EVE Search - You want an economy sink? Remove Insurance in 0.0

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

You want an economy sink? Remove Insurance in 0.0

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Falbala	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:34:00 - [1] First, there are no valid reasons why an insurance company should reimbures your losses in 0.0 which is outside empire space. Second it creates isk then generates inflation so please CCP remove insurance in 0.0.
Miner's Bane	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:35:00 - [2] Originally by: Falbala First, there are no valid reasons why an insurance company should reimbures your losses in 0.0 which is outside empire space. Second it creates isk then generates inflation so please CCP remove insurance in 0.0. I would love to see insurance removed completely from low-sec empire/0.0. ------------------------------------------------------------------
Danton Marcellus	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:38:00 - [3] Remove insurance for corporations at war, now that would settle that. Insurances are void during wartime in most places anyhow, why not in EVE? Convert Stations
Oi Poloi	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:47:00 - [4] Because in the long run most people would stop doing PvP in 0.0 then? Gank fest in Yulai ahoi! ----- DJ 4tw
Domalais	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:51:00 - [5] Wow, that's an awesome idea which will definately help CCP get more people into 0.0 like they've been trying to.
Danton Marcellus	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:53:00 - [6] Whoever said people needed to be at war to PvP in 0.0? It'd be used to hurt the enemy and as for the Yulai comment the highways would've been gone by the time they implemented something like this. Convert Stations
Xtreem	Posted - 2005.02.27 22:55:00 - [7] yup, remove insurance in 0.0 and people wont go there!! listen i dont now peple have b's in the bonnet about people gatherin money, its what they do in eve and in real life. if i was a new player in my bs, and it got blown and the insurance was gone, id putup a stomp 2!! if u buy a raven for say 110 mil.. it dies, u get 110 insurance, but u still have to pay for the next lot of inurance, and eqipment for it, its not much of a benifit for nyone unles they mined all the mins themselves
Lygos	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:01:00 - [8] What's wrong with inflation? Unless of course you are worried about a shrinking savings account.. Inflation occurs for a reason, thus there is something about current earning potential amongst the hoi polloi that justifies the price increases. Either you already are demanding to be overpaid in the npc market, or you need to start demanding more money for your time in the pc market. A balance could theoretically emerge. Such a balance of course still won't be conducive to accomplishing much besides making npcs slightly less attractive.
Dobra	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:02:00 - [9] Edited by: Dobra on 27/02/2005 23:05:20 Edited by: Dobra on 27/02/2005 23:04:55 Actually removing insurance won't make a money sink it would however remove a money intake and make sure even more people don't go to 0.0. No I say find better ways, DigitalCommunist had some very good ideas with services that can be bought from NPC, the only money sink in EVE, which could make the eve Economy very healthy again. /Dobra
Neon Genesis	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:06:00 - [10] I don't tihnk this is the answer, people wouldn't pvp in bs's because it would simply be 2 hard to replace them. Maybe decrease the effectiveness of insurance all2gether. But to my mind, the real cause of the current massive devaluation of isk is lvl 4's, anyone care to speculate the moeny being injected into the economy every day from rens alone? __ There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
Xilimyth	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:20:00 - [11] On the bright side... we'd finally see more cruisers in PvP BECAUSE of the risk of loosing a battleship.
Demian Sky	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:27:00 - [12] Fal, spectacular suggestion. Not only would it stave off extra money going into the EVE economy, but it would also reduce the number of battleships flying around. A lot of people might actually start using battlecruisers or cruisers in PVP (God forbid some people might actually use other ships other than battleshipsm industrials, and interceptors in this game!) or tech 2 ships of equivalent that are more agile and difficult to kill. Also, individuals will value their starships quite a bit more than the current World of Warcraft style PVP where the risk of getting blown up is practically negligable if you don't have tech 2 mods on your ship.
meowcat	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:44:00 - [13] remove insurance completely, or not at all. remove it just from 0.0 and you'll just end up with even more people coming back to empire to run level 4 missions ~~~~)\~~~~~\o/~~~~ yeah but no but yeah but no but
McBane	Posted - 2005.02.27 23:50:00 - [14] Does anyone bother insuring their ships then?!? Most expesnive part of any battleship i use is the kit on it - and insurance dont cover that. So i figure the difference between the insurance payout, the default payout you'd get anyway, the cost of the insurance and the cost of the kit on your ship - it really aint worth it unless you're really poor!
Verone	Posted - 2005.02.28 00:16:00 - [15] this is a pointless request, and is totally contradicting what CCP are trying to do with eve. they want more people, not less in 0.0, and therefore insurance is needed... so that people will feel they have a little safety when they jump into pf-346 in thisr shiny new T2 clad apocalypse. COME AND SOCIALISE WITH US NASTY SNIGG BASTARDS AT : WWW.SNIGG.CJB.NET
Omniwar	Posted - 2005.02.28 00:36:00 - [16] Edited by: Omniwar on 28/02/2005 00:36:13 simple, if u cant risk the damn ship, DONT FLY IT nuff said. CCP now remove insurance paybacks from wars and 0,0. that's an order ! *Spawn of the Devil*
jbob2000	Posted - 2005.02.28 00:41:00 - [17] I think it would make more sense to have no insurance in empire. gets people out of empire and into 0.0 and its pretty hard to die in empire unless in war or to pirates ----------------------------------------------- CANADIAN
McBane	Posted - 2005.02.28 00:42:00 - [18] Actually, what they should do with insurance is to give a kind of no claims bonus. Each time you lose a insured ship, the insurance goes up in cost until a point comes where you effectively can't get insurance (ie cost of insurace is more than the value of the ship). Should also include base cost of modules in the cover. Think that would work much better then - would penalise those that rely on insurance, prevent insurance fraud and still protect the noobs.
Fuse	Posted - 2005.02.28 00:51:00 - [19] Yes lets punish people for paying to play a game. You guys realy need to get 14aid. Dumbest idea ever. 0.o It's not you... no wait it is you.
Deros	Posted - 2005.02.28 00:54:00 - [20] remove war insurance, not 0.0, else all the semi-carebears wont come to play and those who do actually pvp wont be able to afford to after a while. D
Wild Rho	Posted - 2005.02.28 01:05:00 - [21] Removing it for kills made during a war makes sense as it at least gives each corp the chance to do some real financial damage to each other instead of being more of a nuisance. I wouldnt mind seeing it removed from 0.0 but the sad fact is it would stop alot of people from going to 0.0 becuase they basically don't want any risk and all the reward. I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it...
Emno	Posted - 2005.02.28 01:41:00 - [22] Want more people in 0.0? Remove insurance in empire.
Question2	Posted - 2005.02.28 01:49:00 - [23] Can someone please explain why people wouldnt WANT to go to 0.0? I mean,get this,best belt spawns in the game(its amazing how good their drops are compared to the low sec equavelents).Rare ore that makes it a piece of cake to earn 20-30 mill an hour,thats a billionaire in a week if you really work at it.You get the benefits of being in alliance space,that of a,oh say,1000+ member alliance(unless you are in a major PVP corp and doing full out invasion of big alliance space you are going to get gate-ganked by the guards in no time at all.....) And most rats dont want to bother having dozens of pilots hunting them so they simply dont pirate there. The only problem are the worthless pirate missions.Ok the drone alloys are nice and all.Lack of bounty though,which makes a ton of cash straight off without having to spend half an hour picking up cans in a fast looter. No insurance simply wont change the MASSIVE benefits of going into 0.0 space.I bet CCP was scratching their heads wondering why people didnt perform an exodus into 0.0 space. Well its mostly because people are too used to their agents.Or their alliances/corps are based there and it would be a really stupid idea to go into 0.0 space.It also doesnt help if your alliance/corp is in a war...you go into 0.0 space,you are seen as deserting your mates,and you get expelled.Nice move. The benefits ARE THERE ALREADY.Its just that due to other factors some people who might want to go there cant.
Prothos	Posted - 2005.02.28 02:42:00 - [24] i say no.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2005.02.28 03:18:00 - [25] removing the insurance from 0.0 is a bad idear as thats the reason that there is insurance in the first place now wars we are many that has asked (repetely) that when you are at war the insurance is void but it has not hapened yet (and proberly never will) the 40% default insurance only made the insane inflation worse than it already was what we need is for CCP to realyce that the inflation is getting out of controll in eve and takes steps to stop it Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Nyk0n	Posted - 2005.02.28 03:24:00 - [26] If you want to stop inflation, nerf agent missions, thats where youre problem lies
DigitalCommunist	Posted - 2005.02.28 03:29:00 - [27] Heh, I really don't care either way, but there are better solutions that won't end up with 35,000 whines day - and tbh, considering how fast ships get ganked, it'd be even less of an incentive to fight in anything resembling even numbers, or at all. _____________________________________ Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning. "Can I be a consultant for EVE II?" - WhiteDwarf
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2005.02.28 03:29:00 - [28] Originally by: Nyk0n If you want to stop inflation, nerf agent missions, thats where youre problem lies no not just there pre castor the largest rat spawn NPC (single ship) bonus was what 500k now I personally have killed a 3.5 mill spawn (and I am sure that was not a big spawn) solo in 1 BS you are right though the agents are also handing out ISK like crazy but so are the NPC rats bounty's Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Marcus Grisbius	Posted - 2005.02.28 06:10:00 - [29] Nah, just leave the insurance prices stagnant as the mins prices inflate. At some point people wont be getting 100% return on their ship cost and problem solved. But if I had to go with no insurance in 0.0 or wartime, I would say wartime made more sense and would work more effectively. Certainty of death... little chance of success... what are we waiting for? - Gimli, son of Gloinn
Alt Char01	Posted - 2005.02.28 06:11:00 - [30] Edited by: Alt Char01 on 28/02/2005 06:11:28 or make insurance go up for people loosing their ships and each time it ends without a claim make it cost less. also reduce insurance length.
Beringe	Posted - 2005.02.28 06:23:00 - [31] We don't really need a way to financially damage a war enemy to that extent. You can still damage your enemy financially without it, and we don't need people quitting the game because they just lost everything (you know it happens, no matter how often we tell them not to fly what they can't replace). Really, this is nowhere near the top ten list of EvE's biggest problems. ------------------------------------------- "My main griveance with the Caldari state was that once I had finished my work for them, they wanted me dead." "No, it's none of your business."
Discodude	Posted - 2005.02.28 06:41:00 - [32] I like no insurance or no insurance in war time. ----------------------------------------------- "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his" General George Patton Jr.
Lorth	Posted - 2005.02.28 07:50:00 - [33] Originally by: Neon Genesis I don't tihnk this is the answer, people wouldn't pvp in bs's because it would simply be 2 hard to replace them. Maybe decrease the effectiveness of insurance all2gether. But to my mind, the real cause of the current massive devaluation of isk is lvl 4's, anyone care to speculate the moeny being injected into the economy every day from rens alone? From Rens, I would guess an easy 10 bill a day on a slow day. Look at number of ships in the last 24 hours and number of pirate ships in the last 24 hours and you have a number. Then add in insurance, mission bonuses and what ever else you can think of.... Also theres prob anouther 6 or 7 systems that are as attractive as Rens, and a bunch more that arn't, so perhaps a good 100 bill from agent missions, and I'm trying to be really conservative here. Thats also about 2 mill per day per account. So if you havn't earned, as in got that amount of isk from an NPC in a day you fall behind in the isk train. Doesn't sound like much, but in the long run it adds up.
Latex Mistress	Posted - 2005.02.28 07:51:00 - [34] Getting rid of platinum insurance either in 0.0 or war (or both) isn't a bad idea methinks. And that is coming from someone who doesn't fly unless she's at war... If ECM is an act of aggression, why am I not on kill mails?
V1ceroy	Posted - 2005.02.28 07:57:00 - [35] Insurance won't be removed, and I don't think removing insurance is the only solution to the lots-of-isk syndrome. Nerfing those lvl4 agents would be a much better idea, if not reward wise, then difficulty wise; so that people will actually do them in groups instead of solo in missile spamming ravens (Yeah, like it was intended). Currently the isk-flow from agent missions is way to high, and can be obtained even in 1.0 space with no risk. Actually, the highest quality Cal Navy agent is in Niyabainen (1.0 space, next to the highway). Agents should be distributed according to sec status. Low quality = high sec and vice versa. The highest quality agents should be in 0.0. Basic risk and reward.
Raem Civrie	Posted - 2005.02.28 08:38:00 - [36] No thanks. Don't touch lvl 4 missions, they really are fine as they are. The only thing that needs to be done about them is moving the agents away from high-sec. Seriously. If my agent was moved to .1, I'd be happy as a lark if only for the increase in LP per mission.
Falbala	Posted - 2005.02.28 08:40:00 - [37] If ccp really wants more people in 0.0 they put implants BPO on the market: economy sink+people in 0.0.
LockMe	Posted - 2005.02.28 09:01:00 - [38] instead of removing insurance in 0.0 raise your rates, the game can track how often you are in a system, as it is part of your map browser. It is like having high risk coverage in us. they charge you more. that would make sense, and as far as during wartime, I say the corp declaring war voids all their insurance contracts, and the corp they are at war with drops to 50% of what they have for coverage. This would bring down the number of BSs in fleet battles and make it so wars dont' drag out for months on end, as it would get expensive quick.
Joe	Posted - 2005.02.28 10:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Falbala If ccp really wants more people in 0.0 they put implants BPO on the market: economy sink+people in 0.0. Bpo's would only shift isk around (from the general public, to the owners of the bpo's), It wouldn't really be a money sink at all. Npc corporations selling implants on the otherhand (even +1's & +2's) would deffeintly remove alot of isk from the game. Npc Insurance should be removed from the game, not one 'insurance company' in eve could possibly be making any isk from their buiseness, and would have gone brankrupt a few months after luanch. I do like the idea of leaving corp ship insurance ingame tho, as this would allow corps to finance and support the corps pvp wings & deep space ops etc. Maybe this could be paid for by corp tax's (if tax's ever get implemented). Taranis WholeSale Deals.
Falbala	Posted - 2005.02.28 10:09:00 - [40] Oh yes it would remove isk: Put implant BPO 1 billion, you sell 100 tommorrow. 100 billions out of the game, maybe even more. How can you say it wouldn't?
Myko	Posted - 2005.02.28 10:16:00 - [41] In my opinion forcing people into moving to 0.0 is impossible. There is a sizeable percentage of the playerbase that would rather quit eve rather than have any possibility of PvP, for them no reward is worth the risk. They will simply do whatever earns the most isk from least risk. In my opinion insurance should be moved from a npc role to a player role, it would force re-imbursement prices to align to how risky a certain pilot or ship is, it would be much more realistic and could create an isk sink for those that have no idea how to run an insurance company :) it would also remove a source of npc income. IMO there should be an empire space CONCORD tax that is used to support bounties - players in safe space should pay for their uber protection. I completely argree that agent level and quality should go up as the security status of the system they're in goes down - anyone who can do lvl 4 missions should have enough to risk a couple of jumps in low sec space.
Thyro	Posted - 2005.02.28 10:51:00 - [42] Edited by: Thyro on 28/02/2005 10:52:50 Originally by: Question2 Can someone please explain why people wouldnt WANT to go to 0.0? ... I bet CCP was scratching their heads wondering why people didnt perform an exodus into 0.0 space. ... Because several things that seem to be hard to think at least in Iceland... Why no Exodus to 0.0? Well just few tips... Chock points which prevent anyone to go through... Alliances that are unable to protect a just ONE complete region... and we assist Alliances closing more than one region. This is possible due to small number of chock points. Because if wasn't that then we will see more people on 0.0 Blobs on map... what to say more about this... enough posts about this and also doesn't need to much to think about. Lack of NPC stations in 0.0 (exception for space controled by FA, SE, PA and few others that have many npcs stations fully serviced) however not enough to accomodate any minimal type of "Exodus" Stupid conquerable stations with their useless services: only few stations, lack of services and easy to be conquered to cause pain to previous residents on top fees. Useless POS with lack of basic services with exceptio of... POS are no more than a estatic Big Mining Station which, after too much pain produce some T2 components. Offices + Labs in 0.0 or near 0.0 space that cost more if not same to the ones on 1.0. Why "exodus" to 0.0 if in there are NO conditions to do so? "Exodus" might mean Exodus from EVE to other and also interesting online games and not from EVE Empire space to 0.0. Now regarding to topic originator. Regarding INSURANCE well what to say... another sad idea. (BTW lets nerf everything including the fee to play EVE) Anyway if your ars fly a T2 ship then you will know that insurance does not cover the loss of the ship neither all its modules. So, Stop be idiotic.
Admiral Pieg	Posted - 2005.02.28 11:54:00 - [43] Anyone speaking for this suggestion are obviously people whom want to cause even more grief when gangbanging someone at a gate. Im sorry but this change will never be implemented unless ccp wants to file for bankruptcy during the next year. Considering the time and effort it takes to get a battleship in comparison to how fast you can loose it, a change like this would drive people from eve like rats from a sinking ship. Do i have to remind you that the majority of CCP's paying customers are empire hugging, agent running, roid popping carebears? No i didnt think so. Having said that, i deffinetely think no insurance would make 0.0 battles and fleet warfare MUCH more interesting. ______________________ Pod from above.
SlaneeshZ	Posted - 2005.02.28 12:05:00 - [44] Generally spoken if you want to have 0.0 being the fightclub of EVE then removing insurance will make it only attractive for filthy rich players. It's already risky because there aren't many places to insure in 0.0, you will have to insure ships in empire space and getting them safe to your 0.0 spot of choice. Also it would have the effect that people already in 0.0 will avoid fighting at all costs and may resort to cheap ships (newbie ships, frigs and tier 1 cruisers) instead of the big ones for fights. I am not sure though what the exact reasoning behind removing insurance for 0.0 is though. Most people are hesitating anyway to go there and removing insurance for 0.0 isn't making 0.0 exactly attractive for them, it's like from going "go there, die and get a new ship, rinse and repeat" to "go there, die and eventually get a new ship, rinse and repeat until you are eventually broke". Also I am not sure about removing insurance during wars, I mean anyone could found a 1 man corp and declare war on a 40 man sized empire corp serving as grief-placeholder to prevent them to get any money back from insurance, whether it may be from PvP or PvE fights wouldn't matter. Just watch them getting broke and move on once they are done or tired - you wouldn't even have to fight a single shot. If insurance during wars should go then only if the ship is killed by that corp they are at war with. ---- A true player does feel no need to remind himself or fellow players that it is just a game.
Andrue	Posted - 2005.02.28 12:27:00 - [45] Insurance should expire more frequently and the premium should take account of past history. I also like the idea of player driven insurance. Being able to form an insurance company opens up the possibility of a stock market. Allow corporations/alliances to do the same and now you can hurt people financially. The problem is that such systems aren't easy to set up. -- (Battle hardened miner) [Brackley, UK] WARNING:This post may contain large doses of reality.
Demian Sky	Posted - 2005.02.28 17:01:00 - [46] Edited by: Demian Sky on 28/02/2005 17:02:41 Originally by: McBane Actually, what they should do with insurance is to give a kind of no claims bonus. Each time you lose a insured ship, the insurance goes up in cost until a point comes where you effectively can't get insurance (ie cost of insurace is more than the value of the ship). Should also include base cost of modules in the cover. Think that would work much better then - would penalise those that rely on insurance, prevent insurance fraud and still protect the noobs. I can't believe people totally breezed over this post. If insurance had to stay, the above solution would work great. However, I maintain none-the-less that insurance in 0.0 should be removed, as it would help deal with inflation, among many other things... The problem here is that everyone has become TOO FREAGIN' SPOILED!! Everyone is used to flying around in their shiney BS because it's a synch to buy a new one if it's blasted out of the sky. So spoiled are we now that the idea of flying into 0.0 in a cruiser or battlecruiser fills people with revulsion. That's rediculous! Cruisers and BC's would be substantially easier to replace--- but no, for some reason, half the EVE population is convinced that every pilot and his brother should be flying BS's around in every reach of space. If there were no insurance, and people were so stupid as to fly out there with their ONLY BS rather than purchesing a modest cruiser, than by golly, they deserve to lose it! Okay, so everyone will flock to empire to do agent level 4 agent missions. So here is yet another problem. Agent missions and NPC hunting in 0.0 needs to be polarized, whether insurance in 0.0 is nerfed or not. If agents and NPC hunting offered different kinds of rewards, then we'd see a healthy mix of pilots in both professions (perhaps agent NPC's should be an entirely different breed of pirate with a completely different breed of loot? Flesh traders, smugglers, etc).
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2005.02.28 17:11:00 - [47] 0.0 is already a pretty undesirable place for most people. This wouldn't make is any more so.
Lord Dynastron	Posted - 2005.02.28 17:13:00 - [48] Originally by: Myko In my opinion insurance should be moved from a npc role to a player role, it would force re-imbursement prices to align to how risky a certain pilot or ship is, it would be much more realistic and could create an isk sink for those that have no idea how to run an insurance company :) it would also remove a source of npc income. That would be really cool! You could base it on something as simple as # of deaths in the last X amount of time.
Dionysus Davinci	Posted - 2005.02.28 17:45:00 - [49] Wow, this would totally drive me back to empire or at least never PvP again. Let's stop hating the rich players, because they buy the nice stuff like fraction ships that smaller players earn in empire for lots and lots of space bucks. Including freashly released Tech II making other players rich.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.