| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
The Aduro Protocol
   |
Posted - 2009.09.30 07:47:00 -
[1]
Don't do this CCP!
This is a HORRIBLE idea that means that people can field ships with excellent performance at virtually no cost.
Unless you lower the mineral cost on the ships there is absolutely no reason for these ships to suddenly become cheaper.
Think of the ISK -- tech 2 ships are an ISK sink. You lose one, you eat the whole loss. This causes you to fit them aggressively so you get the most performance out of them. If you soften the blow, people are going to field more of them and more of them are going to likely be more poorly fitted, because 'they can afford to lose them.'
Tech 2 / Tech 3 / Faction ships should not be insurable. The price for performance is perfect as it is.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:08:00 -
[2]
Seconded. Why the sudden Isk Faucet? (Yes its a Faucet. The only people who are going to put isk into the original "Sink" are going to get that isk back + more) ITs completely pointless and its taking a sudden opposing viewpoint on the fact that Many players take upon with insurance being a bad idea. Its another in a series of changes lately that make me go 
_____________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
 Originally by: CCP Fallout
:facepalm:
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:14:00 -
[3]
I'm hearing that the material requirements to produce the ships have been changed (increased) but I think this is due to the upcoming changes related to moon mineral production and the redistribution of r64 materials etc. throughout the new framework.
Either way, I say just remove all insurance and be done with it. Problem solved.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:16:00 -
[4]
Well I guess it is a way to bring t2 prices down 
While I dont think insurance is that necassary, I do think it would at least make some ships more viable in pvp such as field command and t2 bs...
Maybe cruiser and below shouldn't get insurance and bc+ does get insurance?
*shrug*
The only thing I like about this is that it boosts the casual player, so they dont have to rat for years to get a stockpile of decent t2 ships..
EVE Trivia EVE History
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:26:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I'm hearing that the material requirements to produce the ships have been changed (increased) but I think this is due to the upcoming changes related to moon mineral production and the redistribution of r64 materials etc. throughout the new framework.
Either way, I say just remove all insurance and be done with it. Problem solved.
If this is indeed the case I will stop my rantmode, but otherwise without a CCP Statement /flameon.
_____________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout
:facepalm:
|
Real Poison
Minmatar
Stormlord Battleforce
Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:30:00 -
[6]
huh? raising insurances?
sounds awesome! any link with more info?
in contrast to the OP i don't think t2 should be an isk sink anymore.
and what could be done wrong? even if you triple the payouts for current t2 it'll still be ok.
|
Mashashige
Minmatar
Eternal Perseverance
Hellstrome Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:31:00 -
[7]
****
YOU
CCP
YOU
GUYS
ARE
****ING
MORONS
Is what I would have said had this change been for real - but ccp are stupid enough to do something like this. Right guys?
guys? guys?!?!?!?!
....
Anywho, I bet there's a reason for all of this (maybe moon minerals changes or whatever), it just sucks for it to be hidden and not even discussed by ccp - I mean, christ, is it so hard to add a patch note about it? Or a little explanation about the meaning/reasons behind it? Its not like they just changes a description of a ship or something (which they note in the notes btw...) - this **** has the potential to change much of the pvp scene in eve.
=======================================
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity." |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:36:00 -
[8]
I am guessing you are reacting to a change on SiSi?
The sized rigs made all T2 combat ships affordable (cost up to half a hull before), removing any more of their cost will push all T1 options into the background.
With little to no cost associated with losing T2 ships they will be used as throw-aways just like T1 hulls are.
T2 should remain that which you strive for, not just character skill wise, but ISK and player skill wise.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:36:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Real Poison
huh? raising insurances?
sounds awesome! any link with more info?
in contrast to the OP i don't think t2 should be an isk sink anymore.
and what could be done wrong? even if you triple the payouts for current t2 it'll still be ok.
For example, plat insurance on the Zealot was 50mill now when i looked on SISI. PRorator up from 8mill to 28mill...etc.
_____________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout
:facepalm:
|
Peryner
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:53:00 -
[10]
ok wait... if you lost less when a ship is destroyed... wouldn't that increase the price? as more would die, thus more would be bought?
|
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:05:00 -
[11]
I wonder, should the insurance be increased on T2 ships, will it make them viable to be used in suicide ganks?
------------------------------------------------
You either need a punch up the throat or a good shag.
Nobody round here is offering the second one therefore your choices are limited! |
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:31:00 -
[12]
|
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:45:00 -
[13]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Why is it we have to drag every little piece of information out of you kicking and screaming? 
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:53:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Why is it we have to drag every little piece of information out of you kicking and screaming?
Because it just wouldn't be fun otherwise.
_____________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout
:facepalm:
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium.
Aggressive Dissonance
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:59:00 -
[15]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
|
Kaito Haakkainen
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:17:00 -
[16]
I'd much rather see insurance drop a certain percentage of the ships build materials at your clone station. No more ISK faucet, no more insurance fraud, and the value replaced is more closely tied to the market value of the ship.
No insurance would just lead to less targets.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:33:00 -
[17]
One of the questions is: will this create a floor price for T2 production?
And that floor price is based on invention costs or BPO costs?
|
houndbite
Gallente
Sacred Templars
Atropos.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:43:00 -
[18]
Ok.. You don't have a clue there has been people asking for this for a long time now.. CCP feels its a good idea who are you to step in and tell them what to do.
Yeah so what if we can feild Tech 2 ships with tech 2 fit at virtualy no cost.
You don't even know how much the insurances is going up by.
And since when has it been up to you who flys what and what its gunna cost them is CCP want to do something THEY doing it with out people like you (Siigari kitawa). Judgeing their idea
|
Marmios
Elite Aeronautic Developer Syndicate
Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:48:00 -
[19]
Wait wait... you mean even non r64 holders can now afford pvp? teh win :D
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:55:00 -
[20]
this is a big change to tech 2. given yes it takes so long to save for em. And the insurance only seems to cover if it goes through as is ships then youre going to get a lot back this will just boost tech 2 demand. 50% seems to be fair 50m to replace a zealot and then 50m insurance. REmember the skill requirements are being lowered to for a lot of tech 2
So either thye are reducing the isk sink, discouraging macros and increasing the in line with the 00 push to get more people out of empire then yes this makes sense just more quicker pew pew in line with the sov changes
Theres something missing and i think that is going to be a full range of tech 3 ships.
So 100% rebate on tech 1 at max insurance
50% rebate on tech 2
and mineral cost maybe 1-2% on tech 3 cruisers ( and maybe frigates, destroyers, battlecruisers and battleships ?)
|
Shade Millith
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:00:00 -
[21]
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.
Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid
--------------------------------------------
|
Merfio
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:06:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.
Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid
Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:14:00 -
[23]
CCP. WTF ?
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:16:00 -
[24]
Yup i expect the changes will be altered even 30% of full t2 cost would push the isk around and make it quicker to get into t2 especially if we are about to get hit with a full pack of tech 3 ships from frigs to battleships. Wormhole space becomes the new battleground. But yeah if dypso etc is about to become more common then it makes sense that the demand side for t2 would be kicked up as well and quickest way to make people risk their ships in pvp is to give em more back if they loose it and insurance is that avenue
|
Mikayla Grey
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:19:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Merfio
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.
Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid
Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....
It turns t1 cruisers into useless junk(even more than already), gives a bigger advantage to older players, and removes the exciting part of pvp where you actually risk something.
|
MIND SCR4MBLER
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:21:00 -
[26]
why is this such a bad idea?
if you own a moon goo rich alliance, have tons of isk and T2 BPO's you can basically field your T2 fleet for free, whereas a non-moon goo owning roaming gang can't field T2 ships without a multi-billion loss per fleet battle that is entirely one sided, so i can see how large goo holding alliances would think this was a bad idea :) - btw since you can insure capital ships such as carriers and dreads its a bit odd you cant insure a HAC 1/10th the price....
If T3 is the new T2, then its logical that T2 should now be insurable, to encourage people to use T2 then T3 is the new T2. I'm sure CCP are very aware lots of T2 ships and faction ships are simply too expensive to PVP unless you have a moo goo isk tap to rely on, therefore making them insurable allows you to reduce the isk sink needed to play with them.
This is a good change because
More PVP with T2 means more T2 in lowsec/nullsec - more piracy targets, more PVP encouragement and more T2 salvage.
It allows non goo holding non BPO holding alliances to field ships on a equal basis.
if extended to faction ships it stops them becoming PVE hanger queens that never step out of empire.
Unless you have silly isk nobody is going to risk 100m for 30 secs of gateblob carnage, at least with insurance you might feel it worth it because the loss isnt so big and you have a fighting chance of killing someone else too.
the problem is when ships go beyond a certain cost psychologically people just wont field them for PVP, because for most ppl its too much grind to get the isk to pay for the losses, sisi faction test shows if you gave everyone 10 faction ships with no cost consequence they would throw them away on PVP like disposable frigates, surely anything that encourages more PVP/risk taking is good for the game as a whole, if it means the goo holding alliances face some proper fleet competition then boo hoo, im sure they have enough resources to recover, but for everyone else its win, especially inventors since bigger demand and more ships going pop = profit.
|
Shade Millith
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:21:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Merfio
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.
Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid
Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....
ANY insurance for T2 is stupid
If you wanna fly HAC's you have to pay for it. Too expensive? Fly a BC
--------------------------------------------
|
Linas IV
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:26:00 -
[28]
Dear CCP-Devs:
Please don't do anything like it!
non-T1-Insurance is Stupid!
This will be the final nail in the coffin for small Gang-PVP
|
Mashashige
Minmatar
Eternal Perseverance
Hellstrome Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:28:00 -
[29]
GO GO WORLD OF WARCRAFT!
Oh wait, eve is consequence based pvp no?
FFS maybe I should start trolling the forums more, seems like any stupid idea trolls raise up gets promoted in no time, and yet fixing projectiles took *only* 2 years ish? (btw so far the changes have been so underwhelming it might just be best not to change anything - atleast then when I lose I ship I can blame it on ****ty weapons).
Also, biggest issue with this whole **** isn't the change itself (though I think its somewhat stupid, though I wont cry about being able to replace t2 cruisers) - the issue is that CCP likes to introduce changes to the game without telling anybody, just waiting on someone to find them and then start a ****storm on the forums.
OH WAI, IS CCP TROLLING US?!?!
=======================================
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity." |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:29:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Linas IV
Dear CCP-Devs:
Please don't do anything like it!
non-T1-Insurance is Stupid!
This will be the final nail in the coffin for small Gang-PVP
How? Seriously, Unless it's a BS RR gang most people seem to be using T2 ships in small gangs anyway.
|
Linas IV
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:33:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Linas IV on 30/09/2009 11:34:46
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
How? Seriously, Unless it's a BS RR gang most people seem to be using T2 ships in small gangs anyway.
It will completly obsolete any T1-sub-Bs ship! (except for newbs)
And whats the point in killing a Hac or CS if its cheaper then a BS. Where is the risk vs Reward?!?
|
Merfio
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:35:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Merfio on 30/09/2009 11:37:26
Originally by: Shade Millith
Originally by: Merfio
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.
Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid
Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....
ANY insurance for T2 is stupid
If you wanna fly HAC's you have to pay for it. Too expensive? Fly a BC
Says the man who get T2 reimbursment since years. Cmon wake up and stop lobbying.
In 0.0 alliances roaming is t2 only since a long time. Dont know how that should change it. You got t1 frig ? youre uselesss now and will be after Dominion so plz stop crying.
|
Mikayla Grey
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:43:00 -
[33]
Originally by: MIND SCR4MBLER
why is this such a bad idea?
if you own a moon goo rich alliance, have tons of isk and T2 BPO's you can basically field your T2 fleet for free
Confirming that minerals you mine are free.....
|
Shade Millith
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:43:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Merfio
Edited by: Merfio on 30/09/2009 11:37:26
Originally by: Shade Millith
Originally by: Merfio
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.
Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid
Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....
ANY insurance for T2 is stupid
If you wanna fly HAC's you have to pay for it. Too expensive? Fly a BC
Says the man who get T2 reimbursment since years. Cmon wake up and stop lobbying.
In 0.0 alliances roaming is t2 only since a long time. Dont know how that should change it. You got t1 frig ? youre uselesss now and will be after Dominion so plz stop crying.
I'd like to know where the 130 mil is for the last eagle I lost in a HAC gang is, and the 130 mil for the last cerb I lost is, and the 20 mil for the last crow I lost is, and the 20 odd mil for the last manticore I took on a suicide bombing op.
Funny that, I provide all my OWN ships. I've NEVER received anything from any alliance I've been in for T2 losses. Which is, funnily enough, why I fly BC's primarily.
--------------------------------------------
|
MIND SCR4MBLER
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:58:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Mikayla Grey
Originally by: MIND SCR4MBLER
why is this such a bad idea?
if you own a moon goo rich alliance, have tons of isk and T2 BPO's you can basically field your T2 fleet for free
Confirming that minerals you mine are free.....
well up until recently we all know ferrogel was for some ppls.....
|
Deva Blackfire
Viziam
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 12:34:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Merfio
Says the man who get T2 reimbursment since years. Cmon wake up and stop lobbying.
In 0.0 alliances roaming is t2 only since a long time. Dont know how that should change it. You got t1 frig ? youre uselesss now and will be after Dominion so plz stop crying.
I dont get reimbursement for t2. I fly ONLY t2 (well, except BS). And i do not want to see any insurance on them. Actually id love if CCP could remove insurance even from t1.
|
Harotak
THE FINAL STAND
The Final Stand.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 12:53:00 -
[37]
In other news, I made about 30m isk buying and self destructing hyperions last night. Kinda funy when people sell them below the payout-minus-premium cost.
|
Gespenst Jager
Pumpkin Scissors
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:04:00 -
[38]
Yay! t2 insuranse!!!  Small alliances which do not have compensation programs will be very grateful. Less pve, more pvp!
|
Koyama Ise
Caldari
Equestrian Knight Order of Lolicon
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:18:00 -
[39]
To everyone emo raging the **** out.
The increase is 100% of the previous amount I believe. The Ishtar returns 50,469,992.00 isk on insurance, subtracting the 15,140,997.60 isk you payed for the insurance coverage of 12 weeks, that totals to 35,328,994.40 isk.
The current mediam selling price of Ishtars in empire is 130,654,999.00 isk. The gap after insurance is: 95,326,004.60 isk.
I would like to stress THIS IS MINOR. THIS IS NOT A BIG CHANGE. THIS IS NOT GAME BREAKING. Stop opposing change and sit the **** down, and shut the **** up!
---
Koyama Ise, Applying logic in areas where it is logical to do so. |
Rudolf Miller
Dawn of a new Empire
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:19:00 -
[40]
NOT SUPPORTED
Zealot costs 125 mil
Insurance costs 15 mil
Total Bill: 140 mil
Insurance Payout: 50.5 mil
Isk loss 89.5 mil
Problem?
|
Okonaa
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:25:00 -
[41]
its great, because
- might increase the market value of t2 ships (prices for ships go slightly up)
- more t2 ships in pvp instead of t1
you still have to pay alot of money to insure the ship and you still lose alot of money when losing your t2 ship.
|
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:31:00 -
[42]
Still big losses but may be to give people more encouragement for those small roaming gangs that are hoped to be more prevalent after Dominion.
------------------------------------------------
You either need a punch up the throat or a good shag.
Nobody round here is offering the second one therefore your choices are limited! |
Kyvon
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:54:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Shade Millith
I'd like to know where the 130 mil is for the last eagle I lost in a HAC gang is, and the 130 mil for the last cerb I lost is, and the 20 mil for the last crow I lost is, and the 20 odd mil for the last manticore I took on a suicide bombing op.
Funny that, I provide all my OWN ships. I've NEVER received anything from any alliance I've been in for T2 losses. Which is, funnily enough, one of thereasons I fly BC's primarily.
Join a better Alliance?
Even my CORP covers ship losses in Corp/Alliance operations...
|
Merfio
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 14:06:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Merfio
Says the man who get T2 reimbursment since years. Cmon wake up and stop lobbying.
In 0.0 alliances roaming is t2 only since a long time. Dont know how that should change it. You got t1 frig ? youre uselesss now and will be after Dominion so plz stop crying.
I dont get reimbursement for t2. I fly ONLY t2 (well, except BS). And i do not want to see any insurance on them. Actually id love if CCP could remove insurance even from t1.
Plz try to see the bigger picture not your own perosnal view. More noobs in HACs means more fun for us c/d?
|
Rolfos
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 14:19:00 -
[45]
Originally by: houndbite
CCP feels its a good idea who are you to step in and tell them what to do.
Isn't it a man's job to question his government?
lol my government feels it's a good idea to commit genocide. Who am I to step in and tell them what to do?
A man chooses, a slave obeys.
True story.
|
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 14:28:00 -
[46]
As someone else said, remove all insurances. Without insurance:
a) T2 ships will become more attractive.
b) Pilots will be more interested in briging the right ship to a specific engagement.
c) Cap ships will be used moderately.
d) Some players will quit EVE and go back to WoW.
|
BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 14:35:00 -
[47]
LOL
look at all the whines!
All this over a slight change to t2 insurance on sisi..
NEWSFLASH
A) Nothing has been announced, stop pretending EVE is dying!
B) WTF is this a problem for? 50% insurance? Looks like all the rich whiners who want to keep their advantage over casual players are going to have a heart attack form such a SHOCKING change 
EVE Trivia EVE History
|
Astal Atlar
Caldari
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 15:34:00 -
[48]
Heh i see carebears moaning. But honestly i like the change and most of my alliance mates like it.
With the corp and aliance reimbusements i will have to spend less time carebearing for isk and more pvping so it is good and needed change.
And while people whine for t1 cruizers they are supposed to be **** compared to t2,and while t1 is good for newbies,i hate to see zealot with t1 guns or ishtar with t1 drones...
At all the dominion is coming with more and more promising i am really eager for the release
|
teji
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 15:37:00 -
[49]
Raise the insurance on T2. Sounds good.
|
Ariel Dawn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 15:40:00 -
[50]
You people complain about anything and everything, don't you?
Slightly more affordable T2 encourages people to use the ships. More fun stuff for PvP! Keep in mind you guys don't work at CCP, chances are that there are likely other changes that will provide attractive ISK sinks in the works.
|
Don Pellegrino
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 15:45:00 -
[51]
Originally by: MIND SCR4MBLER
Originally by: Mikayla Grey
Originally by: MIND SCR4MBLER
why is this such a bad idea?
if you own a moon goo rich alliance, have tons of isk and T2 BPO's you can basically field your T2 fleet for free
Confirming that minerals you mine are free.....
well up until recently we all know ferrogel was for some ppls.....
Dude, for the 100th time on these forums,
stuff that you could sell but choose to use it instead is lost money.
Just like buying stuff.
Choosing stuff over profits = paying money to buy stuff
|
Rooky2001
Black-Wing
Empire of Serenity
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 16:05:00 -
[52]
really bad decision, CCP...
Remove all insurences higher than Tech1... That will be the right way, nothing else. |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 16:18:00 -
[53]
Worst case scenario:
T2 ships end up being reduced in price due to increased availability of moon minerals, Ishtars for example drop in price to 50-55m each and Platinum insurance for the Ishtar on SISI covers 52m, ending with a T2 HAC that is fully insurable.
RE-FRIGGIN-TARDED.
With current prices HACs aren't fully insurable with respect to what is available on SISI at the moment. What if ~52m ISK is the target price CCP wants HACs to be at and they're going to juggle material requirements and material availability to adjust the delivered price to this target?
I just looked at the Astarte's insurance: 34.5m to insure and payout is 115.198m ISK. I think that CCP is clearly looking at restructuring the cost of ships to fit them into a theoretical framework for hull costs.
Interestingly, the Legion's Platinum insurance costs 5.52m and pays out 18.4m on SISI.
The best way to handle this is to simply remove all insurance from the game, or at least remove all insurance from all characters over six months old. Insurance is bad, get rid of it.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Kalia Masaer
Rosa Castellum
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 16:49:00 -
[54]
Insurance is complicated, it is probably the best ISK sink in the game if done correctly as it is though it most likely pays out more than it takes in. Please consider inflation in eve is utterly rampant when you take into effect that mission rewards and bounties poor ISK into the economy every day. Increasing the insurance on T2 ships should theoretically increases the amount of ISK that is removed from the economy. Sadly this will not be the case. But do consider that purchasing a ship in now way removes ISK from the economy other than the small amount in taxes mostly it just moves ISK around.
I personally feel there should be no payout at all for an uninsured ship and that the percentage of return is seriously messed up especially when you consider that it is for 12 weeks who the hell has ships that last 12 weeks. The ships that I have that have lasted that long have not been insured so insurance has actually dumped more ISK into the economy for me than it has removed.
Basic Insurance pays our 10x what you put in.
Platinium Insurance pays out 3 1/3x what you put in.
What needs to be fixed is the risk of insurance, theoretically it should scale with the lose of insured ships. Meaning if someone have never lost a ship or it has been a long time they should get cheap insurance. But if you lose 10 a week you it should hardly be worth insuring a ship. Yes this does have consiquences for gameplay, but right now insurance is illogical.
Ironically best way to probably solve this would be to figure out a way to turn over the actual management of insurance to players brokers who split a degree of the costs with concord, meaning they will have charge appropriately to make isk.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 16:55:00 -
[55]
I think you can make the case that T2 ships are a bit too expensive right now.
But flying (and losing) T2 ships in PvP should be more costly than flying and losing T1 ships in PvP. Making T1 ships be insurable while T2 really aren't is a good way to accomplish this.
You gain increased performance for T2 ships to compesnate for the extra cost. If they cost the same, after insurance, there wouldn't really be a reason to fly T1.
|
Mahke
Aeon Of Strife
Dominatus Atrum Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 17:32:00 -
[56]
CCP, heard about the rising T2 insurance too.
Even if minerals are added to build cost, DO NOT DO THIS.
(a) isk faucet
(b) if the values posted on scrapheap are accurate, T1 and T2 cost to lose will be close enough to make it worth flying t2 always if you have the skills.
(c) insurable non-T1? Just no on principal.
If you do this I will enjoy flying tons of cheap zealots, but, for the general good of the game experience, please don't.
|
Sgt Napalm
SiN. Corp
Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 17:40:00 -
[57]
I like this idea.
It'll bring the cost of flying a decent ship into PvP down. Which means, I can spend more time PvPing and less time PvEing.
Must be nice to be rich and afford a 170Mil Astarte.
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 17:53:00 -
[58]
The short answer is we are not deliberately changing insurance, it is a symptom of the material changes to Tech II ships and you all witnessing a work in progress change (as is always the case with the test server) so you only have a small piece of the jigsaw to go rabid with speculation on so far.
The final insurance values in the next update will be different than the precise values they are today on Tranquillity but not drastically different (a few %).
If you want to start a general debate on insurance and death penalties, it needs to be in another forum and another thread. The important message to take home is the second sentence above.
A blog will be out later this week to talk about in more detail about the tech II material changes and the revenue streams of null sec as previously mentioned in the Alliance tournament interviews or you can come talk to me at fanfest if you are with us this year :).
|
|
Count MonteCarlo
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 19:07:00 -
[59]
I would just like to post saying that all of you whiners sound pretty stupid, seriously
|
AchurAbAbY
Caldari
Universalis Imperium
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 19:15:00 -
[60]
I think you guys are forgetting a basic fact here. On sisi they want you guys out shooting and killing, so ya, they raised the insurance payouts so yall will keep doing what they want you to, testing there mods. Secondly, stop whining about everyone being able to fly t-2, sorry you wont be a small percentage of ppl currently able to field a t-2 ship, sounds like youll have to work at being better at pvp. As for the ppl complaining about pirates being able to fly t-2, maybe yall are blind, but most the pirates i see are already in them, so its a moot point.
|
De Guantanamo
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 19:22:00 -
[61]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The short answer is we are not deliberately changing insurance, it is a symptom of the material changes to Tech II ships and you all witnessing a work in progress change (as is always the case with the test server) so you only have a small piece of the jigsaw to go rabid with speculation on so far.
The final insurance values in the next update will be different than the precise values they are today on Tranquillity but not drastically different (a few %).
If you want to start a general debate on insurance and death penalties, it needs to be in another forum and another thread. The important message to take home is the second sentence above.
A blog will be out later this week to talk about in more detail about the tech II material changes and the revenue streams of null sec as previously mentioned in the Alliance tournament interviews or you can come talk to me at fanfest if you are with us this year :).
cystal ball was better
|
Jamyl TashMurkon
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 19:43:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Count MonteCarlo
I would just like to post saying that all of you whiners sound pretty stupid, seriously
This.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 19:51:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon
Originally by: Count MonteCarlo
I would just like to post saying that all of you whiners sound pretty stupid, seriously
This.
You should both go play counter-strike instead. Or WOW.
|
Kyvon
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 19:51:00 -
[64]
Originally by: AchurAbAbY
I think you guys are forgetting a basic fact here. On sisi they want you guys out shooting and killing, so ya, they raised the insurance payouts so yall will keep doing what they want you to, testing there mods. Secondly, stop whining about everyone being able to fly t-2, sorry you wont be a small percentage of ppl currently able to field a t-2 ship, sounds like youll have to work at being better at pvp. As for the ppl complaining about pirates being able to fly t-2, maybe yall are blind, but most the pirates i see are already in them, so its a moot point.
I think you are forgetting a basic fact here. On sisi they want you guys out shooting and killing, so ya, they made everything on the market 100isk...
|
Random Womble
Minmatar
Emo Rangers
Electric Monkey Overlords
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 20:34:00 -
[65]
Just out of interest have all those ranting forgotten what it was like in 2005/6 before T2 prices became super inflated due to more demand? because I still remember when a scimitar used to cost about 25-35mil or a vaga 50-60mil and insurance back then covered about as much percentage wise as that change, if it had been deliberate, would have done. In fact I used to fly claymores before they became popular and you used to be able to buy them for 60-65mil and the full insurance payout is something like 50-55mil so viably being able to insure T2 ships was in the game ages ago its only a massive increase in demand and therefore mineral prices couple with the inefficiency of invention which have stopped this.
So all you whiners really should quit moaning about the game becoming more carebear friendly in this case. Not that it is actually happening anyway but just keep things in perspective with the past before you start ranting and if you were not around back that far then i guess you just learnt something new.
|
Mikal Drey
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 21:08:00 -
[66]
hey hey
for years people moaned like crazy about TII nsurance rates and pretty much everyone agrees that TII insurance isnt worth the paper its written on. [and the ****ty bugs associated with it]
Now CCP look to be adressing the issue of TII insurance and you people wanna cry about it ? holy ****ing jeebus :/
not everyone is as rich as siigari is aledged to be and a reasonable cost to insure a TII ship with some isk back to ofset the loss is exactly what insurance is all about.
Moon Goo is fubar, TII prices are Fubar, insurance is Fubar, CCP have adressed it. isnt this what everyone wanted ! !
my only complaint about insurance ever since i joined 5 long yrs ago is that 12 weeks of insurance is lame and unrealistic. I wish we could pay an insurance premium for the lifespan of the ship or something much more realistic towards the insurance mechanics.
if you dont like it then fly without insurance FFS, this "change" should help alliances field better quality ships. maybe giving people a reason to fly that expensive ship will serve to push the TII market demand higher and drive pilots into TII ships sooner. this benefits pvp incredibly and gives you a lesser burnout rate and those of us without alts/toons/jitashopping***** can have a higher sustainability with their wallets.
tbh this is a good change
|
thisisnotmikaldrey
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 21:14:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Random Womble
because I still remember when a scimitar used to cost about 25-35mil
current scimmy prices make me a sad panda :'''(
those prices were very recent :/ ******* moon goo sploiters !
|
FOl2TY8
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 00:27:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Worst case scenario:
T2 ships end up being reduced in price due to increased availability of moon minerals, Ishtars for example drop in price to 50-55m each and Platinum insurance for the Ishtar on SISI covers 52m, ending with a T2 HAC that is fully insurable.
That sounds like a best case scenario to me. Of course I don't play Eve 24/7 nor do I have time to grind for ISK.
----------
This post brought to you by the worst PVP'er in Eve |
Korizan
Red Mercury Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 00:35:00 -
[69]
Sounds like insurance is going dynamic.
Instead of a fixed amount it is now based on market build costs.
In other words you will get a percentage, so you could get 30 mill one day and 20 mill the next depending on the markets.
This is all speculation on my part of course, but it would make sense.
|
Mojster Pek
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 00:57:00 -
[70]
MAKE INSURANCE GO AWAY! its for carebears |
Mkiaki
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 00:58:00 -
[71]
More tears please from T2 ship builders, please
|
Gredos
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 02:43:00 -
[72]
I think its a great idea.
|
Don Pellegrino
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 03:47:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Mkiaki
More tears please from T2 ship builders, please
It would reduce T2 ships builders profit margin, but they would probably end up getting more money in the end because of a vastly increased demand.
Who doesnt like a ship that you only really pay the fittings? (a.k.a. T1)
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 04:39:00 -
[74]
Ok chain of thinking
Sov changes = more changes to sov quicker to attack defend. Nuking the moon hoarding of the rare moons. Probably it will change to a development index tying in with system upgrading, planetary colony upgrades, more diverse means of getting youre hands on all moon minerals ( spreading and boosting supply) so that also encourages more pew pew. T2 ships are quicker replaced less grinding, material supply is boosted more smalelr alliances can upgrade ther 1-10 system holdings and start getting dypso ( perhaps even wormhole space) so there goes the isk printing
Like when the t2 bpo became invention slowly ccp has been boosting supply side
So ccp boosts t2 supply side ( mroe minerals and t2 bits, perhaps quicker production of t2 sips and mods also)
Demand side - more pew pew with everything from capital ship changes to lowering skills to t2 ship entry to adding a 10-50% insurance scheme. Ships are more readily available - quicker to replace, easier to produce less of a isk printing machine
Smaller alliances get involved players more willing to fly t2 machines and newbies can get into em quicker. Everything ties into more dynamic and faster
So there u have it and next year we get the uber t3 ships frigs through to battleships to become the new t2, more players in 00 space factional ships get a boost. Even more t2 ships in wormhole space boosting t3 suppleis it all ties in ( titan nerf reduces their importance) down towards dreads carriers and motherships.
Starting to make sense folks, factional ships are boosted as well making them more likley to be used. And then ccp can add the other layer for the older players to tech 3 - this also makes things still more competitive older players get a slight nerf but even then if they have broadbased multiracial skills allows em to get into the ships quicker and fly more.
Its a balance everything designed to reduce and remove mega allance mega blob and it all ties in
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 04:47:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Don Pellegrino
Originally by: Mkiaki
More tears please from T2 ship builders, please
It would reduce T2 ships builders profit margin, but they would probably end up getting more money in the end because of a vastly increased demand.
Who doesnt like a ship that you only really pay the fittings? (a.k.a. T1)
exactly this ties in with my post above also expect a decrease in t2 production time allowing em to be cranked out faster. Expect to see more apsects of ccps across the board changes coming soon. Next patch nextg year will probably be to introduce more wormhole space, more ancient races and t3 additional ships
|
Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 05:40:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Stuff...
You never fail to amaze me.
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar
Clown Punchers.
Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 06:39:00 -
[77]
Originally by: BiggestT
Well I guess it is a way to bring t2 prices down
While I dont think insurance is that necassary, I do think it would at least make some ships more viable in pvp such as field command and t2 bs...
Maybe cruiser and below shouldn't get insurance and bc+ does get insurance?
*shrug*
The only thing I like about this is that it boosts the casual player, so they dont have to rat for years to get a stockpile of decent t2 ships..
Law of demands states that an increase of demand will result in a increase in price.
Supply slopes up, demand slopes down, now shift the demand slope to the right, the price goes up..... (X axis is quantity, y is price.)
Increasing insurance on t2 and t3 drives up prices, not down good folk.
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Stareatthesun
No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down.
Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S |
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 06:57:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
Originally by: BiggestT
Well I guess it is a way to bring t2 prices down
While I dont think insurance is that necassary, I do think it would at least make some ships more viable in pvp such as field command and t2 bs...
Maybe cruiser and below shouldn't get insurance and bc+ does get insurance?
*shrug*
The only thing I like about this is that it boosts the casual player, so they dont have to rat for years to get a stockpile of decent t2 ships..
Law of demands states that an increase of demand will result in a increase in price.
Supply slopes up, demand slopes down, now shift the demand slope to the right, the price goes up..... (X axis is quantity, y is price.)
Increasing insurance on t2 and t3 drives up prices, not down good folk.
If you double demand ie lower skill requirements and insurance. And then if ccp do it right they add more materials to more moons ( no more dypso mafia) u increase moon supply, u increase production speeds on the bpcs - u may notice radar and mag sites have had their supply outputs increased recently ( in anticpation of ? dominions perhaps) so if u can make twice as much and demand doubles u keep stability in pirces
moon materials in wormhole space would just about do it and in 00 finding some way of making each moon have a random chance of producing all materials - perhaps random cycling weekly or something, or tie it in with soviegnty upgrades
|
Winters Chill
Amarr
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 09:00:00 -
[79]
I disagree Siigari
Tech 2 insurance = more people competatively PvPing = totalhelldeath.
I fail to see the bad side of proper tech 2 insurance, except a few GTC warriors who like to feel awesome because thier RL job funds thier faction fit crows/vagabonds/pilgrims/megathrons.
You know who you are...
|
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Burning Horizons
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 10:17:00 -
[80]
Hey Siig, I disagree with you on this.
Going with CCPs on wording in the past that t2 is now considered standard and with more t3 coming out in the future I'm sure it makes sense that the t2 ships would need to be insurable.
Wish I could get on SiSi and look, damn my dial up...
Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. -Mitnal |
Armoured C
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 10:38:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Blane Xero
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Why is it we have to drag every little piece of information out of you kicking and screaming?
Because it just wouldn't be fun otherwise.
the funs is what we look for
it why people like me go on forums :)
Armoured C
Steven Mason
FOR CSM
*with added pirate hat*
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 10:52:00 -
[82]
im on sisi let me buy some t2 ships and attempt to insure them ill post an as is response as of today on the 100% insurance option and the 20% insurance otion ( subject to changes between now and dominions rollout)
Ok viator - 14m at lowest insurance 28m at highest insurance these nromally go for 60-80m on TQ
Feel free to add folks couldnt get market to work
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 12:09:00 -
[83]
Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 01/10/2009 12:14:58
Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 01/10/2009 12:14:29
Originally by: HeliosGal
im on sisi let me buy some t2 ships and attempt to insure them ill post an as is response as of today on the 100% insurance option and the 20% insurance otion ( subject to changes between now and dominions rollout)
Ok viator - 14m at lowest insurance 28m at highest insurance these nromally go for 60-80m on TQ
Feel free to add folks couldnt get market to work
Considering that moon minerals will be nerfed = decrease cost of ships + inscreased insurance value = free t2 ships.
If thats the case CCP is about to broke PvP.
Why change something that worked excellent until now ( non insurable t2 ships ).
Maybe a little expensive , but that would be addresed with moons nerf.
FREE T2 Ships is a VERY BAD IDEA.
Shame on you.
|
BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 12:46:00 -
[84]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The final insurance values in the next update will be different than the precise values they are today on Tranquillity but not drastically different (a few %).
Oh well, there I thought the casual player was getting boosted...meh
/goes back to flying t1
EVE Trivia EVE History
|
FlameRat
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 12:51:00 -
[85]
Boost! Boost! Boost Insurance!
Don't make game only for "true"-pvp pilots.
|
MIND SCR4MBLER
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 13:18:00 -
[86]
Edited by: MIND SCR4MBLER on 01/10/2009 13:21:41
so there is basically two principle sides to this argument,
side 1: jitapricechecker et al, i.e anyone with a isk printing machine such as a permajita markettrader, dyspro moon empire, warchest full of GTC isk: they dont want insurance for T2 because it will make T2 cheaper, and more ppl will then field T2 in PVP because they can afford to lose them without a 10 day grind to get a new one, therefore all these ppl lose their iwin superbbqsaucepwnmobile. they would much prefer the majority are kept too poor to field T2 or the grind too horrendous so they always have a tactical advantage because they can afford to stand the losses since a: they haz isk printing facility or b: they know the odds are in their favour of winning most engagements against skint folk into T1 lolfits.
side 2: everyone else who has a RL, no access to moon empires, BPO's, elaborate scams or billions of isk and a alt for market speculation would like T2 to be made realistically cheaper i.e not a 100m loss for 1 min combat so they can at least have a fair chance of PVP equal combat vs side 1, therefore cheaper parts, quicker builds and insurance to make T2 viable for PVP and not just PVE would be nice.
the builders/moon-goo makers etc win in any case, T2 margins (for those that dont actually invent them or make them but simply speculate by buying on margin) should be aware the complete invention to sale profit on a 1bn marauder at current component retail prices is thinner than thin and mostly stands a loss, so whatever changes is made dont really hurt the inventors/makers since the goo makers/miners win by increased demand and more ship destruction, and the inventors/makers win by quicker stock turnaround.
As for the side 1 who are complaining about their isk advantage iwin button being taken away, who would like everyone too poor to field a T2 to field T1 so they can carry on fielding T2 with a advantage, CCP has already given you a new class to burn your isk on - its called T3. in order for T3 to become the new T2 then its logical T2 has to be closer in price to T1 to get more people "up the ladder"
after all, if you think about it T3 makes T2 effectively obsolete as the technical crown, if CCP plans to introduce T3 on other ship classes like BS, BC, CS etc then its logical that they have to start taking steps to "depreciate" the value both in isk terms and tactical value of using T2 kit.
I dont see many logical reactions to this change that actually favour the player base AS A WHOLE, its really just emoraging from those wealthy enough to stand losing 300m+ per weekend of heavy combat.
Removing the ego of always wanting an iwin button, and the logical response is that anything that reduces the mindless grind the average non plex selling, non alliance subsidized player has to undergo to support PVP losses in their SHIP OF CHOICE is a good thing, people are always whining that Eve is turning into carebears online, yet when CCP takes some logical steps to actually make life in lowsec/nullsec and PVP more attractive to carebears by reducing the grind needed to cover the expense, those that want moar PVP and targets cry like babies about it, because god forbid some of those carebears might actually have nuff T2 skills and some combat that stops your constant "I am legend" status in your superpwnagehaconeshotscarebeardrakes.
if before it was 4 x cerbs vs 2 drakes then surely this change just means 4 x tengus vs 2 cerbs....
as they say. adapt or die. if you dont want to lose your T2 pwnage to a bunch of carebears in HACS then pony up your isks and buy some T3.......
whats the point btw of a marauder other than uber-PVE carebearwagen? at 1bn with no insurance who is honestly going to PVP it?
but please, moar of the emorage, i am lolling over all the uberrichness tears worried poor ppl might start driving nice internetz spaceshipz and they might actually lose a fight on equal terms :)
|
Professor Dumbledore
Amarr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 13:34:00 -
[87]
So your "fix" to high end moons it to make them all worthless? CCP you are so stupid it hurts.
|
Charming Fellow
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 13:39:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Professor Dumbledore
So your "fix" to high end moons it to make them all worthless? CCP you are so stupid it hurts.
boo hoo cry more lil babby
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 13:42:00 -
[89]
You do not get it. Cheaper t2 ships dont bother me.
Free t2 ships do !
|
Professor Dumbledore
Amarr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 13:44:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Charming Fellow
Originally by: Professor Dumbledore
So your "fix" to high end moons it to make them all worthless? CCP you are so stupid it hurts.
boo hoo cry more lil babby
Yes and the main reason for conflict in 0.0 is control over valuable resources. If these go away no conflic, which means no market for ships. Which means all of your stuff won't be bought.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 14:37:00 -
[91]
Originally by: MIND SCR4MBLER
stuff
Forgot something Scrambler.
If the T2 insurance double or treble in payout CCP has just introduced another big isk faucet.
And those isk should leave the game some way.
I suspect that we will not like the isk sinks they will chose.
|
Ruby Khann
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 14:48:00 -
[92]
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2
You do not get it. Cheaper t2 ships dont bother me.
Free t2 ships do !
Did you even read what Chronitis posted, or are you just dense?
The absolute amounts are changing, the Insurance/Cost percentages will stay the same.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 15:25:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Ruby Khann
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2
You do not get it. Cheaper t2 ships dont bother me.
Free t2 ships do !
Did you even read what Chronitis posted, or are you just dense?
The absolute amounts are changing, the Insurance/Cost percentages will stay the same.
I am not familiar with insurance calculation
As long as t2 ships will not become t1, it should be good.
|
Ruby Khann
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 15:28:00 -
[94]
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2
I am not familiar with insurance calculation
So get the fuck out of a discussion about insurance.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 15:30:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Ruby Khann
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2
I am not familiar with insurance calculation
So get out of a discussion about insurance.
Don't evade the swear filter.
_____________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout
:facepalm:
|
Faife
Divine Retribution
Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 16:03:00 -
[96]
apparently a dev post explaining you're all wrong is no match for your idiotic speculation.
well done chaps, carry on and fight that good fightå.
--
Check out my EVE cartoons - most recent: #17 Goomba needs a new job |
Shidhe
Minmatar
The Babylon5 Consortuim
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 16:16:00 -
[97]
I agree with the OP.
T2 prices can be made more sensible by ending the Dyspro/Prom production cap.
There is then no reason to extend insurance.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 16:33:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Ruby Khann
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2
I am not familiar with insurance calculation
So get the fuck out of a discussion about insurance.
According to your logic you cant run a car unsless you know how it works (inside) .
Congrats your a moron.
|
Terra Mikael
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 16:37:00 -
[99]
Meh
|
Hoodat Bee
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 16:42:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
Law of demands states that an increase of demand will result in a increase in price.
Supply slopes up, demand slopes down, now shift the demand slope to the right, the price goes up..... (X axis is quantity, y is price.)
You've completely butchered things.
The law of demand is that the demand for an object is inversely related to its price, holding all else constant. This is key.
See, in your hasty analysis you've buggered the "holding all else constant" part. CCP has said numerous times that they will be holding nothing else constant, and that we know little of the upcoming changes. Let me lay out a few alternative possibilities for you.
The supply curve could be massively increased relative to the demand curve due to increased availability of moon goo and ship building facilities post-sov changes -- prices would likely fall.
Or both supply and demand curves could shrink as alternative goods of higher quality, t3 ships, become more available, and production is shifted to them, with unexpected results for t2 ship prices -- after all, alternatives are a key determinant of demand.
Or there could indeed be an initial increase in price due to increased payouts from insurance -- in which case more suppliers would find a way to enter the market until economic profits were reduced to the break even point.
The takeaway message here is that economic laws never have only one result for any given cause, and declaring that A will inevitably result in B is a good way to look like an ignorant jackanapes. |
Gneeznow
Minmatar
Goo Spew
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 16:44:00 -
[101]
the sky is falling!
|
BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 19:08:00 -
[102]
oh ffs can ppl read?
HINT:
PG2 BOTTOM, CCP REPLY, READ IT.
The sisi stats are in no way representative of a tq change, the real change will only be a few % 
EVE Trivia EVE History
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 20:10:00 -
[103]
Originally by: BiggestT
oh ffs can ppl read?
HINT:
PG2 BOTTOM, CCP REPLY, READ IT.
The sisi stats are in no way representative of a tq change, the real change will only be a few %
Warp to zero was also 'purely an experiment' and 'something to ease travel time on SISI only', and look what happened.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Kachiko Sama
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 20:18:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Warp to zero was also 'purely an experiment' and 'something to ease travel time on SISI only', and look what happened.
They introduced a giant improvement in the game that should have been in since the beginning?
Bad example to choose if you're trying to make a point.
|
Nicoli Voldkif
Caelli-Merced INC.
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 20:19:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: BiggestT
oh ffs can ppl read?
HINT:
PG2 BOTTOM, CCP REPLY, READ IT.
The sisi stats are in no way representative of a tq change, the real change will only be a few %
Warp to zero was also 'purely an experiment' and 'something to ease travel time on SISI only', and look what happened.
Warp to 0km was only a look at reducing the ridiculous 10k bookmarks per player just to make travel semi sane. Everyone with any intelligence/experience was already warping to 0km only new players weren't. Nothing to do with this.
|
Tesal
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 02:07:00 -
[106]
Here is the real reason people are mad, it is because dyspro is getting a huge nerf. No more easy isk for the huge alliances and power blocs.
It is also interesting where the isk goes in this. The shift from high ends to low ends will result in more low sec and 0.0 low end moon mining where a person can actually go out and make a profit putting up a tower. People will fight for even crappy systems, because they can make a home and start turning a profit off of low end moons. Being successful will not be about having the most moons, it will be about having the best team and using your space well. Ironically, the best space in EvE may end up being in Providence, but only because they use it extensively.
This upends the entire order in 0.0, which is exactly what CCP wanted to do. It rewards people who are willing to work for their space with pvp and industry, and punishes AFK empires. That is what CCP said they were going to do. This should have been expected. The status quo was leading us towards a Chinese server situation. Malaise has set in over 0.0 already with a super nap covering most everything. Something had to be done.
never stop posting...with alts.
Now you know what it is to be owned. Mittani alt says hi.
I win. You lose.
|
Lawnchair Commando
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 02:08:00 -
[107]
Ok, here's my two cents:
If you hate the proposed change, quit. And can I have your stuff?
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 02:41:00 -
[108]
/me Gets his insured Vagabond out for a high sec sucide gank
SKUNK
(o)
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 06:46:00 -
[109]
Originally by: BiggestT
oh ffs can ppl read?
HINT:
PG2 BOTTOM, CCP REPLY, READ IT.
The sisi stats are in no way representative of a tq change, the real change will only be a few %
Of the new price CCP think T2 ships will have.
So a change in absolute value is possible while the % value will be the same.
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 10:49:00 -
[110]
The more I consider it, I'm beggining to see the awesomeness of Bellum's "remove insurance". There is essentially zero bad effects* to it, and it fixes the large imbalances regarding loss costs of ships, so on and on.
*No, people are not made to 'do more grinding to PVP'. They could PVP in smaller ships if they cannot fund flying larger. It's not such a outrageous proposition, you know. I learned my trade (piracy) and made my first billion flying Rifters. Sure, I couldn't compete with old and rich players flying nanoHACs, but with training and money I got there, too, after some time. The whole 'people would have to NPC more to make ISK for PVP then' is completely invalid, since you do not NEED to fly something outrageously expensive to PVP.
The whole 'what about the noobs' is solved by just retainint insurance for the first 90 days.
And suddenly Tiers on BCs & up, T1 v T2 prices, and a lot of other stuff make sense when insurance is removed.
Also removes suicide whines, since only ships which are really carrying stupid amounts of ISK with zero tanks get suicided. Those deserve to die.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Dreyloc
Minmatar
Dark-Rising
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 15:25:00 -
[111]
Anything that gets more ships un-docked and fighting is a good thing.
If you don't like insurance how about, instead of just ranting negatively, you propose a solution that does not hurt player participation while also removing insurance. Until you do that, all these angry and insulting posts just hurt your cause.
"Batman has contingencies, why don't you?" - Prism X |
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 16:24:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/10/2009 16:24:42
Originally by: Dreyloc
Anything that gets more ships un-docked and fighting is a good thing.
If you don't like insurance how about, instead of just ranting negatively, you propose a solution that does not hurt player participation while also removing insurance. Until you do that, all these angry and insulting posts just hurt your cause.
People will either risk ISK or they won't and you can't get them to, short of removing death penalties. Some won't PVP even then. People avoid PVP in freaking WOW, and it's death penalities are composed of losing five minutes.
"gets more ships un-docked and fighting" != "gets more HACs undocked and fighting"
Here's some news: you don't need a HAC to PVP. People don't avoid PVP because PVP is too expensive in general; you can PVP in cheap ships very easily as it is. They avoid it because they either don't like losing (which is why the "I need uberest ship to PVP" is so common), or don't want any risk to their game.
The whole "I would have to grind more / avoid PVP" argument is essentially "I HAVE to fly a HAC/BS/CS/T3 cruiser/whatever to PVP", which is total bull. You don't.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Dregek
Pilots Of Honour
Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 17:16:00 -
[113]
look at all the emo tears
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 17:20:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
The more I consider it, I'm beggining to see the awesomeness of Bellum's "remove insurance". There is essentially zero bad effects* to it, and it fixes the large imbalances regarding loss costs of ships, so on and on.
*No, people are not made to 'do more grinding to PVP'. They could PVP in smaller ships if they cannot fund flying larger. It's not such a outrageous proposition, you know. I learned my trade (piracy) and made my first billion flying Rifters. Sure, I couldn't compete with old and rich players flying nanoHACs, but with training and money I got there, too, after some time. The whole 'people would have to NPC more to make ISK for PVP then' is completely invalid, since you do not NEED to fly something outrageously expensive to PVP.
The whole 'what about the noobs' is solved by just retainint insurance for the first 90 days.
And suddenly Tiers on BCs & up, T1 v T2 prices, and a lot of other stuff make sense when insurance is removed.
Also removes suicide whines, since only ships which are really carrying stupid amounts of ISK with zero tanks get suicided. Those deserve to die.
+1 to the fold. Keep 'em coming.
But seriously, every time someone sees a game change that affects them personally in a negative way, they get all butt hurt about it. Why can't people see that a change like removing insurance doesn't affect *just them*. It will affect everyone equally. It's not like EANMs got a CPU increase and now their favorite ship can't use the fit anymore and it only affects that one particular ship. Insurance affects everyone, and in equal fashion.
In six months, people won't even notice it.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Undertow Latheus
Minmatar
Neo Spartans
Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 20:39:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Don't do this CCP!
This is a HORRIBLE idea that means that people can field ships with excellent performance at virtually no cost.
Unless you lower the mineral cost on the ships there is absolutely no reason for these ships to suddenly become cheaper.
Think of the ISK -- tech 2 ships are an ISK sink. You lose one, you eat the whole loss. This causes you to fit them aggressively so you get the most performance out of them. If you soften the blow, people are going to field more of them and more of them are going to likely be more poorly fitted, because 'they can afford to lose them.'
Tech 2 / Tech 3 / Faction ships should not be insurable. The price for performance is perfect as it is.
It's fine as it is right now for a rich bastard like you who had the money to lose both the first and second t3 ships ever made in ways of epic stupidity. Why would it be a bad thing for people to field more t2? You only want to have t1 targets while flying t2?
|
Akita T
Caldari
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 21:46:00 -
[116]
Oh boo-hoo, big deal, the insurances on MARAUDERS with how things are right now would go up by 100 mil or so (and they might end up going up even less in the final version), so T2 ships aren't exactly going to be cheap to lose, just slightly less painfull to lose.
For instance, this is what you'd need for a ME:0 Golem (yeah, I know, best you can get is a ME:-1, but still, the ratios are similar)... the "before//TQ" -> "still changing // now on SiSi" values :
Fermionic Condensates : 2,201 -> 165
Hypersynaptic Fibers : 1,542 -> 1,326
Ferrogel : 6,140 -> 3,223
Phenolic Composites : 4,505 -> 5,225
Nanotransistors : 8,313 -> 24,863
Fullerides : 35,355 -> 33,000
Sylramic Fibers : 180,334 -> 847,264
Titanium Carbide : 382,332 -> 1,279,140
or if you prefer it in moon minerals...
atm.gas : 277.1 -> 828.8
cadmium : 2,073.2 -> 692.5
caesium : 652.6 -> 160.0
chromium : 4,284.7 -> 13,947.5
dysprosium : 1,420.6 -> 532.5
evap.dep : 3,793.9 -> 14,403.8
hafnium : 972.7 -> 610.0
hydrocarbons : 589.3 -> 550.0
mercury : 930.2 -> 958.4
neodymium : 827.4 -> 870.0
platinum : 3,136.6 -> 8,842.2
promethium : 2,085.3 -> 847.0
silicates : 4,106.1 -> 14,125.0
technetium : 866.4 -> 1,378.8
thulium : 550.3 -> 41.3
titanium : 1,911.7 -> 6,395.7
vanadium : 972.7 -> 610.0
In other words "boo-hoo, big deal".
_
Info about our corp | Beginer's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper |
FOl2TY8
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 22:40:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
+1 to the fold. Keep 'em coming.
But seriously, every time someone sees a game change that affects them personally in a negative way, they get all butt hurt about it. Why can't people see that a change like removing insurance doesn't affect *just them*. It will affect everyone equally. It's not like EANMs got a CPU increase and now their favorite ship can't use the fit anymore and it only affects that one particular ship. Insurance affects everyone, and in equal fashion.
Of course removing insurance for everyone will affect everyone. No one will get insurance payouts. What you fail to see is that the casual gamer will not be able to field all the ships that the dedicated player will for every engagement. Sure you can only fly rifters every time but dammit I want to fly a friggin Ishtar every once in a while and as it is NOW I don't have time to grind up the ISK for it. If you remove insurance completely I will never be able to afford flying T2 cruisers.
I'm all for upping the insurance on T2 ships. Makes it more affordable for me so I can fly them more often and have more fun in the video game.
----------
This post brought to you by the worst PVP'er in Eve |
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 22:45:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Undertow Latheus
It's fine as it is right now for a rich bastard like you who had the money to lose both the first and second t3 ships ever made in ways of epic stupidity. Why would it be a bad thing for people to field more t2? You only want to have t1 targets while flying t2?
I think it's bad if people waste moon minerals like that, if they can't figure out how to compete using T1.
I think the whole attitude "why shouldn't CCP make it easier to fly the elite ships" is completely borked. Why should they? Because you're afraid of competing in a T1 ship?
I sure wish I'd get more T2 targets to attack my T1 ships, but unfortunately this has nothing at all to do with insurance or money; it has to do with the relative perceived power of each ships (for instance, in the nano age, HACs thought BCs were loltastic and safe to engage since they could always bugger off).
People don't refuse to attack because it's gotten more expensive (since with medium rigs, it's actually cheaper somewhat; polys were horrendously expensive), people refuse to attack because they're afraid of losing. And that's not going to change even if you drop the loss cost to 10M.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
NightmareX
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 22:48:00 -
[119]
Edited by: NightmareX on 02/10/2009 22:50:27
It's simple. If you don't want to pay any insurance on your ships, then don't pay anything on the insurance then. How hard it that to understand?.
But let CCP get those who want to pay an insurance on their t2 / t3 / faction ships do it IF they want.
And stop whining like cry babys here. You just make you look like an idiot here with that.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
FOl2TY8
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 23:36:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
That casual gamer and the dedicated player are on the same footing; the dedicated player, if he's equally proficient, will lose more ships.
Please elaborate with this statement because I'm not following you.
Originally by: Cpt Branko
That said, if you cannot afford to fly a Ishtar with the currently loltastic amount of insurance removed, then you cannot afford to fly a Ishtar anyway.
I can afford to fly an Ishtar, but just barely. Remove all insurance and now I won't be able to afford it at all because the income I received from T1 losses won't transfer to T2 purchases.
Originally by: Cpt Branko
That said, the Ishtar isn't anything special at all. It's far from a I-win button. It's not such a problem to combat it with the cheaper T1.
I'm not looking for an I-win button (check my sig), I'm looking to experience as much of the game as I can. You remove insurance and I cannot play the Eve that "rich" players get to play.
----------
This post brought to you by the worst PVP'er in Eve |
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 00:15:00 -
[121]
Originally by: FOl2TY8
Originally by: Cpt Branko
That said, the Ishtar isn't anything special at all. It's far from a I-win button. It's not such a problem to combat it with the cheaper T1.
I'm not looking for an I-win button (check my sig), I'm looking to experience as much of the game as I can. You remove insurance and I cannot play the Eve that "rich" players get to play.
The whole idea that you're entitled to use the tools that the "rich" players get the use without being either efficient enough or making ISK quickly enough to afford this is the problem.
I will probably never experience flying a faction BS / Marauder with officer fit with HG and officer implants. I will definitely never experience lol doomsdaying small gangs in a Titan. Truly rich players have and will. Should CCP strive to make everything affordable to me, just because I shun PVE content like the plague and don't want to go plexing/whatever to afford this?
I don't think they should. I personally don't think that CCP should subsidize me just so I can fly any ship on a regular basis.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 00:29:00 -
[122]
Removing insurance would be interesting, but you'd need to rebalance some costs. BS would need to be made cheaper.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 02:09:00 -
[123]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
If you want to start a general debate on insurance and death penalties, it needs to be in another forum and another thread.
Like the many other insurance reform threads that you guys refuse to even acknowledge? Please.
(I want a 40% base price for my totaled car without paying a premium, too.)
____________________
CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 02:40:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
Removing insurance would be interesting, but you'd need to rebalance some costs. BS would need to be made cheaper.
FFS. Why can't you people ('you people being all the idiots who can't grasp a simple concept) understand the fact that INSURANCE forces the current market prices of items like BATTLESHIPS?
Price of payout for platinum insurance - cost of platinum insurance = base battleship price. If you sell for less, it's COST EFFECTIVE to buy the ship, insure it and then SELF DESTRUCT IT for the insurance money.
So if you REMOVE INSURANCE then there is no minimum price that BS hulls can achieve. It's simply supply and demand at that point.
The SAME EXACT SITUATION that the T1 market is in is where the T2 market will end up once the moon minerals get uncorked by the new sov situation and the system upgrade stuff is in place. The low price floor will be dictated by insurance payouts.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
FOl2TY8
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 06:31:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
The whole idea that you're entitled to use the tools that the "rich" players get the use without being either efficient enough or making ISK quickly enough to afford this is the problem.
I will probably never experience flying a faction BS / Marauder with officer fit with HG and officer implants. I will definitely never experience lol doomsdaying small gangs in a Titan. Truly rich players have and will. Should CCP strive to make everything affordable to me, just because I shun PVE content like the plague and don't want to go plexing/whatever to afford this?
I don't think they should. I personally don't think that CCP should subsidize me just so I can fly any ship on a regular basis.
Don't put words in my mouth. I said I'll experience what I can. I am well aware that I will never be able to fly a titan, marauder or even a command ship most likely. Hell, it would be great if I could fly a T2 cruiser. I dont' because I can't afford it. The only thing I'm adding to this discussion is that if CCP raises the payout for T2 insurance it will make it easier for more casual players like myself to purchase and fly T2 more often.
If CCP doesn't raise insurance for T2 I will just keep on doing what I'm doing. If they remove insurance altogether I'll just keep doing what I'm doing or quit and do something else. I'm going to have fun regardless.
Everyone's arguments for the market response to CCP decisions seem a bit silly because although this is the most player driven market in an MMO it is not completely player driven and never will be.
----------
This post brought to you by the worst PVP'er in Eve |
MIND SCR4MBLER
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 14:28:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
Removing insurance would be interesting, but you'd need to rebalance some costs. BS would need to be made cheaper.
FFS. Why can't you people ('you people being all the idiots who can't grasp a simple concept) understand the fact that INSURANCE forces the current market prices of items like BATTLESHIPS?
Price of payout for platinum insurance - cost of platinum insurance = base battleship price. If you sell for less, it's COST EFFECTIVE to buy the ship, insure it and then SELF DESTRUCT IT for the insurance money.
So if you REMOVE INSURANCE then there is no minimum price that BS hulls can achieve. It's simply supply and demand at that point.
The SAME EXACT SITUATION that the T1 market is in is where the T2 market will end up once the moon minerals get uncorked by the new sov situation and the system upgrade stuff is in place. The low price floor will be dictated by insurance payouts.
I think it will be slightly more complex than that,
T1 prices floor is dictated by the insurance cost for sure, because it is only a basic mineral basket to make it up. A lot of T1 production minerals can come from reprocessed loot drops so there is a pretty constant supply of source minerals, the BPO's are seeded and plentiful and you can research the ME to the nth degree to get the cheapest possible cost to achieve that floor price. but T1 production is rarely profitable in big margins because supply will always outstrip demand, and the mineral basket can always come from the loot/ore i mine is free crew.
T2 means a longer production chain, firstly there is the cost of invention (we will ex T2 BPO's for the mo for volume arguments), invention chance and poor ME. then there is the limited volumes 1 BPC per invention chance with either crappy ME and multi runs or good ME and single runs. Then there is the huge component basket that means you need all the T1 mineral basket plus all the T2 components built as well, then you have to cook the lot which on a marauder means the complete start to end process from invention to production to sale can take a couple of weeks, so there is a much bigger utility cost in how much time T2 clogs up your production/invention slots vs T1 which cooks a BS in a couple of hours.
For sure the "base cost" of remarketed i.e second hand T2 will be insurance payouts, but what happens is when the people reselling T2 ships are undercutting base invention/make costs most T2 makers will sit on inventory or switch to more profitable lines, then the supply dries up and prices rise again, since you can't just run a L4s for a week, process the loot and cook a BS or 2 for profit then I do not think T2 prices will change much unless their is significant cuts to the time/material/costs chain. i.e they can cut the build cost but the aggro factor of it taking 2 weeks to build a marauder will still keep suppliers probably low.
looking at the mat changes on sisi as reported i can see this getting horribly borked and T2 being really uneconomical for some reason or other to the point people either dont build ships or only build them for their or their corps own use.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 19:19:00 -
[127]
Originally by: MIND SCR4MBLER
<snipped for space, some very good points you've brought up>
I did a quick review of platinum insurance on SISI:
Ship / insurance cost / payout / minimum possible ship cost due to insurance
- Hyperion / 52.8m / 176m / 123.2m
- Megathron / 31.5m / 105m / 73.5m
- Redeemer / 60.6m / 202m / 141m
- Kronos / 91.4m / 304.5m / 213.1m
- Astarte / 34.5m / 115.2m / 80.7m
- Ishtar / 15.1m / 50.5m / 35.4m
- Arazu / 12.2m / 40.6m / 28.4m
I know that the devs have said 'this is just placeholder stuff and it's not going to TQ', but what if it does go to TQ? Or something similar?
If the new system upgrade game changes uncork moon minerals in the same fashion that invention uncorked T2 BPC availability then we're going to see a dramatic decrease in the cost of the raw moon materials and in turn the base cost of T2 components. Look at where T2 module prices are now compared to before invention. Sub-5m ISK Covert cloaks, Invuln IIs at 2m or so. It's crazy. That kind of pressure will be brought to bear against moon mineral prices if people have the ability to access even a tiny amount of rare moon minerals through system upgrade development.
With insurance CCP is ensuring that prices won't drop below a particular level, ever. People want super cheap ships? Remove insurance and remove the artificial floor for the ship prices.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Fluoroantimonicacid
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 15:19:00 -
[128]
Please don't remove insurance on T1 ships, it is so hard to move and sell stuff relative to just building and self destructing it. Hopefully Cap, T2, and T3 ships will be at the self destruct for money level soon, the isk per hour would be higher than just T1 BS.
(You do not want to see how many BS I have self destructed)
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 17:31:00 -
[129]
i got on at full insurance a zealot payed out 17.5m thats 100% insurance for 5m isk on a 100m baseline ship. If prices fall say 20-30% tats about 30% rebate. Which will just reduce the replacement cost slightly
WIht tech 3 mods and more ships coming this isnt a bad thing. Mid range moon materials will go up, high ends will fall. CCP has balanced and thats good.
Alternative overheat requirements have dropped use all that t1 loot u have and burn em out
Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
LeeManBob
Amarr
V I R I I
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 18:30:00 -
[130]
I find T2 T3 insurance just right. As more EVE is like the RL economy, better it is. i will say even insuance clones with inplants is a good idea. if an insuranc make prices or other things wrong, then its that CCP need to fix. In RL you can have insurance on everything without that make the prices faked up. why do you never bring a T2 BS in a PVP fight? if CCP make T2/T3 ect insurable we will see more T2 BS and CS in fights. insurance makes it even worth training marauders, even you are not a fancy PVE'er.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |