| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Renegade
   |
Posted - 2003.09.03 09:22:00 -
[1]
wow just got my new battleship and to insure it for the value it cost me its going to set me back over 28mill i dont play enough to earn that back in 1 week!
Would a better suggestion be a rolling policy where for example i might pay 10 mill to start the policy then every week pay 1 mill to keep it going. then should my ship get destroyed i have to pay 10 mill to start another policy.
only a crude example i know but you get the idea.
|
Danton Marcellus
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 11:58:00 -
[2]
The CCP seem to have a notion that people not playing 24/7 should not have battleships either but I agree cheaper insurance would liven things up quite a bit.
Convert Stations
|
Serge
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 12:03:00 -
[3]
well - atm if u pay the cash for platinum insurance for 3 weeks than u have paid what your ship costs!
I thought about doin a cheaper insurance, but then decided to buy a backup ship ... so IMO one can easily skip ship insurance as it is atm.
Jep - an improve is needed badly!
Renegade¦s idea is sound imo.
***********************************************
... "we suddenly have a good 2 dozen Chicken Littles running about proclaiming tha |
Ruffles
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 15:25:00 -
[4]
I think its a little risky to ignore insurance complete due to the worms and CTD's we all have been experiencing in the past weeks.
I agree that the time frame really isn't reallistic for the more casual player. Four to six weeks would be a more realistic effort for a ship that size, especially the ammounts involved.
I don't think you should make it cheaper, as there could be issues associated with that. However, I don't see any issues making it a longer time duration.
|
ULTIMA TREX
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 15:42:00 -
[5]
how about both.
you pay a small amount for a weeks insurance or pay a larger amount for 4 weeks but not 4 times the price of the 1 week insurance. so u save money the longer u want insurance.
|
Firekraker
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 16:37:00 -
[6]
Does GEICO cover this region of space?
 Quote:
Suck it up soldier! It only gets worse from here!
|
lebo
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 19:39:00 -
[7]
not sure, they might set up a small branch office somewhere 
|
Jojin
|
Posted - 2003.09.03 23:08:00 -
[8]
I think the basic insurance rates should be raised by 50% and their duration increase by 100% or 200%.
This would have a net result of 25% to 50% reduction in the rate of insurance over time and it would eliminate the current ability to commit insurance fraud.
Until such time as the insurance companies in EVE start to increase their rates based on individuals and associated claims, lowering the rate for coverage will only increase the amount of fraudulent claims.
I can imagine this would be a pain to do with the ability to create alternate characters with clean insurance slates.
|
Monium
|
Posted - 2003.09.05 02:44:00 -
[9]
I like that you can continue to train skills while you are offline, but things like insurance should "tick" off of ingame time.
You buy insurance for a week, it should be a week of ingame time and subtract the hours you are on from the policy.
This makes it so everyone pays the same for the identical amount of coverage time. If you use it up in an actual week, then you had your week of coverage. If it takes you a month to use it up, then you got your weeks worth of coverage as well.
Is sad when you purchase insurance and you ISP goes out or you take an unexpected vacation/trip and have essentially "wasted" that money as you weren't even online.
Another way to change it would be to make it like clones. You pay for a clone and it is good until you upgrade or have to use it. You could pay for insurance and it is good until you upgrade ships or have to make a claim against the policy.
|
Volchier
|
Posted - 2003.09.05 15:37:00 -
[10]
Perhaps they set them so high for a reason. Meaning when they talk about this game they say that you can pretty much be anything that you want to be. Well perhaps it is time for someone to open an insurance corp. Now I'm not too good with accounting but I'm sure that there is a way to make it profitable.
|
SUNchaser
|
Posted - 2003.09.05 21:55:00 -
[11]
I totally agree that having to pay close to 40% of a ships value for one weeks coverage is foolish. I feel 10% coverage is sufficient and instead of getting isk when you lose your ship you have a new one waiting at the first station you dock at(to eliminate insurance fraud). I have the opinion that the "current" arrangement was done in the misguided hope it would stimulate the market with all the players continually replacing their ships from the many PvP encounters going on. Guess what players just avoid PvP combat instead thus circumventing the need for insurance at all.
|
Jojin
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 01:21:00 -
[12]
I disagree with the auto-replacement of a vessel with a new one as a solution to the insurance fraud situation.
Perhaps, it would be a better option, if the game automatically purchased a replacement ship for you from a station actually selling the vessel. This could either be from the nearest or lowest price vendor. From an insurance companyÆs perspective, I would assume the lowest price would be the path chosen.
|
Doppelganger
|
Posted - 2003.09.06 06:45:00 -
[13]
how about tracking your rate of ship destruction, especially of a given class and overall?
It makes sense an insurance company doesn't have the gall to gouge the high sec miner for insurance up the wazoo but will view the high-risk miner with a weary eye.
Basically, noobs will start with the lowest insurance possible, where perhaps 10% (or even less) of the ship's cost will cover everything, but, as in the real world, "accidents" will put you up into higher brackets for weeks. It would make sense that concord would, who keeps oh so carefully track of who destroyed your ship would also tell insurance companies who has been destroyed, when, and what they were flying at the time. (Thus, their value.)
Hence, losing a frigate or shuttle while flying from point A to B will not impact you much, if at all, but losing two cruisers in a month will kick you way up in the brackets. Since I suggest making the "safe" player's insurance so low, it would ramp pretty dramatically.
postcount++ |
Temerity
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 04:25:00 -
[14]
Whatever the fix, I think it needs to help remove the fear of losing the ship. Because with less fear ppl will take more risks and begin to lose ships more often. The increase of ship lose will in turn stimulate the manufacturing industy (which is another area of big complaint... that it's stagnant).
|
Renegade
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 11:13:00 -
[15]
patch version 1200 extends the insurance period to 3 weeks. much better ccp thankyou should help make insurance more attractive allowing for people to be a little braver in there approach. 11 mill a week for me to insure my ship isnt so bad as long as i mine high value ore.
|
Aki Ross
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 11:33:00 -
[16]
I agree with Doppleganger 
And it might encourage the more timid playes to venture out of high security more 
|
night mare
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 12:10:00 -
[17]
well, i still think that 3 weeks is too short a time for the prices they're asking. I think it should be handled like in RL, where you pay a down payment for 6 months coverage then pay a small monthly payment each month, and renew the policy every 6 months (without having to pay any extra fees). I cant afford to insure my battleship, and i play all the time...the money's just not there. I do like the sugesstion of instead of a large cash payout for the ship, they just purchase another ship for you. I'd be willing to travel 50 jumps or even 100 jumps to go get it. And it also will eliminate insurance fraud, so why are'nt they doing it that way instead of taking every last penny we have to insure for 3 weeks?
|
Nelia Hawk
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 12:24:00 -
[18]
had some insurance ideas too here
----------------------------------
some of my ideas:
Very Long Balancing Suggestion !!!
and
My Ideas for EVE |
Nelia Hawk
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 12:41:00 -
[19]
when ya dont want to read all
you get 80% of the insurance cost back when the week expires and your ship is not destroyed
so when you would get a 10mill insurance on a battleship
and after a week you get 8 mill back when your ship dont get destroyed
these "pay back" is the easyest method to change the insurance because it can stay like it is atm!
they just need to add these "pay back"
----------------------------------
some of my ideas:
Very Long Balancing Suggestion !!!
and
My Ideas for EVE |
wamingo
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 12:52:00 -
[20]
Edited by: wamingo on 09/09/2003 12:55:18
My advice is don't take insurance until you're going to jeopardize your ship deliberately...
if you're gonna fly through high risk zones all day long - and making a fat buck hopefully then you can insure it - also I don't recommend full insurance. Never take full insurance unless you're going to battle - and I'm not talking about general npc pirates here.
Your BEST insurrance in my opinion is really to buy another ship...
To answer the topic, you can't make it cheaper because that would make the insurrance much cheaper than the ship is worth and that makes insurrance-scams exploitable very easily. So forget about it.
edit: I like the idea in the post above this one, good idea Nelia.
-- I won't not promise to avoid refraining from harming you! .... What? |
SUNchaser
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 14:27:00 -
[21]
Sounds like a lot of your are talking about insurance from a real world viewpoint. My viewpoint is changing insurance to promote more player vs player combat interaction. Something that is definitely needed and won't occur by choice unless the penalty for losing your ship is minimized. In most other games when you "get killed" the new starting point isn't at a point you were at 2 months ago in the game. Lets remember this is a game and people play to have fun. 10% insurance for the life of your ship may not be realistic but it would foster much more PvP COMBAT INTERACTION and reduce the ill will when players are "trapped" by PK's and have their ship blown out from under them. EVE IMO will be more successful in the long run if the FUN aspects are increased even if at the expense of some realism.
|
Samson
|
Posted - 2003.09.09 21:21:00 -
[22]
The money back idea is a good one. Can't really exploit it, because if you lose the ship you don't get the cash back. Hence insurance could be priced much more reasonably. As I understand it the current rates are set so high to prevent exploiting. Nelia's idea would not only prevent people from profiting on the loss of their ship, but also be good for the game, as some others have mentioned above.
I hope the Devs see this, and implement it. Perhaps a new thread is called for to highlight the idea?
|
Nelia Hawk
|
Posted - 2003.09.10 07:10:00 -
[23]
yeah when you insure your ship (the prices could be like they are atm) and it gets blown up then you get the isk from the insurance (like its atm).
and when you dont get blown up, then as a little "reward" you get 80% of the invested insurance isk back.
btw i heared from a friend that they perhaps make the insurance longer to 3 weeks.
(i personal would like a pay back after 1 week more then a insurance over 3 weeks without payback...)
----------------------------------
some of my ideas:
Very Long Balancing Suggestion !!!
and
My Ideas for EVE |
SUNchaser
|
Posted - 2003.09.11 15:44:00 -
[24]
The whole point of insurance in a game like this is to establish a "restart" point. A 20% restart penalty is more than enough(10% to insure and another to reinsure if ship is destoyed). Insurance is to encourage PvP combat and in its current configuration it doesn't succeed at that. A payback if your ship isnt destroyed fosters the same LETS NOT BATTLE mentality that we currently have. Increasing insurance if you have more claims fosters the same LETS NOT BATTLE mentality that we currently have. For a level 2 BS a 20% penalty is sufficient because that equates to approximately 20million isk. Not an overwhelming amount for someone in a level 2 BS but high enough to still be felt in the wallet. ISK cannot be given out or insurance fraud will be exploited or the payout will have to be so low so as not to fully cover replacement cost thus raising the real cost above 20%. Replacing the ship at first station docked at eliminates insurance fraud because there is nothing gained. Three weeks doesn't get cost down enough to encourage PvP actions thus it isn't a good solution.
|
Ruffles
|
Posted - 2003.09.11 16:15:00 -
[25]
Sadly I don't seriously think you could start to penalize those that take part in PvP for ship losses, it would start getting even more silly and perhaps even put off the heartiest of PvP'rs if they couldn't ever afford a replacement after X time.
I think increasing the costs would cover the insurance fraud side of things, so long as the duration was increased to suit, something like the month. The net effect would be a reduction in cost still over the time period.
|
SUNchaser
|
Posted - 2003.09.11 19:41:00 -
[26]
ruffles I am hoping your reference to penalty was to graduated insurance costs. The penalty I was referring to was that which is impose when something undesired happens to you, ie your ship gets blown up. I strongly feel this penalty has to be fixed for the life of the ship. When you consider a fully armed and modded battleship can have a market value of over 200 million isk that represents is staggering. Spending x amount of time to aquire your battleship is fine with me but upon loss the time required to get back to where you were should be considerably less. What i suggested was a 20% for the first time and after that it would equate to 10%. This seems a reasonable amount of time to represent a real cost to players and at the same time not discourage PvP interaction from a combat point of view. Who knows if more players actually wanted to go out and participate in PvP because the costs associated with that activity were reasonable gate camping could become a thing of the past.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |