| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Skeeve
   |
Posted - 2003.09.01 21:00:00 -
[1]
I posted the same thing in the Patch Review column.. but many don't read that.. in any event I'd like some thoughts on this idea? I think it may help resolve a lot of frustration that many have felt of late...
As we've come to know, the recent CTD's and Blockades et al have restricted many to Empire space. It's hard to loose your new ship in a silly situation. Depending on your level it can be catastrophic... insurance is currently not really that worthwhile, at least it doesn't seem to help that much. Since there is also the hard rule that barring incontrovertable proof that your loss was caused by a "game error" then you are S.O.L. to get your ship back.
ANYWAY... here is a thought.. We have the Insurance system already in place would it be difficult to tweak or revamp it to record what your current config is when you purchase your coverage level? It would record your ship .. mods.. the value of them at time of coverage (rares and specials are excepted of course..they are covered at "regular equivalent item" value) So you pay for coverage on a percentage... 50% 70% 90% (90 being max) and WHEN (yes when) your ship goes boom you get a cash payout based on what was on it (barring trade items or cargo..that's a whole other thing). Now you at least hurt a bit... but you can recover, your loss while a sting is not going to make you want to cancel your account in frustration. Now we have stimulated the ship builders market.. the weapons sellers... etc since people would be more likely to get in harms way if they feel they won't get FUBAR when they go up against other players.. NPC's et al.
Granted this idea is a suggestion only.. but one I hope may be good. Any thoughts?
"Your Mother was a Hamster.. and your Father smelt of Elderberries!" - traditional French Insult |
Dianabolic
|
Posted - 2003.09.01 23:52:00 -
[2]
Thing is, how do you cost a Prototype gun?
What if you paid 5m for it? but the game only values it at mineral cost.....?
I'd like to see insurance being a set amount and it replaces your ship - no scales, one payment.
ie 1m for a thorax etc.
Then people who can afford a thorax, can afford to lose them (if they lose the modules, that's just tough imo).
|
Skeeve
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 00:15:00 -
[3]
that's what I said earlier in my post... there's no way to "cost" for "rare" items.. If you want to put rares on your rig it's on your head that you may well lose them in a battle, but that's life.. *lol*. the "Prototype" would be replaced with the market equivalent type /calibre of weapon value. Granted far lower perhaps than the rare but the rare's really are not worth the high prices vs benifit on Market models. If there are no market equivalent that's life then but the main point of the post was to put forth a proposal on making it less of an issue to lose your ship thereby stimulating PvP action, Eveconomy etc. I know that I can't afford to throw my cruiser into a fight .. insured or not.. I'd verymuch like to go PvP.. but I can't afford to .. insured or not... if I could get most of my loss back I wouldn't be so cautious. but it's just a suggestion anyway..
"Your Mother was a Hamster.. and your Father smelt of Elderberries!" - traditional French Insult |
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 00:25:00 -
[4]
I don't feel modules should be covered by insurance at all. You'll note that those taking the most risks (pirates) use the cheapest of modules.
I love my 650mm Scout and its little brother, the 650mm Prototype Siege. But when I head out to someplace really hot, they stay home and plain 650s are on my ship. Love my Counterbalanced Gyros. But I've got Pneumatics for hot spots. I'm not donating uber loot to Space Invaders. But by leaving those items back at base, I free myself to slug it out with them if I encounter them 
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Laarz Kaledon
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 00:26:00 -
[5]
I believe changing insurance to somehow make it where it wasn't such a huge loss is what would really open up this game... ie. having more combat, more ship losses, happy ship manufacturers.
It truly would help the eve economy and thereby increase the excitement of this game, in my opinion... let's see it happen CCP!!!!!! 
|
ImEasy
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 00:52:00 -
[6]
The only amswer to the insurence and therefore 'more pvp' situation and all the knock ons from that, is to make the ONE payment thats lasts the life of the ship. When you lose your ship, you get back only a certain amount, as you would in the real world.
Buy a brand new car, it is insured, on loss of car you recieve virtually the full amout back...BUT..as the car gets older, it depreciates in value and the insuremce payout reflects that. Therefore, as each week goes by without loss to your ship, you recieve less %. As in the real world.
That is the only solution i can see to the current CCP desire for more pvp and the playerbase's desires not to take such a massive financial hit on the loss of a ship.
To the mods: I am not a playerbase' 'representative, but stating an opinion based on reading these forums - they know what i mean 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Im Easy....work it out for yourself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 04:19:00 -
[7]
 Quote:
The only amswer to the insurence and therefore 'more pvp' situation and all the knock ons from that, is to make the ONE payment thats lasts the life of the ship. When you lose your ship, you get back only a certain amount, as you would in the real world.
Buy a brand new car, it is insured, on loss of car you recieve virtually the full amout back...BUT..as the car gets older, it depreciates in value and the insuremce payout reflects that. Therefore, as each week goes by without loss to your ship, you recieve less %. As in the real world.
That is the only solution i can see to the current CCP desire for more pvp and the playerbase's desires not to take such a massive financial hit on the loss of a ship.
To the mods: I am not a playerbase' 'representative, but stating an opinion based on reading these forums - they know what i mean
Never had a car totalled by the insurance agency have you?
Insurance pays the total value of the car, yes. But that is never what you paid for the car, even if you paid cash and it was totalled within the same week of purchase.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Cruise
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 04:24:00 -
[8]
True, as soon as you drive the vehicle off the lot you get instant depreciation.
I think the insurance idea they've implemented has merit, just not at so heavy a cost to the buyer. Name me any other form of insurance where someone pays so much for one lousy week's insurance? Insure, for instance, a Thorax at full market insurance value for a month straight and you've paid over the value of the Thorax itself!
It's no wonder people think the insurance system's a total joke.
-------------------------------------------
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis ad capul tuum saxum immane mittam.
|
Juan Andalusian
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 11:46:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 02/09/2003 11:47:51
Making ship loss easier to cope with than already is will only promote the "BS only" trend we are currently seeing.
Ship loss costs are fine the way they are now. What needs to be adressed are the usefulness of smaller cruisers and frigates in combat.
In this way if you want to participate in PvP and actually be significant but can't handle the risk of having to cope with the ship loss you can fly a frigate or a cruiser.
One way to achieve this is through !FORMATIONS!
Link to thread: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=29500
**Pain is meant to be felt** |
Sambo
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 12:09:00 -
[10]
Yes Fix insurance its a win win situation.
1.Less petions for GMs to sort through
2.Better player retention.
3.Pirates have more customers.
4.Ship builders have more customers.
5.Let players explore more with out being stuck in noobland
6.Eve customers much happier
7.Happy customers bring new customers through word of mouth.
8.CCP makes more profit allowing for more man hours put in to game content
You dont have to fix it with a sledge hammer let it pay for 90% of the ship , none of the items on the ship but make the cost of the insurance worth buying it and make it last longer. Say maybe a month in duration and cost 2% of the value of the ship. I dunno whats everyone else think all I know is insurance in its current form is a joke. Lastly if the person gets podded to many times over a certain period of time no insurance for them for a certain period of time cus they could be scamming the insurance company building there own ships from there own minerals and collecting insurance as a profit.
|
Skeeve
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 17:55:00 -
[11]
Excellent points all.. although I don't think that a "revamp" of the insurance scenario would encourage a "BS" mentality.. that's the way of it anyway.. you're in a NooB ship.. you want an UberFrigate.. Your in an UberFrigate you want a Cruiser. your in a Cruiser.. you know the song... allowing for a little more "carefree" attitude in going up agains players will only strengthen both gameplay.. gamer experience.. RELIEVE some of the admitted whining.
Personally I think the "battle worth" of Frigates Cruisers and BS's are ok now. If your in a Battleship.. you'd better have a cruiser to cover you if you get jumped by good frigate pirates.. you ever try to hit a fast attack close in fighting Frigate? pray you can warp away in time..
Just thought it may be worthwhile and easy to revamp the insurance scheme to inject some muchneeded goodnes into the universe.. and I'm gratified to see that you seem to agree..
"Your Mother was a Hamster.. and your Father smelt of Elderberries!" - traditional French Insult |
Koda
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 18:42:00 -
[12]
In the US (and I suspect most countries), cost of auto insurance is tied to your driving record. Have few accidents and it's cheap, have a lot and it's not.
Most EVE players don't go through too many ships and their "good driving" records would earn them cheaper insurance than those who like to live dangerously.
It would lessen the steep cost of fully insuring a ship and encourage people to take more risks, more Pvp, etc.
The players win because of more fun, the ship builders, miners, retailer win because of increased ship sales.
--------------
Share the love in the SNIGG Forums
|
Mustard
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 21:22:00 -
[13]
Well, there was another insurence type post a little earlier. I feel that the insurence system needs to be revamped. I can go into details about how casual gamers earn this and risks and fun factors... but I think a simple solution is make the term longer. A week is to short. Maybe a month (ie 30 days) or perhaps model it after the cloning system. That way people who take little risk can feel safe and accept disaster knowing they can recover and people who take high risk can pay insurence over and over when their ship blows up.
I don't earn the 300K a week or more it takes to insure my Rupture. I have a family and a full time job. When I get to a place where I can buy a battleship in many months from now, I will have to basicly fly it around Empire space and mount "dummy guns" on it because paying outrageous insurence won't be enough to keep me sane.
Thats the rub. The fact that we spend all this time aquiring wealth sooo slowly and then in 5 seconds its gone. For good. Its a game and sure, unexpected events are fun, but for those of it who are tired of being set back weeks even months to attaining a battleship or whatever, the insurence system needs revamping.
My humble opinion,
Mustard
|
Jojin
|
Posted - 2003.09.02 21:33:00 -
[14]
I agree the insurance system could use a small modification; increase the duration and increase the cost. I would like to see the current cost doubled and the duration increased four fold. Thus double the price and increase the duration to a month.
I feel this would help out those who wish to have a lower investment into insurance. It would also remove the current temptation to commit insurance fraud for a profit (insure ship and destroy for profit).
|
Ruffles
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 11:53:00 -
[15]
Completely agree.
The insurance system really caters for the continual player, perhaps in a big corp.
It doesn't really account for casual players at all, and where earning money requires far greater time spans.
The insurance should be increased up to somethin around a month or perhaps six weeks.
|
Ashton Black
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 12:30:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Ashton Black on 03/09/2003 12:33:57
The thought of ship loss is the one thing that has stopped me from actively taking part in any PvP. Even just to get isurance for the week that you want to PvP is ludicrous. RL insurance is based on a mixture of Value, Driver and Location. Not just on the value of the vehicle.
Whilst we are on the subject of insurance why not have a graduated scale of insurance dependant on the sec status of the pilot? The greater the neg sec the greater the isurance costs.. This would "reward" lawful pilots and peanalise the criminals (or is this too much of a carebear nerf?)
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 12:57:00 -
[17]
Quote:
Edited by: Ashton Black on 03/09/2003 12:33:57
The thought of ship loss is the one thing that has stopped me from actively taking part in any PvP. Even just to get isurance for the week that you want to PvP is ludicrous. RL insurance is based on a mixture of Value, Driver and Location. Not just on the value of the vehicle.
That's silly. Take a hint from the pirates. Going to PvP? Unload the Scouts, take off any modules you don't have a backup for and use regular equipment.
They do.
Quote:
Whilst we are on the subject of insurance why not have a graduated scale of insurance dependant on the sec status of the pilot? The greater the neg sec the greater the isurance costs.. This would "reward" lawful pilots and peanalise the criminals (or is this too much of a carebear nerf?)
Too much of a carebear nerf. Pend Insurance is an insurance agency. The only thing missing from their corporate logo is the Skull N Crossbones, just like State Farm
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Li'l Mol
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 13:13:00 -
[18]
simple solution...
keep the costs the same, but make the policy last a year. 
______________
'When all your wishes are granted... Many of your dreams will be destroyed...'
____________________________ |
Reluah
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 14:07:00 -
[19]
There are some good points around, but generally i dont like any of them, as they are mostly easy fixes aimed at making the insurance chaper, mabye it should be cheaper, mabye not.
imo the insurances is too cheap as it is. the reason why i think this is that u can make money from buying a ship, and the insure it/blow it up.
however, no matter how mutch u tweak the insurance system everyone will never be satisfied.
a real problem with the insurance is that as it is, the power gamers have alot cheaper insurances than those who play 3-4hours/week
say if u play 100hours/week(some actually do) u will be playing like 20times more than other players, and thus, 20times more income making that insurace really cheap.
What they could do however, would be to set the insurance to 1day/1week of PLAYING time, the time might be unreasonable as i dunno what would be fair :)
as for equipment insurance, it would *really* be hard to keep this balancedsay u could insure stuff for what they was worth, so u could buy 20gauss rail guns, insure them and then fit them on some cheap ship, blow it up, get money back from the guns u had fitted, dock at a newbie station and pick up the guns that survived the explosion, then u gained a few guns for free, repeat until u have no guns left and u will probably have made ALOT more moneythan what the guns did cost etc.. insurance scams ahoy :P
somehting that could work tho, would have it like with RL car insurances, the more u crash the more u have to pay for the same insurance, also, if u blow ur ship up u sholdent get any insurance money anyway
_______
m°f |
Skeeve
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 14:09:00 -
[20]
One thing I did neglect to point out.. My Bad.. the "New" insurance would cover you till your ship goes "boom"... and like rent and real insurance you'd have to pay a "monthly" - "weekly" premium to keep it active, but at a reasonable amount.. depending on your ship value.. ie a couple of thou isk for frigates. more for cruisers and bs's. The prorating idea is a very good one (charge based on sec rating) but may be a pain to implement. Basically I'm hoping that the Dev team could throw this tweak in without too much hassle and exponentially increase game play for everyone. Reducing the by now famous (infamous? lol) "I lost my ship I'm quitting!!" Petitions (yes I"m guilty of that one too.. ). Increasing the length of coverage is critical..along with the initial "bulk payment" to purchase then a small weekly or monthly fee to keep active. Hopefully that would jumpstart the PvP action... Market..etc. and reduce the number of bad feelings that ship loss gives.
(oh and they locked my thread in the patch column..LOL.. ah well hopefully this one will reach the ears of Pann and the Dev team.. )
"Your Mother was a Hamster.. and your Father smelt of Elderberries!" - traditional French Insult |
Luc Boye
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 14:50:00 -
[21]
Well I have few ideas (behold!) about insurances:
1.) make insurance rates dynamic by following means:
1.1.) create a NPC insurance corp, for formalities sake
1.2.) make insurance rates dynamic, depending on how many insured ships DO get blown up (so that the insurance corp has profit, but NOT THAT BIG PROFIT)
1.3.) modify insurance rate per players skill points (resembles age irl)
1.4.) modify insurance rate per track record (insurance bonus) - if you loose a lot of ships you have higher rates
2.) as for the modules insured, we should have an option to insure them as well, exotic modules base price could be calculated as their basic variant, for example you insure anode ions as if they were standard ions, and get payed accordingly
or
3.) raise the limit on how much are we allowed to spend on insurance, but that could be a problem: if insurance is too cheap and there is no limit, it WILL get exploited (insurance fraud)
The problem with cheap insurances is not that it couldnt or shouldnt be done. The real problem is exploit possibilities, and that is the main reason I believe that insurances are expensive. Lets say you can build a megathron for say 90 mil in mineral costs and it costs you 10 mil to get a mega insured to its market price, that would make you some extra cash every time you get blown up.
--
2004.12.29 23:33:40combatMining Pollution Cloud hits you, doing 140.0 damage. |
Turtle
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 15:20:00 -
[22]
Well having gone through the total game IRL recently this is what I would do if possible.
1. Create a NPC insurance corp.
2. The NPC insurance corp buys ships from PC builders.
3. Rates are dynamic to insure that the insurance corp makes a little profit.
4. When you loose a ship you get a new ship in return. Of course you will need to pick it up at the nearest claims office.
5. You can buy supplimental insurance for an agreed upon price to cover modules. This rate would also be dynamic based on payouts. It only covers item distroyed, not what is lost. In addition policys are per item, i.e. it won't let you take out a 5 mill policy on a medium shield booster.
6. Tie rates to skill points. The more points the less insurance cost.
7. Tie rates to sec rating. 0 = bases rate, + a discount, - an increase
In theory this would drop insurance rate alot. It would eliminate fraud in most cases. It would provide a steady market for people to sell there ships.
Face it, it hurts to loose a ship. I'm almost ready to think about a BS but for me insurance will not be possible. I can hardly make the insurance week to week on my MoA. I'm not in a big corp nor do I want to be.
|
McWatt
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 15:25:00 -
[23]
reluah s system of a link to play time is the only post making sense here!
tip: use cheapest insurance, no fancy modules and rethink buying that battleship.
and no, i don t want some real life system, filing forms, checking regional/dangers lists just to have the insurance not pay when finally something happened.
|
Meau
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 16:31:00 -
[24]
Insuring equipment as well as the ship would make exploiting the insurance system even more profitable and easier. As not all equipment is destroyed when a ship explodes, the insurance would either have to be very expensive, or cover only a small portion of the equipment cost, and so wouldnt help to solve your problem.
Your problem, hmmm, what was that again? You put too many eggs in one basket, yep, that was it. Just stop doing that.
With the ship prices one has nowadays, full insurance already pays more than the cost to replace mosts ships.
The real problem isnt the money you get from the insurance company.
The real problem isnt even the cost of the insurance.
The real problem is that you have to pay the same fee insuring a ship that is used 2 hours a week, and one that is used 23/7.
Dont get me wrong, i like many of the ideas here about changing the insurance, f.e. counting lost ships to calculate cost, but they would take more time to implement than the insurance system will get for months to come, considering all other more urgent issues.
Imho the best thing to do atm would be to keep the current system with only one change. Lower the insurance period to 3-4 days, but only count online hours.
|
Klydor
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 19:45:00 -
[25]
Tieing insurance to sec rating is not really worth doing. Most new age pirates have +ve sec ratings. Also the insurance would be cheaper for those players who are more likely to be making money ie those with high sec as they're more experienced and know how the game works better than a new player.
Having insurance work like real life in the sense of the less you crash a car the lower the premium (no claims etc) is a bad idea.
Why? Well it may reward the more cautious pilots who die very little. But then it will worsen combat, players may be less willing to go into combat when they know their insurance could double if they die.
Also, yet again it penalises the new players who won't be able to benefit from the no claims discount and are the most likely to get blown up by the more experienced players who have a lower insurance.
It would be nice if insurance was tweaked in some way, for example making it impossible to make money by blowing your ship up.
|
Skeeve
|
Posted - 2003.09.04 21:51:00 -
[26]
Thanks much everyone for your suggestions... there is a wealth of good ideas to pull from. May they reach the all seeing all knowing DevGods... 
"Your Mother was a Hamster.. and your Father smelt of Elderberries!" - traditional French Insult |
Fusco T
|
Posted - 2003.09.04 22:48:00 -
[27]
""You'll note that those taking the most risks (pirates) use the cheapest of modules.""
hmmm Let's see vito is a pirate and he dropped extrudeds. Leyla is a pirate and she dropped proto gauss.
Also since you have zero statistical evidence to support your claim of "most risk".
I think you don't know what you're talking about here.
Piracy is is no more 'risky' than bounty hunting. Or exploring stain as a non-stain member. Or hunting in fountain without a pass.
I also find it odd that you would say pirates have the most risk and then when suggested by someone else that they have higher insurance costs you boo hoo it.
Insurance is based on risk correct? I mean an accountant certainly does not have the same insurance rates as an explosives expert or stunt man right?
Insurance just like anything else should make sense and be profitable for the insurance company without being useless like it is now.
In fact I would be for player run insurance companies. Some form of simple contracting, and then some means (by no means absolute) to handle fraud or at least investigate it. Possibly sending a copy of the kill report to the insurance company to see who was involved etc...
|
Kapp
|
Posted - 2003.09.05 02:15:00 -
[28]
The problem with insurance rates and returns is in one somple word, "exploiters". Already they make 10% profit by building, insuring and then losing a ship in the astroid belt out there. This goes from what I have heard for all ships if you build them with good skills.
So unfortunately, for the rest of us who don't exploit thru insurance fraud, insurance is a big screw. (Seriously, how hard could it be for them to figure out that a guy has lost hundreds of ships? haha flag that account for no insurance for you!) I think that to make the duration of the insurance a full month would be far more fair to us the player. Currently there are only two insurance lvls to use. 50% for normal use and 100% if you're literally heading into a war.
So the insurance period should be raised to a month and the payout for 100% insurance should be lowered by 10% to stop exploiters. By no means should an added avenue for exploitation be introduced so we can be further nerfed.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |