| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Furb Killer
Gallente
   |
Posted - 2009.12.23 10:48:00 -
[31]
The low mineral prices has little to do with the miners. Remove unnamed t1 drops from rats, and then look again what to do.
|
Toramii
Le Moulin Rouge
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 11:05:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Wesfahrn
Very risky solution to the problem. You dont know if it would work as intended. Much better of doing something simple. Like removing Platinum Insurance.
Then start developing EVE Online 2, learning from all the "mistakes" from EVE 1. GoGo
CCP Soundwave (touborg): "...We're going to constantly improve EVE. As I mentioned before, there are no plans for an EVE 2, we're just going to run this one TILL THE END OF TIME..."
|
Davich MacGregor
Minmatar
Stellar Products and Quality Resources
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 11:15:00 -
[33]
This is what happens to stupid people when they have too much to drink. The depth of stupidity falls to levels mere humans cannot fathom. You know that place on your body where the sun doesn't shine? You can put this absolutely dumb idea there. 
Since the company I work for shut down I've been needing a good laugh. Thanks. 
|
Forge Lag
Jita Lag Preservation Fund
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 11:27:00 -
[34]
I have better idea:
1) Remove sec hit.
2) Remove insurance.
Goal achieved.
|
Kriz Lupin
Silver Snake Enterprise
Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 11:34:00 -
[35]
ON top of this I would like you to be able to buy faction standings. I am so tired of getting shot by the Amarr Navy because I did missions. I personally don't care if the isk cost is massive.
|
Lunatic Shakhid
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 11:40:00 -
[36]
You begin with the premise that mineral prices are inflated then go to suggest this is caused by an oversupply. It's a unique economic viewpoint at least.
Also, amnesties are handed out on the agreement that you do not re-offend.
How about another suggestion: You pay twice the normal subscription fees and get a monthly renewable License to Grief.
|
hired goon
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 12:43:00 -
[37]
I support OP's idea
-omg-
|
Hakkan Koftar
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 12:45:00 -
[38]
Or perhaps scrap static insurance costs and payouts and have insurance track a mineral price index.
Essentially, provide the insurance system with regular rates based on a notional sum insured.
|
Melathonis Meradin
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 12:50:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Melathonis Meradin on 23/12/2009 12:50:44
Removing insurance entirely or tying it to Trit prices are far better solutions than an additional static 'cost of doing business' expense that is easily gamed, much as insurance is currently.
There's nothing 'broken' about suicide ganking, but insurance is entirely broken, so it should be removed. The game gets more expensive and risky - that's what attracts people in the first place, sooo...
Post above mine has a decent suggestion. Nominal reimbursement based on mineral prices. But I think it should be VERY nominal and no insurance for deaths to CONCORD.
|
5pinDizzy
Amarr
Pillow Fighters Inc
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 13:30:00 -
[40]
Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 23/12/2009 13:36:09
Originally by: Furb Killer
The low mineral prices has little to do with the miners. Remove unnamed t1 drops from rats, and then look again what to do.
I'm not sure whether I agree or not although I think I probably do.
I think I'm more in favour of hitting the refinery as it stands, seeing as you can pretty much refine anything and get back everything it was made out of pretty much seeing as net yeild can reach 100%. I don't think it should be possible do get it even close to 100%, max skills should go more for around 80% at best.
It's no wonder the minerals in the market price fix all the ships so easily at very least when everything is so easily reprocessed and interchangable with something else.
Problems are:
1. Mining is a braindead profession spammed by hordes of alts that don't exactly deserve more reward, maybe how mining works should be changed first.
2. Change insurance system too.
|
|
|
Hamshoe
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 13:44:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Herr Wilkus
Concord starts a pirate 'amnesty' program - where you pay ISK to have your sec-status improved.
Well, I think the isk farmer lobby would be in complete agreement with you. Bad idea if for that reason alone.
Kicked in the head by a horse, what's your excuse? |
Jones Bones
Final Agony
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 15:23:00 -
[42]
Killin' Hulks everyday yo!
But really, you don't need positive sec status to gank stuff in high sec.
===================
Go Bucks! |
Maryeva Premia
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 17:51:00 -
[43]
The insurance scam puts a floor to mineral prices, I agree.
The scam is directly associated with unlovely and maybe even "game environment detracting" suicide ganking.
Since suicide ganking is artificially isk-cheap (due to low mineral prices) and only costs sec status, you are suggesting trading isk for sec to bring the costs closer to home.
How about another suggestion? Drop the isk out of the equation (at least directly).
I give you......"mineral penance"
With RP elements not too different than the data warehouse centers standings for tags (whatever the name is), how about an exchange of boatloads of specific minerals to some DED agent in the convenient areas of low sec for standing?
That avoids putting a direct isk-per-sec status hard exchange rate in the game. Sec status cost would depend on mineral cost, not fixed isk.
I'm uncertain whether you would want a data center / COSMOS "agents in space" one-time mission based deal or an open-ended "buy all the sec you want with minerals" system.
While the mission style is limited, it does excite me that there would be pirates hanging out in freighters full of minerals at known points in low-sec.
The "buy all you want" system would provide ongoing support to mineral prices, in direct proportion to the popularity of suicide ganking.
Sorry to twist the OP's idea if this is unuseful, I just like the idea but don't like isk exchange rates pegged in the game. I know the insurance scam is one, but I hope my tweak would make it irrelevant rather than introducing another one (isk-per-sec) to combat it.
Just some thoughts.
|
PuffnSnuff
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:22:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Kriz Lupin
ON top of this I would like you to be able to buy faction standings. I am so tired of getting shot by the Amarr Navy because I did missions. I personally don't care if the isk cost is massive.
Technically they do have this. They are called COSMOS agents.
|
Slade Cale
PRAXIS RESEARCH
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:31:00 -
[45]
Why not nullify insurance when killed by Concord, and also implement a degredation factor so that items you use (ships you fly, modules you equip, or somesuch) will eventually have a chance at wearing out? This makes sure there is a constant requirement for minerals, thus making demand go up.
|
Mr Epeen
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:31:00 -
[46]
Let me be sure I have this right.
You get to grief players with no risk due to the high return of insurance payout.
Then you sell the stuff you looted from the poor wretch you just ganked for free.
Then you use the money earned to buy back the minimal sec status loss you took because you weren't stupid enough to pod the guy.
Yeah...I can see where you will have plenty of support for that idea 
Mr Epeen
|
Wesfahrn
WESCORP 2.0
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:32:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Toramii
Originally by: Wesfahrn
Very risky solution to the problem. You dont know if it would work as intended. Much better of doing something simple. Like removing Platinum Insurance.
Then start developing EVE Online 2, learning from all the "mistakes" from EVE 1. GoGo
CCP Soundwave (touborg): "...We're going to constantly improve EVE. As I mentioned before, there are no plans for an EVE 2, we're just going to run this one TILL THE END OF TIME..."
SPARTAAAAAA!!!
Yep, they all died
|
Mukutep
Gallente
The Freelancer's Mining Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:41:00 -
[48]
I think insurance purchasable from NPC's should be done away with completely, and let ships only have the basic minimum default payout. Then, devise a mechanic to allow player corporations and alliances to insure ships.
Instead of buying "Platinum" insurance from NPC's, you're given a list of available corps who sell ship insurance at the insurance screen. You can compare prices and buy the insurance that you want. The player corporation is the insurance company and can set prices however they want. Corporations have wallets setup for this where all premiums get paid and payouts come from. They can change what new contracts payout anytime they want to adjust to fluctuating market prices of ships, and so on.
In other words, put the whole stinking insurance market in the hands of players!
|
Kytanos Termek
Caldari
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:51:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 23/12/2009 18:53:08
Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 23/12/2009 18:52:28
Create a thread on the assembly man. undoubtedly their are some kink's. but the raw ability to buy sec status is a good idea overall in my opinion. (but do not extend it to faction standing's, ever, just raw sec status) Isk sinks are gooood.
|
Georg Inekn
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 18:57:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Herr Wilkus
Fact is, mineral prices currently are resting on the 'insurance price floor' like a NY World Trade Center 88th story jumper.
You're an *******.
|
|
|
Alt0101
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 19:41:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Mr Epeen
Let me be sure I have this right.
You get to grief players with no risk due to the high return of insurance payout.
Then you sell the stuff you looted from the poor wretch you just ganked for free.
Then you use the money earned to buy back the minimal sec status loss you took because you weren't stupid enough to pod the guy.
Yeah...I can see where you will have plenty of support for that idea
Mr Epeen
Winner.
|
Sillas Cov
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 20:16:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Herr Wilkus
Some, (bunnies), will quit, but most will find other avenues towards success.
Herr, Bro you truly don't get this complex and extremely challenging game is paid for by thousands of Bunnies who:
Just log on and want to tinker and fiddle around with CAREBEAR stuff and WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY PVP TO HINDER or TRAUMATIZE, THEIR ONLINE ACTIVITIES.
CCP allows them to feel safe in an unsafe universe, you just want to toss that huge policy for your own ganker fun ride....
LOL fully LOL
Onward
|
Borun Tal
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 20:45:00 -
[53]
Really? You don't see driving away a good sized chunk of the player base as a problem rather than a solution? Really?
Fascinating. 0/10.
A solution to the insurance "problem" that so many are whining about is fairly straight-forward: 1) no payouts to gankers; 2) no payouts to self-destructs; 3) payout based on current market value of ship (for both T1 and T2). I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept to grasp. CPP has a much-vaunted economist; this should be a very simple thing for him to investigate and recommend for implementation.
|
Zeredek
Gallente
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 20:50:00 -
[54]
I came in expecting holocaust...
_________________
rawr |
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 21:00:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Pesets
You are actually making a half-valid point, despite economy having nothing to do with ecology. It has to do not with "artificial bunny food", but rather lack of "hunger" in the first place. There are next to no operating costs in Eve; even if you think that your minerals are free, it's impossible to go broke. In real life, you are motivated to run the economic treadmill for the whole life simply by the fact that otherwise you will starve or at least observe your living conditions drastically decrease. Problem is, this is a game.
One potentially fun way to deal with the 'operating costs' problem is start removing the crutch that is the NPC Station. Put a manufacturing inefficiency hit on the lines, drop the base refine efficiency, then boost the equivalent capabilities on POSes (along with making refining arrays usable in high sec). This would force players who want to be competitive out into POSes, which of course have operating costs ^_^
|
Transmit Failure
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 21:23:00 -
[56]
Quote:
Fact is, mineral prices currently are resting on the 'insurance price floor' like a NY World Trade Center 88th story jumper.
WTF? Not only are you touting your little scheme for lazy gankers to raise sec status with zero work as the savior of eve's economy, you're using analogies to WTC jumpers to do it?
I'll pass on this one.
|
Joe Skellington
Minmatar
JOKAS Industries
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 21:26:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Herr Wilkus
So come on, CCP - lets do the thing that must be done - enable us to cull the bunny herd. Start an amnesty program. Do not defy nature.
You're wanting Concord to be a corrupt 3rd world nation? Suck it up and take your medicine, this isn't Hello Kitty Online.
|
Ivana Twinkle
Amarr
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 21:39:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Herr Wilkus
Others:
Also, for those who want to dismiss me as 'just a ganker.' I've lost far more to suicide ganks than probably 99% of the Eve population. As in, multiple frieghters and industrials. Billions of ISKies. And I don't complain. It IS PVP - simply the cost of doing business.
ganking hulks is PVP?
PVP is Player versus Player - theres not much "versus" in ganking hulks(unless battlehulk) that has no weaponry or other offensive capabilities. if stripminer could strip the minerals from your hull, then maybe.
Now if you attacked a guy that actually had guns instead of tearing up about how people can mine isk, and that the isk value og minerals is dropping.
"It's the economy, stupid". When people aren't getting their time worth mining, some will stop and prices go up. It doesn't rest on your shoulders to save EVE. CCP is killing EVE regardless :P
no bribing CONCORD in my book.
i'd like to have free money mining, but I dont really have the temper to be sitting and looking at rocks all day.
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 21:52:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Zeredek
I came in expecting holocaust...
Ditto.
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis
THE SPACE P0LICE
|
Posted - 2009.12.23 22:33:00 -
[60]
Read the OP, all the replies etc. First off, I find the name/thread title/content combination amusing. Distasteful to some, amusing to me. Not that I advocate genocide or terrorism, but hey I can't help what amuses me 
I like the idea of player-run insurance more than anything else suggested so far. The 'cash for secstatus' idea seems cool too, but how about this: Instead of faction navy/police coming for a permaflashy pilot who jumps into hisec, let the players handle naughty people coming into hisec on their own.
The way I see it, this would have the same net effect as the OP's proposal, ie more naughty people in hisec, more ships destroyed, mineral prices are pushed up as demand increases. On top of that, I believe this would synergize (sp?) with player run insurance contracts. Insurance companies/corps would ideally have the option of setting certain stipulations, such as no payout if CONCORD gets involved, with the insurer paying a lower premium, as well as a 'suicide ganking package' where the ganker has to pay a higher premium but gets his money even if CONCORD gets involved.
IMO, this creates a more dynamic environment with more player interaction, where hisec is still safer than lowsec due to the presence of CONCORD, but not the fluffy HelloKitty Adventure Island it is today. This would put the power into the players' hands, and provide an incentive for antipirate groups to form up and patrol lowsec borders. This would also bring the game more in line with the whole 'EVE is a cold, dark and harsh universe', as the only 100% safe place would be stations.
As for numbers/balancing, that requires more time fine tuning than the few minutes spent writing this. The whole highsec rewards balancing thing, I'm going to leave out of this post, since it has no relevance to the topic at hand.
fake edit: The useful part stops here. Go ahead and stop reading now if you want.
Now I've said my bit, time to start a flamewar (I hope ). LOL @ all the juvenile behaviour exhibited by some of the posters in this thread.
No constructive content? Check.
Name calling? Check.
Self righteousness? Check.
Lack of contribution to the discussion? Check.
Whining? Check.
Reading comprehension fail? Check.
Selective reading and memory? Check.
Just plain don't 'get it'? Check
And yes, nominations for worst/most useless post in this thread go to: Prof Tarantula, Venkul Mul, silentalleycat, Elena Laskova, Davich MacGregor, Lunatic Shakhid, Hamshoe, Mr Epeen, Alt0101 (dubious nomination, quoting a silly post with no input), Transmit Failure, Joe Skellington, Ivana Twinkle. No doubt more to follow (subsequent nominees will be updated with edits <3)
That's right, individual names are posted to elicit more flaming from them (hope their selective reading misses this part), cos I need a laugh. Expecting 'wall of text, didn't read' posts anytime now :D
tl;dr Insurance fraud rampant (according to forums), combat by driving up ship cost. Let flashies into hisec to facilitate this. Player operated insurance saves the day. Flaming.
Originally by: salva dore
Cloak should not be AFK solution.
What do you think?
Originally by: AFK Cloaker
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |