| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lagruna Zegata
   |
Posted - 2009.07.06 12:24:00 -
[61]
I am neutral on this topic.
But...how about a 3-7 day cooldown period on insurance (just pick a reasonable timeframe) where basic insurance is refused and better packages cannot even be bought if you have recently lost your ship within this period for whatever reason?
Maybe just exclude T1 frigates from this rule...
So many things are time-based in EvE, why not insurance?
~Lagruna Zegata
|
Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 15:11:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Ephemeron
Insurance should be removed from all ships more expensive than t1 battlecruiser
In the old days when making money was tough and owning a t1 bs actually meant something, insurance was justifiable. But in today's age when a month old noob is already flying Raven, where real battleship cost is 3-5 mil, where isk is being printed in record numbers, we really don't need the insurance crutch.
This game is supposed to be tough and losses are supposed to mean something. We are losing that.
This.
|
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 17:25:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Malcanis
By all means let's make "insurance" more 'realistic'.
As long as it's balanced by making CONCORD more 'realistic' too.
as in forbidding certain players docking privileges in empire space or destroying their pods in empire space etc? 
got to admit i like the way you think guy.
|
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 17:27:00 -
[64]
banning insurance payouts to people killed by concord is long overdue. was promised several expansions back and patience is running short.
|
Velvet Sinner
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 01:29:00 -
[65]
There needs to be an internal mechanic that links different alts to the same human being (ie, payment device). Your toon isn't deciding to gank a Hulk; it's the warped brain of the human behind the keyboard. You gank in hi-sec, all accounts associated with the ganking toon are banned immediately. The only way around it would be those that pay for their account(s) with isk; even GTC buyers can be tracked thru payment mechanism. Also make trial accounts unable to fire on non-NPC ships in high-sec.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 11:47:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Velvet Sinner
There needs to be an internal mechanic that links different alts to the same human being (ie, payment device). Your toon isn't deciding to gank a Hulk; it's the warped brain of the human behind the keyboard. You gank in hi-sec, all accounts associated with the ganking toon are banned immediately. The only way around it would be those that pay for their account(s) with isk; even GTC buyers can be tracked thru payment mechanism. Also make trial accounts unable to fire on non-NPC ships in high-sec.
And while we're at it, why don't replace all our ships with cuddly bunny rabbits in tea cozies?
If you want to play Hello Kitty Online, you're at the wrong website.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 12:46:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 08/07/2009 12:47:04
Premise, my sec status floats between -1 and -7.
Quote:
No.
Highsec isnt risk free, it isnt intended to be
While high sec suicide attacks with no expense are intended to be?
Why shouldn't suicide ganking be like everything else in EvE, that is a tradeoff between good and bad sides?
With the current trend, you risk and lose ZERO because the insurance pays back the hull in full and the drops (expecially miners') more than cover for the T1 turrets loss.
Quote:
Removing insurance payouts for concorded ships makes suicide ganking VASTLY less profitable. This translates directly to fewer ganks occurring and a safer highsec.
FALSE. Suicide gank an indy carrying 200M in modules with a destroyer and you lose like 10M and still earn 190M / 2.
Freigthers could be reverted to "killable status" again so that it's still profitable to kill the 2B afk ferry boat with a loss of 1B on your part.
Have people have to *think* before they push the trigger.
Quote:
Oddly enough, pod pilots aren't considered citizens.
Oddly enough, policemen normally need paying.
Which way do you want it: are you a citizen with rights - and obligations
I pay quite expensive starbase charters to the empire faction and regular fees to the owners of the stations hosting my corp offices. So?
Quote:
In what meaningful way are pod pilots citizens?
I can access the Gallente and Minmatar loyality points (odd name, it's like they want to prize you somehow) and I can even fly Factional vessels.
I feel more citizen in EvE than in real life, where I have yet to get a State limousine handed in for my own perusal.
Quote:
Personal property is personal property, and insurance is not the same as the police, You may notice that you get paid from an insurance company, and not from concord? no?
Could you please point me the name of the insurance company paying for you to destroying your car every day?
Quote:
They dont cost zero. The ships themselves cost marginally above zero; then they must be fitted.
So, you spend 2M to T1 fit a gallente cruiser and kill an hulk dropping 1.6-1.9M *tech I* mining lasers (more if tech 2) and possibly T2 MLUs and T2 shields / gist shield repper @40M value a piece.
It's CLEARLY a bad deal!
Quote:
And there is a significant non-zero time factor, plus the sec hit
- Attack miners with usual drones out on aggressive (for rats), targetting the drones first => no sec hit.
- Use -10 sec pilots boarding a ship dropped nearby off an Orca => sec hit does not matter.
Quote:
Originally by: Ephemeron
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insurance should be removed from all ships more expensive than t1 battlecruiser
This.
No, insurance should be removed off ALL the ships if anything. Because the suicide boats would almost all be covered and insured by the above statement.
Quote:
There needs to be an internal mechanic that links different alts to the same human being (ie, payment device). Your toon isn't deciding to gank a Hulk; it's the warped brain of the human behind the keyboard.
I'd be fine with the idea of making a guy blinky for all the characters of my account. So I could warp in my proper PvP ship and see who is the man.
-
Auditing and consulting
Before asking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and
http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans
Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 13:48:00 -
[68]
No. CCP looked into this and buffed response time instead. You can take away our insurance if you reset the response time changes.
Cost isn't really an issue with suicide gankings. Sec is, considering the grind to recover it after a successful gank.
Example 1
When I was out suicide ganking I would rarely go after anything with a cargo value of less than 200 mil. Assuming one has a 50% drop rate and assuming you are using a tier 2 battlecruiser (what are they now, 35 mil) that's still a minimum 65mil profit if insurance is voided. Still worth doing.
Example 2
Pirate corp X is using destroyers to kill Hulks mining in Hisec. It takes 4-5 dessies to be able to reliably kill 1 Hulk. Total cost: 4-5 mil. Well worth it to destroy some carebears.
All that will happen if insurance is voided for Concord actions is the alienation of carebears who accidently set off a smartbomb in a plex or turn their guns on a fleet member.
This hysterical whining about suicide gankers has got to stop. Carebears have had too many concessions over the years. Pay attention, play smart and you won't get killed, simple as.
Fighting for justice
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 13:54:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
Cost isn't really an issue with suicide gankings. Sec is, considering the grind to recover it after a successful gank.
My father had an expression that went something like "You made your bed, now lie in it".
Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer
Example 1
When I was out suicide ganking I would rarely go after anything with a cargo value of less than 200 mil. Assuming one has a 50% drop rate and assuming you are using a tier 2 battlecruiser (what are they now, 35 mil) that's still a minimum 65mil profit if insurance is voided. Still worth doing.
Example 2
Pirate corp X is using destroyers to kill Hulks mining in Hisec. It takes 4-5 dessies to be able to reliably kill 1 Hulk. Total cost: 4-5 mil. Well worth it to destroy some carebears.
All that will happen if insurance is voided for Concord actions is the alienation of carebears who accidently set off a smartbomb in a plex or turn their guns on a fleet member.
This hysterical whining about suicide gankers has got to stop. Carebears have had too many concessions over the years. Pay attention, play smart and you won't get killed, simple as.
I'm not proposing that we allow people to play less intelligently, Lark. If anything, this will encourage more thought in the game, since you won't be able to gank anything that happens across your path with a reasonable expectation of at least breaking even economically.
You'll have to actually pick your targets selectively and balance the costs versus the potential rewards.
I thought that was sort of the point of EVE?
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 15:38:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Malcanis
But you're fine with empire carebears getting a massive free protection subsidy.
Or do you think should CONCORD protection be paid for? That would be an excellent idea IMO - instead of basing the concord response time on system sec, base it on the level of the contract you have with them. That gives the gankers their risk level - they cant be sure if they're shooting someone with platimum protection (CONCORD turn up in 5 seconds) or just basic (faction police arrive after 1 minute)
This is the only good idea in this thread fyi
|
|
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 15:41:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Malcanis
But you're fine with empire carebears getting a massive free protection subsidy.
Or do you think should CONCORD protection be paid for? That would be an excellent idea IMO - instead of basing the concord response time on system sec, base it on the level of the contract you have with them. That gives the gankers their risk level - they cant be sure if they're shooting someone with platimum protection (CONCORD turn up in 5 seconds) or just basic (faction police arrive after 1 minute)
This is the only good idea in this thread fyi
I'd support this as long as my contract is applicable everywhere in EVE, including nullsec and WH space. After all, if I'm paying for protection, I expect my body guard to be nearby.
That really is a good idea, thanks!
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Drizzt Zoloff
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 17:34:00 -
[72]
I support this. On the grounds that Insurance companies aren't going to pay you to destroy your own vehicle.
Just because a mechanic is in a game doesn't mean it needs balanced if something changes. Sure if there is a glaring issue. But basically you have people whining because they're going to make ONE of the ways to have non-consensual PVP involve a bit of thinking other than cheap fitting a ship. |
Delilah Wild
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 17:51:00 -
[73]
De'Veldrin is spot on with this.
|
Master Chaz
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 18:37:00 -
[74]
hmmmm,
where do you start.
1. ganking in high sec is griefing...period
2. has a pvper i resent being tossed into this lot with these so-called pvpers ( gankers)
3. you should lose your insurance if you choose " this profession"
4. high sec should be safe . we must assume that when CCP made the empires they were pretty sure that said leaders of these empires would not allow a bunch of clowns going around attacking the taxpayers ( has any state or country would)
5. high sec was created to give breathing room to folks in game ,l low sec was for the wild wild west.. so take your "profession" to low sec where it is intended.
to stop all this just make anybody who commits a crime ( again CCP idea of a crime) a target for all in high sec, and any other toon they have on the account
if your yellow players can kill you .Concord leaves you alone.. if your red your dead and not allowed into high sec ( even in a pod).that would truly make it risk and reward, tho i suspect the bad%ss pvpers in high sec will go away and to some other game. for it is they who are ruining eve with all this stuff not the carebears you so often whine about.
|
Syringe
R.E.C.O.N.
Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 18:45:00 -
[75]
no - do you realize how boring C&P would get?
---------
War isn't the answer. However, the objective isn't to provide answers rather than eliminate the question. |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 18:49:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Syringe
no - do you realize how boring C&P would get?
I was under the impression that certain overzealous individuals had already more or less killed that area of the forum?
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Nykky Syxx
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 19:16:00 -
[77]
Fine....as soon as L4's are moved to low sec. I see that as a good compromise.
|
Deanna Colare
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 19:16:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Deanna Colare on 08/07/2009 19:16:15
Full support. Insurance payouts for CONCORD kills makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.
Make the suicide gankers WORK for a living for a change. You whiners can still suicide gank, but you'll have to smartly pick your targets instead of just hitting every Tom, Richard, and Harry who happens to be passing through a 0.5 system in an industrial or mining there.
Boo hoo, you might have to work. 
|
Sarkadji
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 19:39:00 -
[79]
Now someone please wake up the CSM and make them ask CCP about something that was PROMISED as a specific fix long time ago?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 20:04:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Ehranavaar
Originally by: Malcanis
By all means let's make "insurance" more 'realistic'.
As long as it's balanced by making CONCORD more 'realistic' too.
as in forbidding certain players docking privileges in empire space or destroying their pods in empire space etc?
got to admit i like the way you think guy.
Sure they can try. "Realistic" concord being about as effective as faction police. When they turn up. If they turn up. If you have kept up on your payments.
|
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 20:05:00 -
[81]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Malcanis
But you're fine with empire carebears getting a massive free protection subsidy.
Or do you think should CONCORD protection be paid for? That would be an excellent idea IMO - instead of basing the concord response time on system sec, base it on the level of the contract you have with them. That gives the gankers their risk level - they cant be sure if they're shooting someone with platimum protection (CONCORD turn up in 5 seconds) or just basic (faction police arrive after 1 minute)
This is the only good idea in this thread fyi
I'd support this as long as my contract is applicable everywhere in EVE, including nullsec and WH space. After all, if I'm paying for protection, I expect my body guard to be nearby.
That really is a good idea, thanks!
Why on earth would CONCORD protect you in 0.0 or lo-sec? They dont operate there.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 22:29:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Malcanis
But you're fine with empire carebears getting a massive free protection subsidy.
Or do you think should CONCORD protection be paid for? That would be an excellent idea IMO - instead of basing the concord response time on system sec, base it on the level of the contract you have with them. That gives the gankers their risk level - they cant be sure if they're shooting someone with platimum protection (CONCORD turn up in 5 seconds) or just basic (faction police arrive after 1 minute)
This is the only good idea in this thread fyi
I'd support this as long as my contract is applicable everywhere in EVE, including nullsec and WH space. After all, if I'm paying for protection, I expect my body guard to be nearby.
That really is a good idea, thanks!
Why on earth would CONCORD protect you in 0.0 or lo-sec? They dont operate there.
You're the one that suggested making them a pay for use service. If I am paying them to show up when I'm in trouble, they'd better bloody well show up regardless of where I am.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Zlake
Deus Imperiosus Acies
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 22:39:00 -
[83]
No support.
|
Orthaen
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 00:11:00 -
[84]
Edited by: Orthaen on 09/07/2009 00:11:44
Originally by: Tsumei Meyren
One of the silliest proposals ever.
This isn't an issue. I'm sorry, but you're saying criminals should be treated differently from how "legal citizens" are when it comes to finances.
Personal property is personal property, and insurance is not the same as the police, You may notice that you get paid from an insurance company, and not from concord? no?
This is because you are insured by the -COMPANY- Not by the police. The contract is simply that when the ship blows up, insurance will be paid out.
It's a non-issue.
Damn forum ate my actual reply....
Check again. You ARE insured by CONCORD. They are the ones that shell out 100 million ISK to you after they blow up your ship. Why they give you money, no one knows. Because CCP hasn't gotten around to changing it, I suppose.
All this talk about "carebears are dumdum headz that need to adapt and try harder!" is bull****. Thanks to massive insurance payouts, EVERY ship in the game is able to be ganked into the ground before CONCORD kills the ganker, regardless of any protection they might have. You aren't just ganking untanked retrievers, you're hitting tanked hulks, top of the line industrials, and freighters. As soon as you die, you're fully reimbursed for your trouble(If you're losing more then 5-10 million on a gank you're a ****ing idiot, and doin it wrong), and then you get to pick up the booty and do a little dance.
Yeah, suicide ganking takes a little bit of work, and I don't care if you all do it until your face turns blue. You should not be paid insurance for your ships destruction, because you very actively chose suicide, and your "career" is free of this risk you speak of. Profits aren't high enough in high sec without insurance? Try low sec, I hear you can make better money there where you risk getting killed.
PS. Miners in hi sec sucking down veldspar all day for superior profit to low sec is also borked.
|
Rip Minner
Freewind Ventures
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 04:14:00 -
[85]
Right on lets fix this :)
|
Uronksur Suth
Sankkasen Mining Conglomerate
Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 06:45:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Velvet Sinner
There needs to be an internal mechanic that links different alts to the same human being (ie, payment device). Your toon isn't deciding to gank a Hulk; it's the warped brain of the human behind the keyboard. You gank in hi-sec, all accounts associated with the ganking toon are banned immediately. The only way around it would be those that pay for their account(s) with isk; even GTC buyers can be tracked thru payment mechanism. Also make trial accounts unable to fire on non-NPC ships in high-sec.
Are you joking, or are you really that insane?
Like, I support the proposed alteration to insurance, but your taking it way too far.
|
Blasphemour
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 09:14:00 -
[87]
I fully support this.
Come on, gankers get a cheap T1 ship, gank a fully loaded and equipped hulk which are hardly insurable and get the money for their ship back? The insurance company basically pays you for commiting a crime?
It is not just the hulk that you lose, also all the fitting and the ore that you have been mining. It is not as if hulks are cheap ships or anything. If it weren't for the loads of miners you 'tough' pirates wouldn't be able to get a cheap ship since the ore would get too expensive.
And that said, stop trash talking about carebears and eve is built on PVP. If you want to PVP and shoot people up, find a ship that can actually defend itself.
This is not player versus player, this is player versus certain victim. PVP is based on fighting people, not shooting neutral industrialists who cannot defend themselves since the ship does not allow you to fit all kind of guns along with the strip miners.
As soon as we get a big exhumer that can fit loads of guns and missile launchers you can come and shoot us up all you want, but untill that happens you should bare the consequences for your actions, just as it would be in real life.
Piracy is fine for me, it gives another dimension to the game. It shouldn't however be subsidized and insurable. Want to gank someone? Good for you. You get killed by Concord, you go back and get the loot left behind, make sure it is worth it.
It's like a bankrobber insuring his guns and getting paid when the police takes them away.
|
Aastarius
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 11:17:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Aastarius on 09/07/2009 11:17:17
Supported.
You cause "sanctioned" by CONCORD then you shouldn't be "rewarded" and while you're at it how about removing insurance on self-destructs too.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 14:35:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Aastarius
Edited by: Aastarius on 09/07/2009 11:17:17
Supported.
You cause "sanctioned" by CONCORD then you shouldn't be "rewarded" and while you're at it how about removing insurance on self-destructs too.
I'd be fine with removing insurance on self-destructed ships. Again, you're making a conscious choice to destroy said property.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
DanorexicD
|
Posted - 2009.07.10 04:11:00 -
[90]
I'm not going to lean towards or against removing insurance for suicide ganking, but I would like to say that people need to step away from the idea that they're making things anymore 'realistic'. The entire insurance system in EVE is BEYOND unrealistic.
Let's compare EVE ship insurance to car insurance.
Have so many of you not even thought about how insurance companies work in real life? Insurance companies in real life work by using mathematics figures and statistics to determine how much of a risk each insured person is and how much their premiums are. Levels of coverage, deductible amounts, past incidents, vehicle type, and a range of other variables are taken into account when an insurance company issues a policy. They also issue the policies knowing that every customer will use their policy to the fullest extent [ie, replacing the entire vehicle, or in EVE's case, ship].
EVE is vastly different from the real world. In EVE, insurance isn't used to cover the cost of fixing minor damages caused to a ship, nor is it used to pay for damage done to other people's ships. In EVE, it is almost GUARANTEED that the user's ship will be lost. If such an occurrence was true in real life, only a mad man would attempt to run an insurance business.
There is also the matter of CONCORD being realistic, but I'm sure you get where I'm going.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |