Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Veebora
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:42:00 -
[1]
The insurance really should be revised to avoid the exploits, but the nerf went too far.
Previously the insurance payback was calculated based in something like the fixed Ship Value (bigger than market value) + Insurance fee. Which leaves margin for exploits.
Now the payback is based only on the building cost of the ship, forgetting the big fee of 30% you pay for insurance. Losing a Tempest now costs about 27 Mi just for the ship without putting any fitting on the calculation.
This will have the bad effect of decreasing the will of people putting ships for PVP, which is the brightest side of this game in my opinion. I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
The new insurance should be calculated by the building price of the ship + 30% of insurance fee. It would be fair and non exploitable.
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' marked.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
|
Murev Vorchilde
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:48:00 -
[2]
looks about right to me
|
Zions Child
Caldari Carthage Industries
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:49:00 -
[3]
You clearly are a young character, because Raven's used to cost around 120 mill. On the OLD insurance plan you'd lose 50 mill, back when people weren't running around with trillions in their wallets. Stop Whining.
Insurance wasn't nerfed enough, or recently enough. Of course, if they nerfed it without attempting to balance minerals, there'd be some problems...
Originally by: CCP Shadow *snip* Castration successful. Shadow.
|
Major Galdari
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:49:00 -
[4]
People fly T2 ships and don't get insurance. Come on, the T1 insurance "nerf" is not an issue
|
oolk
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:50:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Veebora
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' marked.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
Well,lets say I scrap a vehicle fully insured;the check they will cut me will be very much similar to that system...depreciation,etc. and they wont reimburse me the cost of the insurance either...but they will allow a certain % for the pimp I added to it,so yes there is still room for improvement but very hard to do from past posts about the subject of mods.
Basically it cost 26mil to almost eb able to get a new ship back...still not a bad deal,we had it easy in the past I guess.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:51:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Veebora This will have the bad effect of decreasing the will of people putting ships for PVP, which is the brightest side of this game in my opinion.
Willingness to face loss has never been a strong point of the EVE playerbase, but the solution is not to remove loss.
Insurance should just be removed. -
DesuSigs - Now with ThreadAssignÖ and SigSelectÖ |
Mr Epeen
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:52:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Veebora
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' marked.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
If it was up to me, you would have no insurance and lose 74,333 ISK when you got blown up.
Be thankful there is any insurance.
Mr Epeen
|
Verys
Burning Technologies Cult of War
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:52:00 -
[8]
I don't see this as a bad change.
First of all it avoids insurance exploits due to swings in the mineral market.
Second now you actually lose something if you lose a ship instead of just the fitting, however the insurance nerf means ships have gotten a lot cheaper (especially the raven) making them cheaper to replace unless the mineral market will start acting up.
Add drone repair bays to carriers |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:54:00 -
[9]
There's no point in repeating what the above people said, so I'll just focus on what wasn't said yet.
Originally by: Veebora I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
My, my, could this possibly be one of the GOOD side-effects ? Yes, yes it is. It was about time much more people started also flying smaller ships, dammit.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Zions Child
Caldari Carthage Industries
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:55:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Akita T There's no point in repeating what the above people said, so I'll just focus on what wasn't said yet.
Originally by: Veebora I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
My, my, could this possibly be one of the GOOD side-effects ? Yes, yes it is. It was about time much more people started also flying smaller ships, dammit.
You know what? Agreed. We need more frigate and cruiser fights, none of these giant roaming RR BS gangs. God are those irritating.
Originally by: CCP Shadow *snip* Castration successful. Shadow.
|
|
Gunnanmon
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:57:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Mr Epeen
Originally by: Veebora
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' marked.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
If it was up to me, you would have no insurance and lose 74,333 ISK when you got blown up.
Be thankful there is any insurance.
Mr Epeen
Surely losing 74 thousand isk would force people to quit Eve. Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Veebora
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:59:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Akita T There's no point in repeating what the above people said, so I'll just focus on what wasn't said yet.
Originally by: Veebora I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
My, my, could this possibly be one of the GOOD side-effects ? Yes, yes it is. It was about time much more people started also flying smaller ships, dammit.
Akita, you do mostly PVE or industry/trade as you usually states and so maybe you are overlooking something.
In 0.0 they will continue using very big stuff as they have very big earnings, no doubt it wont change anything.
For low sec PVP, like FW. People is already very careful to use BSs or even BCs, most fleets are cruiser down size.
Even with the old insurance, the T2 fittings for a BS with Trimarks rigs is very high, now losing + 26 Mi on the ship itself will make it worst.
So people already use small ships, the insurance chance wont have this good effect.
|
Mr Epeen
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:04:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Gunnanmon
Originally by: Mr Epeen
Originally by: Veebora
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' marked.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
If it was up to me, you would have no insurance and lose 74,333 ISK when you got blown up.
Be thankful there is any insurance.
Mr Epeen
Surely losing 74 thousand isk would force people to quit Eve.
Ouch
Got me good, Gunnanmon, lol
Mr Epeen
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:05:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Veebora Previously the insurance payback was calculated based in something like the fixed Ship Value (bigger than market value) + Insurance fee. Which leaves margin for exploits.
Now the payback is based only on the building cost of the ship, forgetting the big fee of 30% you pay for insurance.
Are you quite sure about this?
I seem to recall that the old insurance payout was the combined base value of the minerals; the fee was 30% of this, so the payout on a "base value" ship was 70%. Now, it's still 70%, only the value of the ship is based on the market value of the minerals, rather than their base value.
āor do I remember things wrong? ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Zions Child
Caldari Carthage Industries
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:08:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Zions Child on 02/06/2010 16:08:27
Originally by: Veebora
Originally by: Akita T There's no point in repeating what the above people said, so I'll just focus on what wasn't said yet.
Originally by: Veebora I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
My, my, could this possibly be one of the GOOD side-effects ? Yes, yes it is. It was about time much more people started also flying smaller ships, dammit.
Akita, you do mostly PVE or industry/trade as you usually states and so maybe you are overlooking something.
In 0.0 they will continue using very big stuff as they have very big earnings, no doubt it wont change anything.
For low sec PVP, like FW. People is already very careful to use BSs or even BCs, most fleets are cruiser down size.
Even with the old insurance, the T2 fittings for a BS with Trimarks rigs is very high, now losing + 26 Mi on the ship itself will make it worst.
So people already use small ships, the insurance chance wont have this good effect.
You fail to understand her point. Take it from a pirate, (not a very good one, but hey, who's counting?) smaller ships are more fun. BS fights take too long, and aren't nearly as spontaneous. Cruiser and frigate fights require slightly more skill, and are actually quite fun.
So, BS fights = Boring Frigate + Cruiser fights = Fun
Therefore, no issue with losing lots o isk in battleships.
And again, people used to pvp with battleships back in 06', when you'd lose a hell of a lot more than 20 million isk on fittings and insurance loss.
EDIT: Also, Tippia is right.
Originally by: CCP Shadow *snip* Castration successful. Shadow.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:16:00 -
[16]
Veebora, "more people" does not equal "everybody"... just, you know... a higher percentage of people.
Also, while true that this character on TQ is almost exclusively involved in "carebearish" activities, that doesn't mean I don't have a bit of fun even with this character on SiSi every now and then, nor does it mean that I never have alts that actually engage in PvP on TQ (not lately, again true, but still, the point stands).
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Illwill Bill
House of Tempers
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:22:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Akita T
It was about time much more people started also flying smaller ships, dammit.
This. So much!
Additionally, it really infuriates me, when people use some pointless rant about signatures as a sig. |
Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:25:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Crumplecorn Insurance should just be removed.
|
Jered Transer
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:31:00 -
[19]
Eve has insurance?
|
knobber Jobbler
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:34:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Major Galdari People fly T2 ships and don't get insurance. Come on, the T1 insurance "nerf" is not an issue
That isn't the most constructive of answers for younger characters or poorer characters. A T2 ship is very expensive unless you have billions in the bank or a corp backing you.
The insurance nerf penalises newer players. They should have changed the nerf so you get no payout if you've been killed by Concorde or you make X amount of claims within a given time frame. That would answer exploiters and suicide gankers.
|
|
Zions Child
Caldari Carthage Industries
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:38:00 -
[21]
Originally by: knobber Jobbler
Originally by: Major Galdari People fly T2 ships and don't get insurance. Come on, the T1 insurance "nerf" is not an issue
That isn't the most constructive of answers for younger characters or poorer characters. A T2 ship is very expensive unless you have billions in the bank or a corp backing you.
The insurance nerf penalises newer players. They should have changed the nerf so you get no payout if you've been killed by Concorde or you make X amount of claims within a given time frame. That would answer exploiters and suicide gankers.
Is it just me, or are people on this forum born stupid?
IF YOU'RE MAKING MONEY, OR GETTING 100% OF THE MONEY YOU SPENT BACK FROM INSURANCE, THEN THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS MISSING THE POINT.
Sorry, had to get that out there. Anyways, the insurance "nerf" wasn't a nerf, as you call it. It was bringing it back in line to where it should be. Its supposed to be penalizing to lose a ship, no matter what. The "nerf" was not intended to hurt gankers, newer players, older players, w/e. It was intended to bring the mechanic back in line with where it should be.
Look at the price history of ships in EVE. It wasn't until recently, that insurance became a "free ship" sort of deal.
Originally by: CCP Shadow *snip* Castration successful. Shadow.
|
Aqriue
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:43:00 -
[22]
Quote: Losing a Tempest now costs about 27 Mi just for the ship without putting any fitting on the calculation.
Ganker? Tempest's best use to blow up industrials, which was getting out of hand as the insurance cost covered any loss to the pirate and was basically risk free PVP with profit. Hulkageddon won't happen now or their will be less participation now because like all humans, they are risk adverse to any real loss . Unless they start flying fleets of destroyers, you won't see any BC or BS kills on a Hulk KM that often anymore
|
gfldex
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:45:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Veebora Edited by: Veebora on 02/06/2010 15:52:51 The insurance really should be revised to avoid the exploits, but the nerf went too far.
Previously the insurance payback was calculated based in something like the fixed Ship Value (bigger than market value) + Insurance fee. Which leaves margin for exploits.
You imply that prices for ships would not drop down to get the same ration we had before. Have a trip and check the jita market history. It already started.
This insurance nerf will be renamed to The Big Miner Nerf of 2010 fairly soon.
|
Slapchop Gonnalovemynuts
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 16:59:00 -
[24]
Originally by: gfldex
Originally by: Veebora Edited by: Veebora on 02/06/2010 15:52:51 The insurance really should be revised to avoid the exploits, but the nerf went too far.
Previously the insurance payback was calculated based in something like the fixed Ship Value (bigger than market value) + Insurance fee. Which leaves margin for exploits.
You imply that prices for ships would not drop down to get the same ration we had before. Have a trip and check the jita market history. It already started.
This insurance nerf will be renamed to The Big Miner Nerf of 2010 fairly soon.
Except that now, unlike before, the insurance payouts are going to be periodically adjusted instead of being based on some values from 7 years ago. --------------------------------------------
Quote: EVE-Online... Too rough for ya? Don't like it? GTFO...
|
Qoi
New Eden Warriors
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 17:01:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Aqriue Unless they start flying fleets of destroyers, you won't see any BC or BS kills on a Hulk KM that often anymore
|
Securitas Protector
Yaoi Corp Shadows of Light
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 17:04:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Aqriue
Quote: Losing a Tempest now costs about 27 Mi just for the ship without putting any fitting on the calculation.
Ganker? Tempest's best use to blow up industrials, which was getting out of hand as the insurance cost covered any loss to the pirate and was basically risk free PVP with profit. Hulkageddon won't happen now or their will be less participation now because like all humans, they are risk adverse to any real loss . Unless they start flying fleets of destroyers, you won't see any BC or BS kills on a Hulk KM that often anymore
You can easily gank a hulk with 3 destroyers, it'll just mean you need to have a (very small) group of players to achieve hulkageddon instead of a 1 man operation in a Tempest. Proud to be shaych |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 17:05:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Veebora 26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
That sounds about right and should nerf the ****fit T1 BS being the most cost-effective ship in the game.
If paying 26.5 mil for a BS hull is too much for you, then fly smaller. Fly what you can afford, damnit.
Originally by: knobber Jobbler The insurance nerf penalises newer players.
What are said newer players doing throwing battleships (which are sort of by default not newbie ships) in the fire?
Originally by: gfldex You imply that prices for ships would not drop down to get the same ration we had before. Have a trip and check the jita market history. It already started.
Ships will never be free again. Periodically recalculated payouts, you know.
If prices keep sinking then CCP will probably reduce more of the non-mining mineral faucets.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
James Tritanius
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 17:24:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Mr Epeen
Originally by: Gunnanmon
Originally by: Mr Epeen
Originally by: Veebora
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' marked.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
If it was up to me, you would have no insurance and lose 74,333 ISK when you got blown up.
Be thankful there is any insurance.
Mr Epeen
Surely losing 74 thousand isk would force people to quit Eve.
Ouch
Got me good, Gunnanmon, lol
Mr Epeen
All values x1000 means nothing to you guys?
|
FunzzeR
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 18:02:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Veebora Edited by: Veebora on 02/06/2010 15:52:51 The insurance really should be revised to avoid the exploits, but the nerf went too far.
Previously the insurance payback was calculated based in something like the fixed Ship Value (bigger than market value) + Insurance fee. Which leaves margin for exploits.
Now the payback is based only on the building cost of the ship, forgetting the big fee of 30% you pay for insurance. Losing a Tempest now costs about 27 Mi just for the ship without putting any fitting on the calculation.
This will have the bad effect of decreasing the will of people putting ships for PVP, which is the brightest side of this game in my opinion. I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
The new insurance should be calculated by the building price of the ship + 30% of insurance fee. It would be fair and non exploitable.
Calculations:
TEMPEST INSURANCE (all values x 1000) 74333 - Cost of a Tempest in Rens' market.
20471 - Cost of platinum insurance 68237 - Payback of platinum insurance
26567 - Cost of losing a full insured Tempest.
Actually that looks fine, we are finally taking steps towards making losses actually mean something again.
In fact, I will go as far to say that CCP needs to remove insurance entirely.
I originally had low expectations for this patch, but I am quite pleased to how its turned out. PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!!
THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!! |
Julius Rigel
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 18:20:00 -
[30]
Quote: I won't use a BS in PVP anytime soon with this loss.
Finally something good to come out of that cesspool they call "FID". Proud that this is Working as IntendedÖ!
Congrats CCP!
Faith in humanity + + +
13/100
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |