Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 20:32:00 -
[1]
Warning: Wall-O-Text inbound!
Introduction People of MD, I wanted to take some of your time and have a chat about Internet spaceships, Loan contracts and Insurance. This issue has been clawing away at me since the changes to insurance was made. Please bear with me and read through my proposal. I would like to know if this issue if worth my effort to lobby CSM support on and if my idea is feasible.
Insurance system rant First, I would like to classify the current in game insurance system and try to lobby support for a slight change in the system on a corporation level. The current system is based on Actual Cash Value method of payout. In real life, the Actual Cash Value method takes into account depreciation and tries to make a client whole by offering a payout based on the value if the item was sold on the market used. As we all know, EVE does not have anything like deprecation as there is no difference between a used and new item. Instead CCP instituted a weighted system that reduces the value of payouts as you go higher on the class and/or Tech level of an item. From a perspective of a loan, this system is not good. Like with cars in real life, internet spaceships need ôfull coverageö so that lenders can mitigate risk. With the system as it is now, lenders must rely on collateral for a way of making themselves whole if something would to happen. This can be quite troublesome for new pilots as they do not have assets that could cover the collateral in most cases and most PVP pilots donÆt usually maintain any assets with value unless they use said item frequently.
Contract system rant Second thing I want to discuss is the contract system. As MD knows, the contract system can stand to use a facelift; however, I would like to discuss a low hanging fruit issue that would close a potential loophole when loaning insured ships to corporate and alliance members. A lot of people do not realize that you can loan an insured ship out to an alliance or corporate member and the corporation still collects the insurance if the ship is blown up. However, there is a slight loophole that even fewer people know about. Once you lend out a corporate insured ship, there is nothing that prevents a member from reinsuring the ship and effectively canceling the corporate insurance policy. The current system does not even send an evemail to the corporation letting them know. This is bad as it limits the potential use of loan contracts as a system to provide ships to members with limited risk for both parties via insurance.
Proposal 1.) Instead of the using the Actual Cash Value method in determining the payout of ships insured on a corporate level, allow corporations to insure ships using the replacement cost method for payouts. This will allow insurance payouts (regardless of class and tech level) to be valued at the market price allowing corporations to recover from losses quicker. In turn, this will give more of an incentive for pilots to join player ran corporations and allow new players a safety net funded by their corporations. In making this change, I understand that there is increased risk being put back onto the market. Two suggestions to mitigate this issue would be instituting a system of monthly payments or higher premiums to the cost of insurance payable through corporation funds. 2) The Loophole within the contract system needs to be closed by not allowing ships to be reinsured until the current insurance is expired or not allow only corporate owned ships to be insured by individuals.
Con't...
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 20:34:00 -
[2]
Conclusion I want to apologize for the wall of text and for the bad spelling and grammar. I wanted to highlight the problems in the system and present solutions in a way that allows corporations to benefit both themselves and their members. I feel that I could not do this without a detailed description of the problems from these specific viewpoints.
IÆm submitting this idea to MD for review as I want to gage the communities support and try to see if my proposed system has any flaws which needs to worked out before the proposal is submitted to the CSM.
Please keep the discussion on track and thanks for your time!
|
Londo Cebb
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 20:51:00 -
[3]
I have seen bigger walls of text.
|
israus
Minmatar Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 22:27:00 -
[4]
ships can't be fully insurable in eve it leads to explotation insurance is there to help subsitise a loss not fully cover a loss.
as for doing it with corpations many pvp corperations and allainces already offer ship replacement programs to cover there members losses during pvp actions. fact is the changes that where made to the insurance system where long overdue and very much needed.
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 23:54:00 -
[5]
Originally by: israus ships can't be fully insurable in eve it leads to explotation insurance is there to help subsitise a loss not fully cover a loss.
as for doing it with corpations many pvp corperations and allainces already offer ship replacement programs to cover there members losses during pvp actions. fact is the changes that where made to the insurance system where long overdue and very much needed.
I recognized and addressed this in the insurance rant. Towards the end of the rant I suggested to increase premiums and/or have a monthly bill(At lower cost compared to premiums) that allow the system to decrease/maintain ISK supply within the market and allow corporations to keep ships insured over time.
The idea here is not to shift risk back onto the market, like the old system did, but only shift risk in terms of time. Corporations will have the tools (Via game mechanics) to offer ships with reduced risk to its members while allowing the corporations to incur the risk up front instead of at the time. (Time value of money) You can look at this as a business planning tool that allows corporations to plan for risk (ships blowing up) and not have to worry about the issue after the fact.
As for for comment about organized alliances already offering a similar system. I'm sure that these systems are well designed and implemented; however, my concern is not addressed to them but instead to small corporations and alliances that cant have or don't want such a bulky system that takes a lot of outside organization to implement. (spreadsheets and due diligence) I'm suggesting a small, streamline system that can be managed via the already implemented contract system with minimal back end support required.
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 00:02:00 -
[6]
That's a really poorly written OP but it sounds like you want the old way of T1 ships being basically free with platinum insurance with the addition that all ships (t2, t3, faction, capital) get T1 insurance. This is an insurance rant and really doesn't belong here, more like features and ideas or GD.
You want no risk and no loss? Then stop playing EVE. Also, don't recruit corp members that cancel the insurance on their ships. This is all very simple. - It's not "Play through a pre-set story, become stronger, do endgame". Gameplay is open ended, and you make your own story. Unless you're too afraid of 'pvp grief' to do anything relevant |
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 00:14:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Vaal Erit That's a really poorly written OP but it sounds like you want the old way of T1 ships being basically free with platinum insurance with the addition that all ships (t2, t3, faction, capital) get T1 insurance. This is an insurance rant and really doesn't belong here, more like features and ideas or GD.
You want no risk and no loss? Then stop playing EVE. Also, don't recruit corp members that cancel the insurance on their ships. This is all very simple.
You miss the point of the OP and yes it is poorly written!
1) "You want no risk and no loss?" Incorrect. The above reply will hopefully clarify the "no risk question" concern.
2) This is an insurance rant and really doesn't belong here, more like features and ideas or GD. This was addressed in the OP as well. It will be moved to the AH over time. As insurance affects the market, I felt that the OP would be better suited in MD as the subject is relevant and the posters in MD have a vested interest in the proposal.
|
israus
Minmatar Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 08:32:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Zendoren
I recognized and addressed this in the insurance rant. Towards the end of the rant I suggested to increase premiums and/or have a monthly bill(At lower cost compared to premiums) that allow the system to decrease/maintain ISK supply within the market and allow corporations to keep ships insured over time.
The idea here is not to shift risk back onto the market, like the old system did, but only shift risk in terms of time. Corporations will have the tools (Via game mechanics) to offer ships with reduced risk to its members while allowing the corporations to incur the risk up front instead of at the time. (Time value of money) You can look at this as a business planning tool that allows corporations to plan for risk (ships blowing up) and not have to worry about the issue after the fact.
As for for comment about organized alliances already offering a similar system. I'm sure that these systems are well designed and implemented; however, my concern is not addressed to them but instead to small corporations and alliances that cant have or don't want such a bulky system that takes a lot of outside organization to implement. (spreadsheets and due diligence) I'm suggesting a small, streamline system that can be managed via the already implemented contract system with minimal back end support required.
i'm still missing how your planning on making this work. it would be impossable for a corperation to insure its members ships quiet often people buy and kit ships a few minutes before the go on ops it would be impossable for a corperation to be able to react quick enough all the time to cover ships. and you can't just simply insure every ship all your members have in 1 premium i've got about 30-40 ships scattered across the galaxy I never fly.
and it also seems you want full coverage for tech 2 and tech 3 ships. while that would increase there use in pvp no doubt it would also have a massive effect on the tech 2 market with prices no doubt going up a lot due to the increased use and loss of ships same with tech 3.
seems to me you want to wrap people up in cotton wool and take away the risk that makes that can make you laugh or make you cry in equal measure. its about people making there own jugment on what they can afford to fly and what they can afford to lose not taking all that jugment away and handing it to ceo's to tell there members when they need to go to the bathroom.
|
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 11:05:00 -
[9]
Personally, I'd love to see in-game insurance eliminated entirely. Projects Blog |
Lucyna
Minmatar Interstellar Killer Bee Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 17:20:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Hexxx Personally, I'd love to see in-game insurance eliminated entirely.
That's cause you are working on an - oh, I see what you did there _________ Eve - for when I'm not playing minecraft ;) |
|
Thrasymachus TheSophist
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 17:52:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Thrasymachus TheSophist on 27/08/2010 17:53:56 I think OP's idea, in theory, is very good! Also, this would not give rise to the old system of insurance fraud by creating a minimum basket price for minerals, becaues the "replacement cost" is itself a function of real mineral prices. The old system's flaw was its reliance on fixed values for mineral prices that bore no relationship to actual values.
Anyway, that compliment aside, the problem with OP's idea is you that there is no practical way to have the EVE client calculate, on the fly, an actual replacement value. What do you use, Jita weighted averages? Those are susceptible to manipulation Do you use Jita lowest sales price? Also susceptible (altho at higher risk to the manipulator) to manipulation. What about ships that can only be purchased through contracts (can't you insure the titans?)?
The current system is in effect as good as it gets on pricing because the in game calculation of payout is intended to not be FULL reimbursement (you should lose something after all) and is pegged to a time-averaged weighted formula on mineral prices (the whole basket of them used in productino of the ship), that remains confidential, and that is adjusted intermittently, that would be insanely difficult to manipulate (given breadth of calculation both in terms of time adn number of minerals), and that is linked to replacement cost to the extent that the value of the minerals is itself the major determinant in the actual market price of the ship.
As far as the contract system rant - I agree, it would be nice to permit loan-contractst hat retain the right to collect the insurance proceeds and that don't permit the debtor to circumvent it. +1 for that idea, if you would actually use it.
tl;dr: Current system is best possible proxy for replacement cost (and is pegged below replacement cost as it should be). Contract suggestion is reasonable.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |