| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre
   |
Posted - 2009.07.21 14:18:00 -
[151]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 21/07/2009 14:19:33
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 21/07/2009 14:19:11
I cant help but laugh.... all those folk who are ranting raving about this being an idea... when it really gets right down to it... they are just whining like a bunch of carebears.... they being the gankers and pirates who like to exploit insurance only to get CONCORD'd
CONCORD governs the laws... the Insurance is handed out by a corporation of the CONCORD Assembly.
In all reality... all this crap about the Insurance company not answer to the law... is a load of bull.
Supported.
If you get CONCORDed... or you Self Destruct... you should not get any insurance back.
This has nothing to do with why... or how... or war-dec's.
It's just that simple.
You really think my insurance company would really be thrilled to find out I drove my car into a wall for the expressed purposes of getting a new car?
Yeah right.
Too long you people have had it made in the shade.... for consequences there should be penalties.
This doesn't take away your right to suicide gank or greif... just makes it a little more... costly.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
=========================
Dependable, Honorable, Intelligent, No-nonsense
Vote Herschel Yamamoto for CSM! |
Gaven's Bihotch
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 04:39:00 -
[152]
Insurance does not cover the whole ship. you get what you pay for. If you don't want risk, Why are you playing a multiplayer game?
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 04:54:00 -
[153]
 Originally by: Gaven's Bihotch
Insurance does not cover the whole ship. you get what you pay for. If you don't want risk, Why are you playing a multiplayer game?
I don't mind risk. I do mind people not receiving the full consequences of their choices - good and bad.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Aria Selenis
Minmatar
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 09:34:00 -
[154]
For the infinitely and repeatedly unanswered question (as usual, most arguments are ignored, with a straw man focused on something foolish someone said.):
For everyone who is whining about how insurance doesn't operate like a real insurance company, why aren't you whining about how CONCORD doesn't operate like a real police force?
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 09:58:00 -
[155]
Why are people who fly warships into warzones still receiving insurance payouts?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 10:05:00 -
[156]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Gaven's Bihotch
Insurance does not cover the whole ship. you get what you pay for. If you don't want risk, Why are you playing a multiplayer game?
I don't mind risk. I do mind people not receiving the full consequences of their choices - good and bad.
You mean like choosing to make ISK while AFK for 5-10 minutes at a time? What consequence should this choice have?
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 12:24:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Gaven's Bihotch
Insurance does not cover the whole ship. you get what you pay for. If you don't want risk, Why are you playing a multiplayer game?
I don't mind risk. I do mind people not receiving the full consequences of their choices - good and bad.
You mean like choosing to make ISK while AFK for 5-10 minutes at a time? What consequence should this choice have?
It already has the consequence of being far more susceptible to being suicide ganked. If I lose my ship because I'm not paying attention, that's my fault, now isn't it?
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Dev Rom
Extreme Solutions
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 13:07:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Aria Selenis
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic.
It is as realistic as your character immortality and the capacitor tecnology that produce energy from nothing. Come on.
If you could open a in-eve insurance company, you will REALLY pay insurance to ganker and to character that loose ships in nullsec wars?? How could you make money from that???
I want to build a insurance corporation, but I cannot do that because the actual insurance mechanics are so unbalanced that i cannot compete. Anctual npc insurance corp cannot loose money, they always win!! What about that?
So I support that.
|
Hoo Is
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 15:50:00 -
[159]
Only time insurance should be paid out is if a killright is granted.
No insurance payouts to CONCORD deaths, war deaths, NPC deaths, or any thing where you were blinky red on anyone elses screen (can flipping or looting).
|
Gaven's Bihotch
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 19:14:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Aria Selenis
For the infinitely and repeatedly unanswered question (as usual, most arguments are ignored, with a straw man focused on something foolish someone said.):
For everyone who is whining about how insurance doesn't operate like a real insurance company, why aren't you whining about how CONCORD doesn't operate like a real police force?
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic.
This times infinity
You guys beg for realism? What if you get it? Concord is not by any means going to be able to save the day anymore, think about those ships, their cost and what it would take to put them in every high sec system. And say goodbye to sentry guns up the wazoo. I mean seriously, the way the ships themselves is rather far fetched in terms of no upkeep over time, and no fuel costs. You want this to be more realistic? it's going to be even worse for you
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 20:30:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Gaven's Bihotch
Originally by: Aria Selenis
For the infinitely and repeatedly unanswered question (as usual, most arguments are ignored, with a straw man focused on something foolish someone said.):
For everyone who is whining about how insurance doesn't operate like a real insurance company, why aren't you whining about how CONCORD doesn't operate like a real police force?
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic.
This times infinity
You guys beg for realism? What if you get it? Concord is not by any means going to be able to save the day anymore, think about those ships, their cost and what it would take to put them in every high sec system. And say goodbye to sentry guns up the wazoo. I mean seriously, the way the ships themselves is rather far fetched in terms of no upkeep over time, and no fuel costs. You want this to be more realistic? it's going to be even worse for you
Actually, I have often argued for fuel costs, maintenance fees, and jump/docking costs to be added to the game.
But apparently, people find those ideas offensive. 
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Brengholl
|
Posted - 2009.07.23 00:05:00 -
[162]
Edited by: Brengholl on 23/07/2009 00:06:32
Originally by: RedSplat
No.
Highsec isnt risk free, it isnt intended to be. Your proposal is motivated by a desire to see Highsec become safer, riskless gameplay strikes at the heart of what makes EVE unique.
No.
You want to nerf an entire profession without providing ample recompense or alternatives to gankers.
Further, Suicide Ganking is the only way to engage in pvp with people in NPC corps abusing the fact they cant be wardec'd. Remove insurance payouts and NPC corps will be totally unassailable by nature of suicide ganking being economically impossible to support.
No.
You already have the tools as a player to defend yourselves and more, strike back at gankers; stop whining, start doing something about it in game.
i think that these arguments are good, and stand out from all the other pirate whining but i dont agree one bit
1. suicide ganking will not stop with the proposed change, it will just make it a bit more difficult, and hisec just a bit safer... safer NOT safe
2. the "profession" needs to be nerfed, and the alternative provided is to pick suicide targets more carefully... what's the difference if you lose 15mil isk or 50mil isk (BC example) if you suicide an indy with 1Bil loot
and as for the only argument i find a bit valid:
if someone runs from a dec into an NPC corp it means they disbanded they're corp (for the most part) and run away from you to hide under concord's skirt. They have no pos-es, no systems, no nothing, or if they have then those are defensless. All they can do is run missions, so you have won the war. What else do you want. want them to quit the game and die in RL?
3. whell a T1 railgun and a cruiser of a year-old trader or miner arent exactly the tools you need to fight of gankers.
... now if some of those new bounty systems that are proposed all around got implemented then i would agree with you on the last part, but would still support the OP
|
Gaven's Bihotch
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 04:38:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Dev Rom
Originally by: Aria Selenis
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic.
It is as realistic as your character immortality and the capacitor tecnology that produce energy from nothing. Come on.
If you could open a in-eve insurance company, you will REALLY pay insurance to ganker and to character that loose ships in nullsec wars?? How could you make money from that???
I want to build a insurance corporation, but I cannot do that because the actual insurance mechanics are so unbalanced that i cannot compete. Anctual npc insurance corp cannot loose money, they always win!! What about that?
So I support that.
So first you argue for unbelieveable ideas, then you argue against them? make up your mind |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 08:14:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Gaven's Bihotch
Originally by: Aria Selenis
For the infinitely and repeatedly unanswered question (as usual, most arguments are ignored, with a straw man focused on something foolish someone said.):
For everyone who is whining about how insurance doesn't operate like a real insurance company, why aren't you whining about how CONCORD doesn't operate like a real police force?
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic.
This times infinity
You guys beg for realism? What if you get it? Concord is not by any means going to be able to save the day anymore, think about those ships, their cost and what it would take to put them in every high sec system. And say goodbye to sentry guns up the wazoo. I mean seriously, the way the ships themselves is rather far fetched in terms of no upkeep over time, and no fuel costs. You want this to be more realistic? it's going to be even worse for you
Ok, but then it will follow you in low sec too, give you infinite duration global criminal countdown (at least as long as you aren't caught and get your trial and prison sentence), investigate where you live, seize your assets and all your clones, lock you in a cell if you are caught, kill you if you make resistance.
Are you so sure now that you want a realistic CONCORD?
A chance of not losing a ship when doing a gank against some day/month (compressed time instead of years/decades as this is a game) of locked character? 
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 14:04:00 -
[165]
Unsupported.
Originally by: RedSplat
No.
Highsec isnt risk free, it isnt intended to be. Your proposal is motivated by a desire to see Highsec become safer, riskless gameplay strikes at the heart of what makes EVE unique.
No.
You want to nerf an entire profession without providing ample recompense or alternatives to gankers.
Further, Suicide Ganking is the only way to engage in pvp with people in NPC corps abusing the fact they cant be wardec'd. Remove insurance payouts and NPC corps will be totally unassailable by nature of suicide ganking being economically impossible to support.
No.
You already have the tools as a player to defend yourselves and more, strike back at gankers; stop whining, start doing something about it in game.
You may gather i dont support removing insurance from CONCORD shiploss.
/Thread
_______
Local is fine, period.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 14:33:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
Originally by: Red Splat
No.
Highsec isnt risk free, it isnt intended to be. Your proposal is motivated by a desire to see Highsec become safer, riskless gameplay strikes at the heart of what makes EVE unique.
No.
You want to nerf an entire profession without providing ample recompense or alternatives to gankers.
Further, Suicide Ganking is the only way to engage in pvp with people in NPC corps abusing the fact they cant be wardec'd. Remove insurance payouts and NPC corps will be totally unassailable by nature of suicide ganking being economically impossible to support.
No.
You already have the tools as a player to defend yourselves and more, strike back at gankers; stop whining, start doing something about it in game.
You may gather i dont support removing insurance from CONCORD shiploss.
/Thread
That made me giggle considering that the thread has gone on for 6 pages after that post.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 16:42:00 -
[167]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 24/07/2009 16:42:07
You want funny?
Every single reason for saying no is utterly stupid.
Even in-spite of the fact that this in no way hurts the criminal profession.
Other than taking away "free ISK"
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
=========================
Dependable, Honorable, Intelligent, No-nonsense
Vote Herschel Yamamoto for CSM! |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 20:17:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 24/07/2009 16:42:07
You want funny?
Every single reason for saying no is utterly stupid.
Even in-spite of the fact that this in no way hurts the criminal profession.
Other than taking away "free ISK"
But Drake, you know everyone likes free ISK.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Nian Banks
Minmatar
Berserkers of Aesir
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 02:44:00 -
[169]
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 24/07/2009 16:42:07
You want funny?
Every single reason for saying no is utterly stupid.
Even in-spite of the fact that this in no way hurts the criminal profession.
Other than taking away "free ISK"
But Drake, you know everyone likes free ISK.
And I would like a free **** *** but I aint getting one, should I complain because noone wants to give me one?
Seriously, suicide gankers are giving miners a good reason not to mine. and then they just mission and hey we all know missions are broken because they give just as much minerals as mining. its a big WTF from me.
Spread the love a little <isk to missions, <isk to suicide gankers, >isk to miners and industrialists. Then maybe we are getting close to how it should be.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 12:55:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Gaven's Bihotch
Originally by: Aria Selenis
For the infinitely and repeatedly unanswered question (as usual, most arguments are ignored, with a straw man focused on something foolish someone said.):
For everyone who is whining about how insurance doesn't operate like a real insurance company, why aren't you whining about how CONCORD doesn't operate like a real police force?
Show me a police force that responds in a matter of seconds and never fails, and then get back to me on why insurance has to be realistic, as opposed to a game mechanic.
This times infinity
You guys beg for realism? What if you get it? Concord is not by any means going to be able to save the day anymore, think about those ships, their cost and what it would take to put them in every high sec system. And say goodbye to sentry guns up the wazoo. I mean seriously, the way the ships themselves is rather far fetched in terms of no upkeep over time, and no fuel costs. You want this to be more realistic? it's going to be even worse for you
Ok, but then it will follow you in low sec too,
Since when did CONCORD have jurisdiction in lo-sec?
|
Arcane Azmadi
First Flying Wing Inc
Primary.
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 13:46:00 -
[171]
For god's sake, just implement the damn update already! The point the OP made was CCP ALREADY said they'd fix this (whether the whining gankers like it or not) so they should just stop procrastinating and DO it!
|
Miss Understandings
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 15:28:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Arcane Azmadi
For god's sake, just implement the damn update already! The point the OP made was CCP ALREADY said they'd fix this (whether the whining gankers like it or not) so they should just stop procrastinating and DO it!
I love that word and indeed, just implement it CCP. You said it would be dealt with soon, now keep your promise.
|
Sans Honore
Gallente
Wirfadam Productions LTD
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 16:03:00 -
[173]
Not supported at all, in any way. No.
|
qwerua
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 19:59:00 -
[174]
Dis issue, support it needz!
|
Keitoshi Yamada
MJOCO Botanical Entheogenics Division
Mjolnir Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 20:22:00 -
[175]
God, everyone that has anything against this proposal doesn't do a good job at /hiding/ the fact that nerfing this would ruin the one thing that they enjoy doing in the game.
EVE is a game about risk/reward.
Suicide Ganking has no risk, and lots of reward. In some cases more than L4 missions. I watched a freighter full of capital ship parts get suicide ganked a couple weeks ago, the loot from that would've been wondrous if I was a part of it...
If there weren't insurance payouts for illegal activities, then it'd force suicide gankers to pick targets that'd offset their loss.
Currently, the /police/ offset your /criminal/ activities..
Doesn't make any sense at all.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:15:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: NereSky
Both self destruct and Ship loss through Concorde should invalidate the insurance on the ship -- i totally agree, what insurance company in their right mind would insure ships lost in these circs?
In what circumstances of ship loss would an insurance company pay?
0.0 - never
lo-sec - never
ratting - never
mining in a 0.8 or lower - never
missioning - never
pirating - never
anti-pirating - never
war-dec (either side) - never
paying 40% above market value for a single 30% premium? - never
"Insurance" in EvE has nothing to do with RL concepts of insurance.
Just as RL concepts of law enforcement have nothing to do with a situation where immortal pilots who are allowed to fly battleships with nuclear weapon around "safe" areas. And where we can pay off the police to ignore huge battles directly outside public ports. You're trying to apply the rules and mores of 21st century western suburban civilization to a a game set in a hypertechnological far future with radically different cultures.
This man has made the points.
Not supported, stop whining about suicide gankers. There's plenty of ways to keep yourself safe.
♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Keitoshi Yamada
Caldari
MJOCO Botanical Entheogenics Division
Mjolnir Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:32:00 -
[177]
Edited by: Keitoshi Yamada on 28/07/2009 22:32:59
Originally by: Awesome Possum
This man has made the points.
Not supported, stop whining about suicide gankers. There's plenty of ways to keep yourself safe.
The point of the topic wasn't whining about the act of suicide ganking, that's all and good.
The point of the topic is how nonsensical it is for CONCORD to pay /you/ for breaking the law.
I've never had a problem with suicide ganking, and I also don't think removing insurance payout would stop or even slow the act of doing much at all. It would just make you pick your targets more intelligently.
You won't just suicide gank a floating destroyer for lols.
You won't just suicide gank a caracal on his way to a mission.
You'll suicide gank a cov ops frig for the possibility of carrying BPO's.
You (or a scout character) would scan cargos of industrials and pick ones with juicy cargo for you to gank.
You'd make more profitable decisions to offset your loss, a loss which there is absolutely no reason for the police force to pay for.
It'd be like if police paid for your car that got wrecked while they were chasing you.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 01:25:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Keitoshi Yamada
It'd be like if police paid for your car that got wrecked while they were chasing you.
Quote:
Just as RL concepts of law enforcement have nothing to do with a situation where immortal pilots who are allowed to fly battleships with nuclear weapon around "safe" areas. And where we can pay off the police to ignore huge battles directly outside public ports. You're trying to apply the rules and mores of 21st century western suburban civilization to a a game set in a hypertechnological far future with radically different cultures.
ITS A GAME
Stop repeating yourself.
EVE is PVP, nonconsensual PVP is PVP
There are already consequences to shooting someone you're not 'allowed' to. Stop trying to make it impossible, because that's what you're aiming for.
This isn't WOW, there are no safe zones (except docked) where you can get your character to and no one's allowed to hit you anymore.
If you don't want PVP, log. Even docked playing the market you have people out for your blood.
♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 01:35:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
ITS A GAME
I'm well aware of the fact that it's a game. that's why I am using the approved process to bring something to the attention of the player's representatives that I don't agree with in the game mechanics. If this was real life, I'd have sued someone already.
Originally by: Awesome Possum
There are already consequences to shooting someone you're not 'allowed' to. Stop trying to make it impossible, because that's what you're aiming for.
Despite what other people may have said, this is not what I am aiming for. I am simply aiming to make suicide gankers suffer the same moment of pause when they undock as I do. It only seems fair. Miners have to decide what to mine to maximize profits. Manufacturers have to decide what to manufacture for the same reason. Why should the suigankers get a pass on that decision just because they're being subsidized by the system?
All I want is for the suicide gankers to have to think before they shoot. Why are you so against leveling the playing field?
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 05:00:00 -
[180]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 30/07/2009 05:06:24
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 30/07/2009 05:04:00
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 30/07/2009 05:01:39
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Keitoshi Yamada
It'd be like if police paid for your car that got wrecked while they were chasing you.
Quote:
Just as RL concepts of law enforcement have nothing to do with a situation where immortal pilots who are allowed to fly battleships with nuclear weapon around "safe" areas. And where we can pay off the police to ignore huge battles directly outside public ports. You're trying to apply the rules and mores of 21st century western suburban civilization to a a game set in a hypertechnological far future with radically different cultures.
ITS A GAME
Stop repeating yourself.
EVE is PVP, nonconsensual PVP is PVP
There are already consequences to shooting someone you're not 'allowed' to. Stop trying to make it impossible, because that's what you're aiming for.
This isn't WOW, there are no safe zones (except docked) where you can get your character to and no one's allowed to hit you anymore.
If you don't want PVP, log. Even docked playing the market you have people out for your blood.
Last I checked.. this thread is about revoking of Insurance for getting CONCORD'd.
What the #### does this have to do with PVP?
Stop derailing the thread.... or go make your own thread about PVP'ing because this has nothing to do with it.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |