ok only talking hypothetically lets image this happens in game.
War and I mean big @ss war spreads across the game, every 0.0 alliance fights everyone else. Gates in and out of 0.0 are camped 23/7. 0.0 mining ops are hit repeatedly in every region by attackers. OK so its a little extreme but it serves its purpose. Mega and Zyd become in short supply as alliances are keeping all they can for thier ship replacements and anyone mining finds it a lot of risk to bring it past the camped gates.
So mega and zyd rise to (only for eg.) 30k and 15k respectivly due to short supply. Now tell me how much a Raven could be built for in Empire?
As I am not a manufacturer I can't say for sure but I would guess at them prices it would cost upto 150 million+ just to build. Now we get into a situation where insurance would cost 35 million and return 105 million not close to the 150million build cost. Would you ask CCP to increase the spawn rate of roids in 0.0, or add extra gates in and out of 0.0 or would you ask for faster haulers or miners or ask that insurance is fixed?
Just like the inty cost and the insurance cover, with enough of a strain on a single item cost can be pushed way over the norm and thus making insurance lack the coverage.
Its the dynamic of the game that has created this situation, if in a week or so some guy with x ammount of the build item that is in demand sells up or some noob gets some and flogs them for cheap it will ease the market until then cost will stay high.
I am sure I am not making sense, but I know what I mean.
Rod, make a post to cover me. You seem to explain better than I do!!
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Dukath
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:25:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Orestes
There's no problem at all.
Only possible insurance you could hope for is Mineral cost + Component Mineral cost + NPC Trade good price. That number will never be close to the actual cost, there's no predicting what player-built items are going to cost.
So, if you want to fly an Elite Frigate (or any T II ship, i think), better be prepared to cry when it's destroyed
The only insurance that would work fine is one based on actual risk analysis.
The more you pay weekly the higher the payout. Meaning if i insure a shuttle for 10 billion then i would receive 10 billion in payout, of course you'd also have an incredibly high insurance fee. HOWEVER, the amount you are allowed to insure for is limited on standing, flight hours ,number of ships lost and previous payouts from the insurance company.
People who lose ships often will get less access to insurance, or will have to pay more to get the same payout. people who never lose a ship would be able to get a full payback. People who try to abuse the system will drop in standing so quickly and will have such high previous payouts that they'll never be able to get a decent insurance again. New players won't have enough flight time to put a too high insurance on things so making an alt to abuse the system wont work
|
Dukath
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:25:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Orestes
There's no problem at all.
Only possible insurance you could hope for is Mineral cost + Component Mineral cost + NPC Trade good price. That number will never be close to the actual cost, there's no predicting what player-built items are going to cost.
So, if you want to fly an Elite Frigate (or any T II ship, i think), better be prepared to cry when it's destroyed
The only insurance that would work fine is one based on actual risk analysis.
The more you pay weekly the higher the payout. Meaning if i insure a shuttle for 10 billion then i would receive 10 billion in payout, of course you'd also have an incredibly high insurance fee. HOWEVER, the amount you are allowed to insure for is limited on standing, flight hours ,number of ships lost and previous payouts from the insurance company.
People who lose ships often will get less access to insurance, or will have to pay more to get the same payout. people who never lose a ship would be able to get a full payback. People who try to abuse the system will drop in standing so quickly and will have such high previous payouts that they'll never be able to get a decent insurance again. New players won't have enough flight time to put a too high insurance on things so making an alt to abuse the system wont work
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:26:00 -
[185]
It's not exactly my argument but I do agree.
Insurance can never be relied on to give 100% cover when base price relative to real price is a dynamic factor.
I think Kieron already said this two pages back btw.
So either: all new insurance system...
or: NPC mineral demand makes sure real price doesn't get below (base price+insurance cost), and every time insurance doesnt give 100% cover we mark it down as being a temprary money sink.
I don't care, but money sinks are needed, that I do care about. And this one is a nice one for now since every rich f#@k in eve wants to fly an inty and loses isk in doing so.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:26:00 -
[186]
It's not exactly my argument but I do agree.
Insurance can never be relied on to give 100% cover when base price relative to real price is a dynamic factor.
I think Kieron already said this two pages back btw.
So either: all new insurance system...
or: NPC mineral demand makes sure real price doesn't get below (base price+insurance cost), and every time insurance doesnt give 100% cover we mark it down as being a temprary money sink.
I don't care, but money sinks are needed, that I do care about. And this one is a nice one for now since every rich f#@k in eve wants to fly an inty and loses isk in doing so.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Omniwar
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:38:00 -
[187]
In my opinion insurance should be removed from the game all togather since it will always govern the lowest price of the ships.
In the case of tech 2 ships has anyone thought about it if tech 2 components get oh so more dropped from agents and even dropped by NPC¦s ?
If CCP changes it and makes say a payout of 8 mills on a crow and then the market gets full of components and the ship prices drop, no one will sell under 8 million or so since that is what insurance pays out.
If that happens we have forced us to pay that price forever on those ships, but as I said and will always say, remove insurance from EVE all togather and if not then at least from below 0.5 systems.
I¦m strange I know.
Spawn of the Devil
|
Omniwar
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:38:00 -
[188]
In my opinion insurance should be removed from the game all togather since it will always govern the lowest price of the ships.
In the case of tech 2 ships has anyone thought about it if tech 2 components get oh so more dropped from agents and even dropped by NPC¦s ?
If CCP changes it and makes say a payout of 8 mills on a crow and then the market gets full of components and the ship prices drop, no one will sell under 8 million or so since that is what insurance pays out.
If that happens we have forced us to pay that price forever on those ships, but as I said and will always say, remove insurance from EVE all togather and if not then at least from below 0.5 systems.
I¦m strange I know.
Spawn of the Devil
|
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:46:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Dukath
The only insurance that would work fine is one based on actual risk analysis.
The more you pay weekly the higher the payout. Meaning if i insure a shuttle for 10 billion then i would receive 10 billion in payout, of course you'd also have an incredibly high insurance fee. HOWEVER, the amount you are allowed to insure for is limited on standing, flight hours ,number of ships lost and previous payouts from the insurance company.
People who lose ships often will get less access to insurance, or will have to pay more to get the same payout. people who never lose a ship would be able to get a full payback. People who try to abuse the system will drop in standing so quickly and will have such high previous payouts that they'll never be able to get a decent insurance again. New players won't have enough flight time to put a too high insurance on things so making an alt to abuse the system wont work
I would love this, actually.
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 11:46:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Dukath
The only insurance that would work fine is one based on actual risk analysis.
The more you pay weekly the higher the payout. Meaning if i insure a shuttle for 10 billion then i would receive 10 billion in payout, of course you'd also have an incredibly high insurance fee. HOWEVER, the amount you are allowed to insure for is limited on standing, flight hours ,number of ships lost and previous payouts from the insurance company.
People who lose ships often will get less access to insurance, or will have to pay more to get the same payout. people who never lose a ship would be able to get a full payback. People who try to abuse the system will drop in standing so quickly and will have such high previous payouts that they'll never be able to get a decent insurance again. New players won't have enough flight time to put a too high insurance on things so making an alt to abuse the system wont work
I would love this, actually.
Join the IC! |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:04:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Orestes
Originally by: Dukath
The only insurance that would work fine is one based on actual risk analysis.
The more you pay weekly the higher the payout. Meaning if i insure a shuttle for 10 billion then i would receive 10 billion in payout, of course you'd also have an incredibly high insurance fee. HOWEVER, the amount you are allowed to insure for is limited on standing, flight hours ,number of ships lost and previous payouts from the insurance company.
People who lose ships often will get less access to insurance, or will have to pay more to get the same payout. people who never lose a ship would be able to get a full payback. People who try to abuse the system will drop in standing so quickly and will have such high previous payouts that they'll never be able to get a decent insurance again. New players won't have enough flight time to put a too high insurance on things so making an alt to abuse the system wont work
I would love this, actually.
No you wouldn't.
It would work against the fighters in eve that actually take the risk to lose isk in this game by putting their ships on the line (insured). Alot will do so less if they are not insured at all, at least with BS which is where it matters most.
If there is one thing we don't need it's less people taking risks in this game.
Actually, it should be reversed. Peoepl the NEVER lose a ship can also not insure it. People who do take risks can get a nice coverage. That way the people that do the risky stuff that is the end stage of eve economics do not get punished for it while the people that sit on their ass making the isk off those that make the demand side in the economy get punished for leeching.
Ok, that is overstating it but I wanted to make a point.
If you punish those that loose ships you lose the demand side of the ingame economy. Ergo: bad idea.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:04:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Orestes
Originally by: Dukath
The only insurance that would work fine is one based on actual risk analysis.
The more you pay weekly the higher the payout. Meaning if i insure a shuttle for 10 billion then i would receive 10 billion in payout, of course you'd also have an incredibly high insurance fee. HOWEVER, the amount you are allowed to insure for is limited on standing, flight hours ,number of ships lost and previous payouts from the insurance company.
People who lose ships often will get less access to insurance, or will have to pay more to get the same payout. people who never lose a ship would be able to get a full payback. People who try to abuse the system will drop in standing so quickly and will have such high previous payouts that they'll never be able to get a decent insurance again. New players won't have enough flight time to put a too high insurance on things so making an alt to abuse the system wont work
I would love this, actually.
No you wouldn't.
It would work against the fighters in eve that actually take the risk to lose isk in this game by putting their ships on the line (insured). Alot will do so less if they are not insured at all, at least with BS which is where it matters most.
If there is one thing we don't need it's less people taking risks in this game.
Actually, it should be reversed. Peoepl the NEVER lose a ship can also not insure it. People who do take risks can get a nice coverage. That way the people that do the risky stuff that is the end stage of eve economics do not get punished for it while the people that sit on their ass making the isk off those that make the demand side in the economy get punished for leeching.
Ok, that is overstating it but I wanted to make a point.
If you punish those that loose ships you lose the demand side of the ingame economy. Ergo: bad idea.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:23:00 -
[193]
Edited by: Hellek on 12/08/2004 12:26:17
I also dislike the current insurance system.
Before I go into a fight, I insure my Apoc 100%, costs me 33mill or so but then, the only loss I have if I die is the mods which aren't very expensive. So if I get blown up, the biggest loss is the loss of time for getting a new ship and flying back to the location of the fighting, and of course the insurance costs. But I have those costs anyway, no matter whether I die or not.
I think it would be good if you would have to pay a bit extra if you really die.
I don't know the word in english (in german its "Selbstbehalt"), but in RL, i.e. if you crash your car and have insurance for it, you need to pay something like i.e. 500euros to the insurance so that you can get money from them.
So it would be great if i.e. insurance would cost a bit less but players would have to pay extra money to the insurance in case they die.
PS: I am against releasing more T2 BPOs or components. That has been heavily discussed in a topic in "ships and modules" though.
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:23:00 -
[194]
Edited by: Hellek on 12/08/2004 12:26:17
I also dislike the current insurance system.
Before I go into a fight, I insure my Apoc 100%, costs me 33mill or so but then, the only loss I have if I die is the mods which aren't very expensive. So if I get blown up, the biggest loss is the loss of time for getting a new ship and flying back to the location of the fighting, and of course the insurance costs. But I have those costs anyway, no matter whether I die or not.
I think it would be good if you would have to pay a bit extra if you really die.
I don't know the word in english (in german its "Selbstbehalt"), but in RL, i.e. if you crash your car and have insurance for it, you need to pay something like i.e. 500euros to the insurance so that you can get money from them.
So it would be great if i.e. insurance would cost a bit less but players would have to pay extra money to the insurance in case they die.
PS: I am against releasing more T2 BPOs or components. That has been heavily discussed in a topic in "ships and modules" though.
|
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:33:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
No you wouldn't.
Yes I would.
Originally by: Rod Blaine
It would work against the fighters in eve that actually take the risk to lose isk in this game by putting their ships on the line (insured). Alot will do so less if they are not insured at all, at least with BS which is where it matters most.
Better get good at fighting then
Originally by: Rod Blaine
If there is one thing we don't need it's less people taking risks in this game.
No. What we don't need is less risk in the game.
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Actually, it should be reversed. Peoepl the NEVER lose a ship can also not insure it. People who do take risks can get a nice coverage. That way the people that do the risky stuff that is the end stage of eve economics do not get punished for it while the people that sit on their ass making the isk off those that make the demand side in the economy get punished for leeching.
Makes no sense, does it?
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Ok, that is overstating it but I wanted to make a point.
If you punish those that loose ships you lose the demand side of the ingame economy. Ergo: bad idea.
The game needs more risk.
In your scenario, frequent fighters would be able to get ships replaced more easily. That way, there is no real 'win' situation possible, as the more you fight, the more easy it becomes to replace a ship. I believe that PvPers fight to win, they fight to make their opponent hurt financially. If "the more you fight the less it hurts" becomes true, where's the point in fighting?
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:33:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
No you wouldn't.
Yes I would.
Originally by: Rod Blaine
It would work against the fighters in eve that actually take the risk to lose isk in this game by putting their ships on the line (insured). Alot will do so less if they are not insured at all, at least with BS which is where it matters most.
Better get good at fighting then
Originally by: Rod Blaine
If there is one thing we don't need it's less people taking risks in this game.
No. What we don't need is less risk in the game.
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Actually, it should be reversed. Peoepl the NEVER lose a ship can also not insure it. People who do take risks can get a nice coverage. That way the people that do the risky stuff that is the end stage of eve economics do not get punished for it while the people that sit on their ass making the isk off those that make the demand side in the economy get punished for leeching.
Makes no sense, does it?
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Ok, that is overstating it but I wanted to make a point.
If you punish those that loose ships you lose the demand side of the ingame economy. Ergo: bad idea.
The game needs more risk.
In your scenario, frequent fighters would be able to get ships replaced more easily. That way, there is no real 'win' situation possible, as the more you fight, the more easy it becomes to replace a ship. I believe that PvPers fight to win, they fight to make their opponent hurt financially. If "the more you fight the less it hurts" becomes true, where's the point in fighting?
Join the IC! |
Phios Phane
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:55:00 -
[197]
hey orestes.
Bite my shiney metal ass
---------------------------
The Cold War, EVE style ...
[ 2004.10.17 10:04:18 ] Crystal DeAngelis
> is cos teh vietkong used littel groups and didnt get any lag |
Phios Phane
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:55:00 -
[198]
hey orestes.
Bite my shiney metal ass
---------------------------
The Cold War, EVE style ...
[ 2004.10.17 10:04:18 ] Crystal DeAngelis
> is cos teh vietkong used littel groups and didnt get any lag |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:59:00 -
[199]
Yeas, sure, just lemme get my shiny metal dentures first..
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 12:59:00 -
[200]
Yeas, sure, just lemme get my shiny metal dentures first..
Join the IC! |
Phios Phane
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:22:00 -
[201]
ohhhhhehehe can you wear those little tight shiney hot pants aswell 
---------------------------
The Cold War, EVE style ...
[ 2004.10.17 10:04:18 ] Crystal DeAngelis
> is cos teh vietkong used littel groups and didnt get any lag |
Phios Phane
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:22:00 -
[202]
ohhhhhehehe can you wear those little tight shiney hot pants aswell
---------------------------
The Cold War, EVE style ...
[ 2004.10.17 10:04:18 ] Crystal DeAngelis
> is cos teh vietkong used littel groups and didnt get any lag |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:23:00 -
[203]
Rawr!
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:23:00 -
[204]
Rawr!
Join the IC! |
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:38:00 -
[205]
Don't you hate it when posts get highjacked!!!
......and by a Mod as well!!!
Tsk tsk.
Disclaimer. Unless this act of metal loving is going to be insured(sounds a little dangerous) then I guess it has relevence to the topic.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Pychian Vanervi
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:38:00 -
[206]
Don't you hate it when posts get highjacked!!!
......and by a Mod as well!!!
Tsk tsk.
Disclaimer. Unless this act of metal loving is going to be insured(sounds a little dangerous) then I guess it has relevence to the topic.
-----------------------------
It's all about the fortune and glory, fortune and glory!
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:54:00 -
[207]
Orestes, I was purposely overstating my argument as I already said.
In effect, I agree there should be more risk in the game. What I do NOT agree with is that the risk increase should be placed solely with the people already taking the risk in this game.
That would rather decrease the demand for new ships as the people losing them would start losing less of them or cheaper ones, and especially with BS+mods being the motor of the economy that would be a bad thing imo.
So I dont believe in progressively increasing cost of insurance with every loss. It's one thing in which the game should not follow real life examples. Instead, create more smaller isk sinks to balance in and outflow of isk better.
I think interceptors with their low cost are a good place to start with that. Once the price drops a bit the loss isnt that big, meaning the risk will be acceptable to those with alot of isk. Other nice medium-small sized isk sinks will be tech2 mods for battleships. They cost alot, but are not really required to operate. If you can afford them you will lose them, if you cannot you will not use them.
However, if you increase the net loss of say losing a battleship to 150mill, you would probably see a different effect altogether since not too may people can handle losing 150+ million at once easily. Spread it out in 15 losses of 10 million each for say modules lost or interceptors lost and people will be much more liable to keep taking risks.
Remember that the game is about having fun, not recuperating from losses all the time.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 13:54:00 -
[208]
Orestes, I was purposely overstating my argument as I already said.
In effect, I agree there should be more risk in the game. What I do NOT agree with is that the risk increase should be placed solely with the people already taking the risk in this game.
That would rather decrease the demand for new ships as the people losing them would start losing less of them or cheaper ones, and especially with BS+mods being the motor of the economy that would be a bad thing imo.
So I dont believe in progressively increasing cost of insurance with every loss. It's one thing in which the game should not follow real life examples. Instead, create more smaller isk sinks to balance in and outflow of isk better.
I think interceptors with their low cost are a good place to start with that. Once the price drops a bit the loss isnt that big, meaning the risk will be acceptable to those with alot of isk. Other nice medium-small sized isk sinks will be tech2 mods for battleships. They cost alot, but are not really required to operate. If you can afford them you will lose them, if you cannot you will not use them.
However, if you increase the net loss of say losing a battleship to 150mill, you would probably see a different effect altogether since not too may people can handle losing 150+ million at once easily. Spread it out in 15 losses of 10 million each for say modules lost or interceptors lost and people will be much more liable to keep taking risks.
Remember that the game is about having fun, not recuperating from losses all the time.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 14:01:00 -
[209]
Well, that's your view
I think Eve is not brutal enough. Especially not in 0.0 space, where people are supposed to take heavy risks to reap the benefits of limitless riches in 0.0!
That's the theory, though.
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 14:01:00 -
[210]
Well, that's your view
I think Eve is not brutal enough. Especially not in 0.0 space, where people are supposed to take heavy risks to reap the benefits of limitless riches in 0.0!
That's the theory, though.
Join the IC! |
BobGhengisKhan
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 15:33:00 -
[211]
Edited by: BobGhengisKhan on 12/08/2004 15:38:20
I don't like the idea of reducing insurance payout per death. First, because I don't think you should get insurance on any death anyway in 0.0 space, and second, because after every death, players would run off and do agent missions or whatever else to boost their standing to get their insurance.
You could say those players running off to do missions and avoid a death where no payout is given would be the same people that would never enter .4s or 0.0 anyway if the insurance system is abolished, but I disagree. If those players hear about people receiving 130 mil for an apoc blown up, and they know they'll only receive 12 or whatever for their second in a week, they won't come because they're at a huge comparitive disadvantage. It's not just that they're receiving no money, it's that even if they get attacked by a group of pirates and manage to kill them all, there's the distinct possibility all of those pirates will be reimbursed fully, and they'll still be flying around going for broke
Abolish insurance, finally then the regional alliances' proud claim to have "survived" will mean something other than they remembered to insure before fighting
|
BobGhengisKhan
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 15:33:00 -
[212]
Edited by: BobGhengisKhan on 12/08/2004 15:38:20
I don't like the idea of reducing insurance payout per death. First, because I don't think you should get insurance on any death anyway in 0.0 space, and second, because after every death, players would run off and do agent missions or whatever else to boost their standing to get their insurance.
You could say those players running off to do missions and avoid a death where no payout is given would be the same people that would never enter .4s or 0.0 anyway if the insurance system is abolished, but I disagree. If those players hear about people receiving 130 mil for an apoc blown up, and they know they'll only receive 12 or whatever for their second in a week, they won't come because they're at a huge comparitive disadvantage. It's not just that they're receiving no money, it's that even if they get attacked by a group of pirates and manage to kill them all, there's the distinct possibility all of those pirates will be reimbursed fully, and they'll still be flying around going for broke
Abolish insurance, finally then the regional alliances' proud claim to have "survived" will mean something other than they remembered to insure before fighting
|
Acix
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 19:39:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Orestes
Well, that's your view
I think Eve is not brutal enough. Especially not in 0.0 space, where people are supposed to take heavy risks to reap the benefits of limitless riches in 0.0!
That's the theory, though.
What limitless riches in 0.0 are you talking about there mod boy?
The only "limitless riches" in this game go to the EVE lottery BPO winners. As each BPO cycles into the game and a new lottery winner gets it they then have the monopoly of the month or few months in the case of the miner 2.
They really should have put on the side of the box that you can make billions by winning BPO lotteries!!!!!!!!!!!!
This post of yours and the previous makes me really hope that your just going to stay a forum mod and never become a dev.............. |
Acix
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 19:39:00 -
[214]
Originally by: Orestes
Well, that's your view
I think Eve is not brutal enough. Especially not in 0.0 space, where people are supposed to take heavy risks to reap the benefits of limitless riches in 0.0!
That's the theory, though.
What limitless riches in 0.0 are you talking about there mod boy?
The only "limitless riches" in this game go to the EVE lottery BPO winners. As each BPO cycles into the game and a new lottery winner gets it they then have the monopoly of the month or few months in the case of the miner 2.
They really should have put on the side of the box that you can make billions by winning BPO lotteries!!!!!!!!!!!!
This post of yours and the previous makes me really hope that your just going to stay a forum mod and never become a dev.............. |
Qual
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 21:03:00 -
[215]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
In effect, I agree there should be more risk in the game. What I do NOT agree with is that the risk increase should be placed solely with the people already taking the risk in this game.
Funny notion this. That the risk solely lies with the fighters.
If getting insurence payout and no risks is so important, darn hell, then i want my next T2 investment insured. If I dont make back my 4 billion ISK in six months I demand that CCP should make a system that reinburses me! If they dont i'll cancel my account...
Hell, no. EVE is risk. EVE is player driven. Look at the ******* BOX guys! This IS what you signed up for. Insurence is ment to help the n00bs. If you want to play with the advanced tools, then you are IN the game and noone is going to take away the pain.
Head of Xanadu Elite Ships Department |
Qual
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 21:03:00 -
[216]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
In effect, I agree there should be more risk in the game. What I do NOT agree with is that the risk increase should be placed solely with the people already taking the risk in this game.
Funny notion this. That the risk solely lies with the fighters.
If getting insurence payout and no risks is so important, darn hell, then i want my next T2 investment insured. If I dont make back my 4 billion ISK in six months I demand that CCP should make a system that reinburses me! If they dont i'll cancel my account...
Hell, no. EVE is risk. EVE is player driven. Look at the ******* BOX guys! This IS what you signed up for. Insurence is ment to help the n00bs. If you want to play with the advanced tools, then you are IN the game and noone is going to take away the pain.
Head of Xanadu Elite Ships Department |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 21:27:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Acix
What limitless riches in 0.0 are you talking about there mod boy?
That's the theory I was talking about 
T Originally by: Acix
he only "limitless riches" in this game go to the EVE lottery BPO winners. As each BPO cycles into the game and a new lottery winner gets it they then have the monopoly of the month or few months in the case of the miner 2.
They really should have put on the side of the box that you can make billions by winning BPO lotteries!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pre-lottery, people got by just fine making billions off bought blueprints, mineral trades and the like. I see your point, though
Originally by: Acix
This post of yours and the previous makes me really hope that your just going to stay a forum mod and never become a dev..............
Me neither, I hope I never become a dev in charge of GameDesign. Too many factors to weigh, to many opinions to consider. Not my kind of job
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.12 21:27:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Acix
What limitless riches in 0.0 are you talking about there mod boy?
That's the theory I was talking about
T Originally by: Acix
he only "limitless riches" in this game go to the EVE lottery BPO winners. As each BPO cycles into the game and a new lottery winner gets it they then have the monopoly of the month or few months in the case of the miner 2.
They really should have put on the side of the box that you can make billions by winning BPO lotteries!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pre-lottery, people got by just fine making billions off bought blueprints, mineral trades and the like. I see your point, though
Originally by: Acix
This post of yours and the previous makes me really hope that your just going to stay a forum mod and never become a dev..............
Me neither, I hope I never become a dev in charge of GameDesign. Too many factors to weigh, to many opinions to consider. Not my kind of job
Join the IC! |
Ris Dnalor
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 02:29:00 -
[219]
problem is that t2 components come only from agents. Since the supply is about as stable as Dahmer on crank, noone, including ccp can tell you what the cost to build one of these babies is going to be. It varies wildly depending upon the day of the week, the location, & how patient you're willing to be to acquire the supplies. Untill ccp allows us to build our own tech 2 components from minerals, it'll never be right.
I still say make blueprints for each t2 compoennt. make a separate skill for each t2 component that allows you to use that blueprint. Then it becomes a specialized, 2-tier manufacturing process, instead of a bunch of people playing a single-player-game hidden within a mmporg, just so they can build something.
tralala
--
Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000
|
Ris Dnalor
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 02:29:00 -
[220]
problem is that t2 components come only from agents. Since the supply is about as stable as Dahmer on crank, noone, including ccp can tell you what the cost to build one of these babies is going to be. It varies wildly depending upon the day of the week, the location, & how patient you're willing to be to acquire the supplies. Untill ccp allows us to build our own tech 2 components from minerals, it'll never be right.
I still say make blueprints for each t2 compoennt. make a separate skill for each t2 component that allows you to use that blueprint. Then it becomes a specialized, 2-tier manufacturing process, instead of a bunch of people playing a single-player-game hidden within a mmporg, just so they can build something.
tralala
--
Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000
|
Koris
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 06:39:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Orestes
Well, that's your view
I think Eve is not brutal enough. Especially not in 0.0 space, where people are supposed to take heavy risks to reap the benefits of limitless riches in 0.0!
That's the theory, though.
I absolutely positively agree with this thought. The vast riches of 0.0 space should come with some heart ache.
|
Koris
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 06:39:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Orestes
Well, that's your view
I think Eve is not brutal enough. Especially not in 0.0 space, where people are supposed to take heavy risks to reap the benefits of limitless riches in 0.0!
That's the theory, though.
I absolutely positively agree with this thought. The vast riches of 0.0 space should come with some heart ache.
|
Vlad Hazzard
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 08:50:00 -
[223]
What is this, the Eve Communist Club?
Who says you're entitled to any ship in the game? You can't afford it, tough. There are no natural or moral laws dictating that you have the right to the best equipment in the game at a certain price.
You want one? Build it yourself. Can't? Then pay the manufacturer.
Devs : How you fix this problem is to have NPC corps make the same ship, and sell it at the 200k price, but only in very limited amounts, driving down the price on the fair market, while not completely wrecking the player run market.
Once the PC manufacturers start to find themselves overproducing these things, the price will fall on its own.
Also might want to mke the blueprints more accessable, if more people can build it themselves, it introduces competition to the market, and again the prices fall.
The situation is completely the fault of the players who buy these, and also the players who make them.
Once again, I express my exasperation at the attitude of the playerbase, who somehow believe owning certain things in life is a "right."
Rights are a myth, the only rights you have are the ones that flow out of the barrel of a gun, that you wield, or that someone else wields on your behalf.
Get used to it.
|
Vlad Hazzard
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 08:50:00 -
[224]
What is this, the Eve Communist Club?
Who says you're entitled to any ship in the game? You can't afford it, tough. There are no natural or moral laws dictating that you have the right to the best equipment in the game at a certain price.
You want one? Build it yourself. Can't? Then pay the manufacturer.
Devs : How you fix this problem is to have NPC corps make the same ship, and sell it at the 200k price, but only in very limited amounts, driving down the price on the fair market, while not completely wrecking the player run market.
Once the PC manufacturers start to find themselves overproducing these things, the price will fall on its own.
Also might want to mke the blueprints more accessable, if more people can build it themselves, it introduces competition to the market, and again the prices fall.
The situation is completely the fault of the players who buy these, and also the players who make them.
Once again, I express my exasperation at the attitude of the playerbase, who somehow believe owning certain things in life is a "right."
Rights are a myth, the only rights you have are the ones that flow out of the barrel of a gun, that you wield, or that someone else wields on your behalf.
Get used to it.
|
Terrapin
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 10:30:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Bhaal
Quote:
People flying interceptors need to have the isk to back it up, if they don't they fly rifters instead. Easy.
I've played this game since launch. I've never owned a BS, cause I could never afford one, I'm a part time player.
I would think an Interceptor should be something I can afford and have fun with. I guess CCP dissagrees...
This game continues to dissappoint the 6-10 hour per week player time & time agian...
I hoped when I came back the Inty would be something I could strive for, trained up for it, then realized how bogus the insurance was, feel like I got kicked in the nads by CCP...
I feel your pain..
I'm also currently training to fly interceptors, but reading all the posts here I feel I may have wasted my time (as I also have limited time to play the game).
Anyway, how about changing the insurance system to return an X percentage (depending on the insurance type) of the T2 components needed to manufacture the ship in question on top of the current ISK payout?
It would decrease the component shortage, and prevent fraud.
Simple but effective. (Or is it?)
T.
---
|
Terrapin
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 10:30:00 -
[226]
Originally by: Bhaal
Quote:
People flying interceptors need to have the isk to back it up, if they don't they fly rifters instead. Easy.
I've played this game since launch. I've never owned a BS, cause I could never afford one, I'm a part time player.
I would think an Interceptor should be something I can afford and have fun with. I guess CCP dissagrees...
This game continues to dissappoint the 6-10 hour per week player time & time agian...
I hoped when I came back the Inty would be something I could strive for, trained up for it, then realized how bogus the insurance was, feel like I got kicked in the nads by CCP...
I feel your pain..
I'm also currently training to fly interceptors, but reading all the posts here I feel I may have wasted my time (as I also have limited time to play the game).
Anyway, how about changing the insurance system to return an X percentage (depending on the insurance type) of the T2 components needed to manufacture the ship in question on top of the current ISK payout?
It would decrease the component shortage, and prevent fraud.
Simple but effective. (Or is it?)
T.
---
|
Dukath
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 10:46:00 -
[227]
I don't get this ' i only have a limited time to play so i can't get an interceptor' part. You have a limited time to play, fair enough, it will just take slightly longer to get an interceptor but lets be honest the price is not impossible for you.
On the other hand you have limited time to play, that also means you'll end up in a lot less situations where you will lose your ship than people who play a lot. So in effect the effort to get and keep an interceptor in relative playing time should not be too different between people who play daily and those who play only during weekends.
|
Dukath
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 10:46:00 -
[228]
I don't get this ' i only have a limited time to play so i can't get an interceptor' part. You have a limited time to play, fair enough, it will just take slightly longer to get an interceptor but lets be honest the price is not impossible for you.
On the other hand you have limited time to play, that also means you'll end up in a lot less situations where you will lose your ship than people who play a lot. So in effect the effort to get and keep an interceptor in relative playing time should not be too different between people who play daily and those who play only during weekends.
|
meowcat
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 10:50:00 -
[229]
(1) my agent gives me a bunch of Graviton Reactors
(2) i sell them for somewhere around the average market price of 250k
(3) somone gives me 7-12 million isk for them depending on how many i got
(4) i use the money to buy an interceptor
use the system
|
meowcat
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 10:50:00 -
[230]
(1) my agent gives me a bunch of Graviton Reactors
(2) i sell them for somewhere around the average market price of 250k
(3) somone gives me 7-12 million isk for them depending on how many i got
(4) i use the money to buy an interceptor
use the system
|
Terrapin
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 11:16:00 -
[231]
Originally by: Dukath
I don't get this ' i only have a limited time to play so i can't get an interceptor' part. You have a limited time to play, fair enough, it will just take slightly longer to get an interceptor but lets be honest the price is not impossible for you.
It's not impossible, but still ridiculous. When I started training for interceptors they were on the market for around 6 mill. Last time I checked they'd gone up to 20 mill. And that's not even taking the insurance into consideration.
I've been playing for well over a year, and I also never got a BS simply because the costs (purchase and maintenance) are too high, so I figured interceptors would make a good alternative. Now it turns out that that's not the case. Which is disappointing.
---
|
Terrapin
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 11:16:00 -
[232]
Originally by: Dukath
I don't get this ' i only have a limited time to play so i can't get an interceptor' part. You have a limited time to play, fair enough, it will just take slightly longer to get an interceptor but lets be honest the price is not impossible for you.
It's not impossible, but still ridiculous. When I started training for interceptors they were on the market for around 6 mill. Last time I checked they'd gone up to 20 mill. And that's not even taking the insurance into consideration.
I've been playing for well over a year, and I also never got a BS simply because the costs (purchase and maintenance) are too high, so I figured interceptors would make a good alternative. Now it turns out that that's not the case. Which is disappointing.
---
|
Bloke 900
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 11:39:00 -
[233]
Originally by: Shiakarma
Originally by: mightygrm
If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up
If you acquire one in another way (purchase from your corp/mate or find one empty) thereÆs one fixed price based on roughly what it costs to make one.
Job done.
"Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up"
Nice idea - so I get my corp mate to put a Crow on the market for 500m, I buy it, blow it up and get my 500m insurance, corp mate returns original 500m. Yay \0/ we be rich
|
Bloke 900
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 11:39:00 -
[234]
Originally by: Shiakarma
Originally by: mightygrm
If you have some genious idea of how you could increase insurance on them without allowing this loophole please speak up otherwise I'd suggest you to stop whining.
Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up
If you acquire one in another way (purchase from your corp/mate or find one empty) thereÆs one fixed price based on roughly what it costs to make one.
Job done.
"Erm how about they set the insurance payout at the amount you paid for it? That way you get back what you paid if you leave the station and decide to blow it up"
Nice idea - so I get my corp mate to put a Crow on the market for 500m, I buy it, blow it up and get my 500m insurance, corp mate returns original 500m. Yay \0/ we be rich
|
Bloke 900
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 11:51:00 -
[235]
The real problem here is the over inflated prices for interceptors, which is simply a result of supply and demand. You intercetor pilots need to go on strike for a month and stop paying the crazy prices. Many of greedy manufacturers are also probably doing themselves a diservice anyhow - many people are simply put off even training for interceptors by the simple over pricing and insurance problem. 1 less trained interceptor pilot could be 20 potential lost ship sales (40 if your CA ).
|
Bloke 900
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 11:51:00 -
[236]
The real problem here is the over inflated prices for interceptors, which is simply a result of supply and demand. You intercetor pilots need to go on strike for a month and stop paying the crazy prices. Many of greedy manufacturers are also probably doing themselves a diservice anyhow - many people are simply put off even training for interceptors by the simple over pricing and insurance problem. 1 less trained interceptor pilot could be 20 potential lost ship sales (40 if your CA ).
|
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:04:00 -
[237]
Edited by: Bhaal on 13/08/2004 12:07:09
Quote:
It's not impossible, but still ridiculous. When I started training for interceptors they were on the market for around 6 mill. Last time I checked they'd gone up to 20 mill. And that's not even taking the insurance into consideration.
I've been playing for well over a year, and I also never got a BS simply because the costs (purchase and maintenance) are too high, so I figured interceptors would make a good alternative. Now it turns out that that's not the case. Which is disappointing.
Yep, exactly...
I'm a part time player...
Chances are, if I want to use my Inty for PvP, I'm going to log on when PvP operations are under way...
Meaning I'm going to use my 2 hrs of gameplay for action, meaning I'm going to lose ships frequently...
I'm not going to pay 12 mill for a ship that should cost 500k...
The Tech II lottery & PC economy is not working...
Agent runners are getting too much ISK for their comps, and Tech II BPO lottery users are asking way too much for thier wares, it's quite obvious how much INTY's are supposed to cost, look at the gouging going on...
If I have to stick to Tech I stuff for another 6 months to have fun, fine, I'll do that, I'll still play... But I'm not a happy customer...
Sucks to be a bottom barrel feeder paying the same monthly fee cause I can only play 6 hrs a week...
I can raise the money to buy an Inty, but can't afford to lose it... I mined like a madman with my first go around in this game, I quit because of it... I'm not going to go through that again...
So, another skill that I strived for that is useless to me, just like CCP did to my first characater with DCM...
Thanks
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:04:00 -
[238]
Edited by: Bhaal on 13/08/2004 12:07:09
Quote:
It's not impossible, but still ridiculous. When I started training for interceptors they were on the market for around 6 mill. Last time I checked they'd gone up to 20 mill. And that's not even taking the insurance into consideration.
I've been playing for well over a year, and I also never got a BS simply because the costs (purchase and maintenance) are too high, so I figured interceptors would make a good alternative. Now it turns out that that's not the case. Which is disappointing.
Yep, exactly...
I'm a part time player...
Chances are, if I want to use my Inty for PvP, I'm going to log on when PvP operations are under way...
Meaning I'm going to use my 2 hrs of gameplay for action, meaning I'm going to lose ships frequently...
I'm not going to pay 12 mill for a ship that should cost 500k...
The Tech II lottery & PC economy is not working...
Agent runners are getting too much ISK for their comps, and Tech II BPO lottery users are asking way too much for thier wares, it's quite obvious how much INTY's are supposed to cost, look at the gouging going on...
If I have to stick to Tech I stuff for another 6 months to have fun, fine, I'll do that, I'll still play... But I'm not a happy customer...
Sucks to be a bottom barrel feeder paying the same monthly fee cause I can only play 6 hrs a week...
I can raise the money to buy an Inty, but can't afford to lose it... I mined like a madman with my first go around in this game, I quit because of it... I'm not going to go through that again...
So, another skill that I strived for that is useless to me, just like CCP did to my first characater with DCM...
Thanks
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Qual
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:16:00 -
[239]
Originally by: Terrapin
It's not impossible, but still ridiculous. When I started training for interceptors they were on the market for around 6 mill. Last time I checked they'd gone up to 20 mill. And that's not even taking the insurance into consideration.
CROW (thats one specific ship type!) Cost 15M. The rest are widely available at much lower prices. I know. We sell them all. Exept for one. Guess which one...
Head of Xanadu Elite Ships Department |
Qual
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:16:00 -
[240]
Originally by: Terrapin
It's not impossible, but still ridiculous. When I started training for interceptors they were on the market for around 6 mill. Last time I checked they'd gone up to 20 mill. And that's not even taking the insurance into consideration.
CROW (thats one specific ship type!) Cost 15M. The rest are widely available at much lower prices. I know. We sell them all. Exept for one. Guess which one...
Head of Xanadu Elite Ships Department |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:27:00 -
[241]
Quote:
CROW (thats one specific ship type!) Cost 15M. The rest are widely available at much lower prices. I know. We sell them all. Exept for one. Guess which one...
I want a Claw...
They go for what... 6.5 mill?
The insurance payout is what, 300k?
Sorry, I won't pay that much...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:27:00 -
[242]
Quote:
CROW (thats one specific ship type!) Cost 15M. The rest are widely available at much lower prices. I know. We sell them all. Exept for one. Guess which one...
I want a Claw...
They go for what... 6.5 mill?
The insurance payout is what, 300k?
Sorry, I won't pay that much...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Qual
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:44:00 -
[243]
Edited by: Qual on 13/08/2004 12:49:20
Originally by: Vlad Hazzard
Devs : How you fix this problem is to have NPC corps make the same ship, and sell it at the 200k price, but only in very limited amounts, driving down the price on the fair market, while not completely wrecking the player run market.
Once the PC manufacturers start to find themselves overproducing these things, the price will fall on its own.
Dude lets get a calculator shall we?
Ok, now im a manufacturer. I'm in luck and get a interceptor bpo for say 700M (yes, i know. its a bargain, but just play along...).
Now i start producing the ships, selling them at the "normal" 6M.
Lets for arguments sake say im a resonable good trader so i get my components for prices in the 10K-25K frame. (This is a realistic price frame that gives the agent a fair reward for his work while not beeing a silly low mineral value price, but one look at the comp market and you will se that far from all comps sell that low.) I also need some minerals and a ship to upgrade. Total material cost is 3.5M (+/- 0.5 mil).
Now im able to build 13 of them in 3 days. Lest say i sell them at the speed i make them. (All interceptor bpo owners sellig at full rate raise your hands... Hmmm... Thought so. But hey. STILL only an example.)
So profit for 3 days is: 32.5M (Not bad.)
ROI time: 700/32.5*3=64 days
So two months to earn that one back. Thats good buisness with room for setbacks, price fluctuations and the occational price war.
Lest bring in 200K competition...
He...
He, he...
Lets not!
Ok, so we drop the price to 4M. Im sure many will still scream that that is too much. Here the ROI time is 5 times longer. Between 10 to 11 months. But thats based on optimal sales, real life tend to doubble these numbers. And thats just to long... Sorry dudes. Get used to interceptors beeing at least in the 5-8mil frame for the rest of EvE's days. And dont delude yourselfs that insurence will get better. It wont! Deal or bail...
*Edited for spelling
Head of Xanadu Elite Ships Department |
Qual
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:44:00 -
[244]
Edited by: Qual on 13/08/2004 12:49:20
Originally by: Vlad Hazzard
Devs : How you fix this problem is to have NPC corps make the same ship, and sell it at the 200k price, but only in very limited amounts, driving down the price on the fair market, while not completely wrecking the player run market.
Once the PC manufacturers start to find themselves overproducing these things, the price will fall on its own.
Dude lets get a calculator shall we?
Ok, now im a manufacturer. I'm in luck and get a interceptor bpo for say 700M (yes, i know. its a bargain, but just play along...).
Now i start producing the ships, selling them at the "normal" 6M.
Lets for arguments sake say im a resonable good trader so i get my components for prices in the 10K-25K frame. (This is a realistic price frame that gives the agent a fair reward for his work while not beeing a silly low mineral value price, but one look at the comp market and you will se that far from all comps sell that low.) I also need some minerals and a ship to upgrade. Total material cost is 3.5M (+/- 0.5 mil).
Now im able to build 13 of them in 3 days. Lest say i sell them at the speed i make them. (All interceptor bpo owners sellig at full rate raise your hands... Hmmm... Thought so. But hey. STILL only an example.)
So profit for 3 days is: 32.5M (Not bad.)
ROI time: 700/32.5*3=64 days
So two months to earn that one back. Thats good buisness with room for setbacks, price fluctuations and the occational price war.
Lest bring in 200K competition...
He...
He, he...
Lets not!
Ok, so we drop the price to 4M. Im sure many will still scream that that is too much. Here the ROI time is 5 times longer. Between 10 to 11 months. But thats based on optimal sales, real life tend to doubble these numbers. And thats just to long... Sorry dudes. Get used to interceptors beeing at least in the 5-8mil frame for the rest of EvE's days. And dont delude yourselfs that insurence will get better. It wont! Deal or bail...
*Edited for spelling
Head of Xanadu Elite Ships Department |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:50:00 -
[245]
Edited by: Bhaal on 13/08/2004 12:53:21
Quote:
Ok, now im a manufacturer. I'm in luck and get a interceptor bpo for say 700M
You're the dumbass paying 700M for a frigate BPO...
Quote:
Ok, so we drop the price to 4M. Im sure many will still scream that that is too much. Here the ROI time is 5 times longer. Between 10 to 11 months. But thats based on optiaml sales, real life tend to doubble these numbers. And thats just to long... Sorry dudes. Get used to interceptors beeing at least in the 5-8mil frame for the rest of EvE's days. And dont delude yourselfs that insurence will get better. It wont! Deal or bail...
Guess I'll never own one...
Wish I had not wasted time on the skill...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:50:00 -
[246]
Edited by: Bhaal on 13/08/2004 12:53:21
Quote:
Ok, now im a manufacturer. I'm in luck and get a interceptor bpo for say 700M
You're the dumbass paying 700M for a frigate BPO...
Quote:
Ok, so we drop the price to 4M. Im sure many will still scream that that is too much. Here the ROI time is 5 times longer. Between 10 to 11 months. But thats based on optiaml sales, real life tend to doubble these numbers. And thats just to long... Sorry dudes. Get used to interceptors beeing at least in the 5-8mil frame for the rest of EvE's days. And dont delude yourselfs that insurence will get better. It wont! Deal or bail...
Guess I'll never own one...
Wish I had not wasted time on the skill...
------------------------------------------------
"for piece sakes!" |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:50:00 -
[247]
Should be able to buy the BPO from an NPC for 5mil tbh.
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Shiakarma
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 12:50:00 -
[248]
Should be able to buy the BPO from an NPC for 5mil tbh.
Computer games don't affect children. If PacMan had affected us as kids then we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music. |
Terrapin
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 13:25:00 -
[249]
Edited by: Terrapin on 13/08/2004 13:26:58
Quote:
CROW (thats one specific ship type!) Cost 15M. The rest are widely available at much lower prices. I know. We sell them all. Exept for one. Guess which one...
I'm pretty sure the price tag read 20mill yesterday.. and close to 10 for the other caldari frigate (which I can't recall the name of right now). Way too high for a frigate imo, but hey if they can be insured properly I can deal with that. Right now they might as well get rid of insurance for T2 ships altogether.
BTW.. I'm still curious what the problem would be if the insurance were to be paid out in T2 components like I suggested in my first post, because I don't see any.
---
|
Terrapin
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 13:25:00 -
[250]
Edited by: Terrapin on 13/08/2004 13:26:58
Quote:
CROW (thats one specific ship type!) Cost 15M. The rest are widely available at much lower prices. I know. We sell them all. Exept for one. Guess which one...
I'm pretty sure the price tag read 20mill yesterday.. and close to 10 for the other caldari frigate (which I can't recall the name of right now). Way too high for a frigate imo, but hey if they can be insured properly I can deal with that. Right now they might as well get rid of insurance for T2 ships altogether.
BTW.. I'm still curious what the problem would be if the insurance were to be paid out in T2 components like I suggested in my first post, because I don't see any.
---
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 14:18:00 -
[251]
Hmm actually, tho not very nicely done RP wise, giving back teh tech2 components as part of the insurance contract might work as temporary solution.
In the medium to long run it would make for a static pool of components hoever, removing the market for agent runners to sell their goods, and ultimately leading to a pricefall of tech2 to nearly equal the minerals cost only.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 14:18:00 -
[252]
Hmm actually, tho not very nicely done RP wise, giving back teh tech2 components as part of the insurance contract might work as temporary solution.
In the medium to long run it would make for a static pool of components hoever, removing the market for agent runners to sell their goods, and ultimately leading to a pricefall of tech2 to nearly equal the minerals cost only.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 14:26:00 -
[253]
Appearently, the bug hs been fixed, as platinum insurance pays out more then 2 million now, instead of a few hundred K.
I'm locking this topic.
Join the IC! |
Orestes
|
Posted - 2004.08.13 14:26:00 -
[254]
Appearently, the bug hs been fixed, as platinum insurance pays out more then 2 million now, instead of a few hundred K.
I'm locking this topic.
Join the IC! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |