EVE Search - GOOD IDEA! Remove insurance payouts for war declarers!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

GOOD IDEA! Remove insurance payouts for war declarers!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
OSughhi	Posted - 2005.04.20 15:06:00 - [31] By the way... Why are you fighting for? Inssurance???
Persia	Posted - 2005.04.20 16:15:00 - [32] Originally by: Jasmine Constantine No insurance payments in 0.0 ... no insurance payments for ships lost in concord sanctioned wars. That'd be my pitch. I don't believe for one minute this would lead to less fighting, but it would lead to less use of battleships and expensive ships in fighting. This is so true, we'd get more people using the ships they can afford to lose: Cruisers. Remember? Those are the ships that were supposed to form the majority of a fleet.
Persia	Posted - 2005.04.20 16:18:00 - [33] Edited by: Persia on 20/04/2005 16:17:48 I think this is one of those short term bad, long term good decisions that could be made in an MMORPGs life. (If anyone read that article going around last year.)
Zandramus	Posted - 2005.04.20 16:20:00 - [34] Right up until the point where some carebears battleship gets ganked by a 30 frigate fleet. then all hell will break loose on teh forums. Zandramus Zandramus Parking Violations Officer Geminate Division S.A.S
Zandramus	Posted - 2005.04.20 16:22:00 - [35] oh and none of this no insurance only for teh declarer of the war, if you want to get rind of insurance it should be for all parties involved in a war, not just the declarer. Zandramus Zandramus Parking Violations Officer Geminate Division S.A.S
Cloned Mark	Posted - 2005.04.20 16:27:00 - [36] Quote: GOOD IDEA! lol ----------------------------- Latrodectus hesperus
Sleazy Cabbie	Posted - 2005.04.20 20:19:00 - [37] Edited by: Sleazy Cabbie on 20/04/2005 20:19:34 If you can't afford to war with your Megathron, fly something you can afford to lose. Remember those ships that start with F? Remember rocket launchers and sm hybrid turrets? Any competent small team flying tech 1 frigates can effectively SHUT DOWN a production corp 10 times its size, I've seen it happen. I'm not sure what aspects of this game give asymmetric warfare a HUGE advantage, but 4 experienced guerilla fighters in dirt cheap ships are worth more than a dozen half-wits from one of these giant 200 man corps that pass out Ravens like candy. Okay so you have 200 guys in ravens. Now let's see you try to operate your core business without an alt corp. What are you gonna do, mine veld in ravens? Now add in no insurance for aggressors. Suddenly the 200 man corp has a chance against 3 man guerilla warfare. Capiche? Teamwork and corporate structure should be supported and encouraged. It should not be a liability to recruit newbies into an organized large corporate structure. Currenly, size is a liability, speed and guile is everything. No insurance for aggressors would balance the scales between huge megacorps and tiny little bands of guerillas.
Miner's Bane	Posted - 2005.04.20 20:37:00 - [38] Edited by: Miner''s Bane on 20/04/2005 20:37:41 Either: Remove all insurance everywhere from everyone. Remove all insurance from 0.0-0.4 and in CONCORD wars, but if you get killed there your premium is refunded. Change insurance back to 3 week policies and bury the default payout. ------------------------------------------------------------------
Kingpenn	Posted - 2005.04.20 20:56:00 - [39] Originally by: IamBen This is a terrible idea. This will make people less likely to fight. Isnt the idea to have more fighting? Fighting = fun? sorry to break it to you. Not all of eve wants the pvp aspect. Forcing all to fight will cause ccp to lose subs... The idea behind eve, is to have fun in one or more of the ASPECTS of the game (pvp is only 1 aspect, not the only way to play). Tell you what, keep killing all those haulers and miners, and the labrats that make the stuff, and soon, you wont be able to buy anything because nothing will be made (or the cost is soo high you need to do lvl 4's for a year to buy a kessy)... No miners = no pvp players in ships = no eve (unless npcs take over ALL mfg task, including mining, and we know that wont happen...)
Selim	Posted - 2005.04.20 21:01:00 - [40] Personally, I think insurance should only pay out when you are killed by npcs, or by someone you are not at war with in empire. So it would not pay out, ever, if a player kills you: - in 0.0 - as part of a concord-sanctioned war Not just that, but insurance needs to be totally reworked, its probably tied with npc bounties as the biggest source of inflation in EVE.
Miner's Bane	Posted - 2005.04.20 21:02:00 - [41] Originally by: Kingpenn No miners = no pvp players in ships = no eve (unless npcs take over ALL mfg task, including mining, and we know that wont happen...) Odd, I'm a PvP player, and thanks to your shiny lvl 4 missions dropping me metric tons of minerals (thanks rogue drones!), I dont buy from the market anymore anyway. I have ~200k industry SP and I build every tech1 ship/module/ammo necessary. When it comes down to it, you 'non-PvPers' are now completely superfluous. You could all catch fire and disappear tomorrow and the only reason I'd notice is that the server magically became less laggy. ------------------------------------------------------------------
Kingpenn	Posted - 2005.04.20 22:17:00 - [42] Originally by: Miner's Bane Originally by: Kingpenn No miners = no pvp players in ships = no eve (unless npcs take over ALL mfg task, including mining, and we know that wont happen...) Odd, I'm a PvP player, and thanks to your shiny lvl 4 missions dropping me metric tons of minerals (thanks rogue drones!), I dont buy from the market anymore anyway. I have ~200k industry SP and I build every tech1 ship/module/ammo necessary. When it comes down to it, you 'non-PvPers' are now completely superfluous. You could all catch fire and disappear tomorrow and the only reason I'd notice is that the server magically became less laggy. lv 4 missions are PVP , oh wow, geeeeee, never woulda thought of that.....omfgwhatsnextroidsarepvp) stop trying to twist the meaning so you can attempt a lame insult.... pull head out of that dark warm stinky place, look around and see that EVE is not PVP, it has PVP as an aspect, but it is not a PVP only game (for the dense idiots like you out there, PVP = player vs player fighting) You build you mine you run missions ....and you think you are a pvp player??? You sound like the typical carebear type with delusions... EVE's universe revolves around the players that mine for minerals, via shooting a rock, or collecting drone alloys...so things are built...remove this type of player, and the PVP players (not those with delusions of being pvp) wont have anything to buy when they get blown up...subs get canceled...eve goes byby... you want pvp, goto 0.0 space...unless you are afraid...
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.04.20 22:23:00 - [43] Originally by: Selim Personally, I think insurance should only pay out when you are killed by npcs, or by someone you are not at war with in empire. So it would not pay out, ever, if a player kills you: - in 0.0 - as part of a concord-sanctioned war Not just that, but insurance needs to be totally reworked, its probably tied with npc bounties as the biggest source of inflation in EVE. Yeah, I'd have to agree with this. This protects all those level-4-mission-whoring empire-hugging carebears from the ebil pie-rats (GOD I hate that word. Almost as much as I hate this smiley --> ). Only give insurance in 0.0. Not in empire, whether you're at war or not. OR from NPCs. It might not make sense from a realistic point of view, but who the hell cares!? Do you want a realistic, unbalanced crap game or an unrealistic, balanced one? Yeah, thought so. Empire 4tl. ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Brutor Slave	Posted - 2005.04.20 22:46:00 - [44] bad idea
Jane Vladmir	Posted - 2005.04.20 22:46:00 - [45] stupid carebear idea.
SBO Braveloco	Posted - 2005.04.20 23:10:00 - [46] Quote: GHOST RED: Insurance needs to be reworked from the ground up anyways. Should be a brokered system where you are insured for the value of your ship, not the market rate. So when you want to insure your ubermega BS, you go to the broker, select from a drop down the value of your ship to insure then pay the premium on it. I totally agre with this. Otherwise why be a mission running carebare in Empire space for months going after a Navy Raven or Apoc? The insurance payout is exactly the same as the base battleship. Any real SMART player would never use the thing in a situation where its plus' could really come in handy in PvP cause thats just TOO FREAKING much money to lose for one mistake. As I see it, they exist for one reason...to sell to some retard with ISK burning a hole in his pocket so you can be seet for a very long time. Otherwise thats billions of ISK and tons of your time spent running missions down the tube for nothing! -loco
Zoner Diode	Posted - 2005.04.20 23:17:00 - [47] None of my RL insurance policies cover acts of war, its completely silly that insurance would cover such a loss in the game. The insurance companies would go bankrupt so fast.
Miner's Bane	Posted - 2005.04.21 00:24:00 - [48] Originally by: Kingpenn lv 4 missions are PVP , oh wow, geeeeee, never woulda thought of that.....omfgwhatsnextroidsarepvp) stop trying to twist the meaning so you can attempt a lame insult.... pull head out of that dark warm stinky place, look around and see that EVE is not PVP, it has PVP as an aspect, but it is not a PVP only game (for the dense idiots like you out there, PVP = player vs player fighting) You build you mine you run missions ....and you think you are a pvp player??? You sound like the typical carebear type with delusions... EVE's universe revolves around the players that mine for minerals, via shooting a rock, or collecting drone alloys...so things are built...remove this type of player, and the PVP players (not those with delusions of being pvp) wont have anything to buy when they get blown up...subs get canceled...eve goes byby... you want pvp, goto 0.0 space...unless you are afraid... Because if anyone ever runs agent missions (given that theyre the best source of isk there is), they cant ever PvP again? Don't answer. Youre an idiot, whatever your reply is, itll be stupid. ------------------------------------------------------------------
rastalin highcort	Posted - 2005.04.21 00:38:00 - [49] yer lets make eve insurance like RL were they rip you off big time and cancel peoples policys just when they want to claim and the isk revinue could just be deleated by CCP. What about tolls on gates and dont forget taxes. Hey come to think of it why are there no supernovas that wipe out whole corps. Damm Do gooders kill em all ps i love you all maybe i should be pope
Morkus Rex	Posted - 2005.04.21 07:40:00 - [50] I would not mind if insurance worked just a little like RL. The more ships that are destroyed, the higher the price of insurance for that type of ship should be. Maybe also a lower payout if you fly into low-sec or a war zone. My motto has always been, don't fly a ship you cannot afford to loose! I usually don't insure my ships By filing this bug report you have challenged the honor of my family. Prepare to die!
Vel Kyri	Posted - 2005.04.21 07:54:00 - [51] I think i qualify as a PvPer (can't use a t2 miner, only can do simple agents, fly interceptors, etc) peraonslly, i hate insurance as it is - i would be all for removing the NPC insurance completely. I would loke it cause it would mean that to be an effective PvP corp, we need the "carebears" to mine and build for us - we would need to be sure to protect our own industry so we can continue fighting. It would give a bonus for being organised. A reason to be part of a good corp. It would also make people stop to think before blobbing up where they would loose their ships to lag... and give more reason for people to be using the old t1 frigs and cruisers rather than only battleships. If you cant afford to lose it - dont fly it!!! -----
Starbuck	Posted - 2005.04.21 08:04:00 - [52] I'm all for this idea. I'd also back a removal of the insurance system. Make ship loss mean something for everyone. --------------------------------------------------- mom'n'pop hasn't made me a cool sig yet :)
NGRU Rix	Posted - 2005.04.21 08:11:00 - [53] Originally by: Jane Vladmir stupid carebear idea. Out of me and you, and i would say the bigger carebear is you, jane - need your precious insurance to fight? I dont even insure my ships and never have.
meowcat	Posted - 2005.04.21 08:13:00 - [54] remove insurance from the game completely. ~~~~)\~~~~~\o/~~~~ yeah but no but yeah but no but
Vel Kyri	Posted - 2005.04.21 08:14:00 - [55] i think its funny - lots of the merc and other PvP corps are all for removing insurance from game completely.. umm - they are the ones who actually risk their ships daily. just saying.... -----
Sanaen Eydanwadh	Posted - 2005.04.21 13:25:00 - [56] Originally by: Vel Kyri personally, i hate insurance as it is - i would be all for removing the NPC insurance completely. It would give a bonus for being organised. A reason to be part of a good corp. I might be crazy, but I quite agree with that... just have to add: AND wars would finally have a sense, when you can inflict real damages to your foe. More and more players fit loads of T2 modules in each and every slot tho, so they are already "hurted" when they lose ships. That's not going to happen though, for too many people think that would be an uber-nerf to the pvp - and they may be right... lots of BS-only pilots today would never even think at using cheaper ships when they're getting short on wallet BS-blobs or nothing I guess...
Vel Kyri	Posted - 2005.04.21 14:15:00 - [57] well, a number of good, organised corps already offer their own ship replacement schemes - low cost ships to members etc... i am sure that enterprising players would come up with their own replacement to insurance... once those NPCs with botomless pockets are taken out of the equation. -----
Starbuck	Posted - 2005.04.21 15:27:00 - [58] There we go. remove NPC insurance and lets go with PC insurance. --------------------------------------------------- mom'n'pop hasn't made me a cool sig yet :)
Raven1x	Posted - 2005.04.21 18:53:00 - [59] Good idea from an RP/storyline point of view. Utterly unworkable idea from a player point of view. And I think the pvpers and mercs are campaigning for the removal of insurance entirely because they mostly pick on peaceful players who don't pose any real threat to them and are more interested in making the carebears in-game time miserable than in protecting themselves. Go on, flame me... ____________________________________________ There is no such thing as too much cynicism. Beware of geeks bearing gifs.
Corvus Dove	Posted - 2005.04.21 19:00:00 - [60] Lousy, Lousy idea. Getting rid of insurance would be hella discouraging for new players, which is bad for business. Additionally, it would further truncate new players moving into 0.0..... Don't F with insurance. Its one of the few things in this game that requires no tweaking and actually reacts to player market construction costs. There are much more important things out there to code. "You Griefer!!!" = "You Doodyhead!!!"

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.