Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3838
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:05:41 -
[61] - Quote
Zimmer Jones wrote:I'm going to get a hefty amount of immediate hate about this.
Scrap insurance as it is now, give players the tools to start their own insurance companies.
Same business as usual, a single ship transferral nulls the entire policy immediately. it'd be dicey to start with but eventually the proper statistical variables can be nailed down in limited api's and such as: Pilot age, number of deaths, by who and how they were killed( NPC, player, combination of both) resistance put up, (Dmg taken vs total ehp for the fit), damage returned, whether support was given( webbing/logi) , # of agressors, identity of agressors and sec level of place of death.
Open accounting of the insurance would be optional, but the wise would go for ones that can show links and reasons and anonymized payouts ( this ship died in this system, had this fit, paid out this much, and had "certificates" of this level for the dead ship. no names or times mentioned) list might have to be pared down to avoid correlating killmails with insurance publications.
"dead bear policies" could also be an option ( taken from the "dead peasant coverage," some large companies have individual policies on long term employees, it does happen).
It is an idea, and changes the insurance faucet into isk transferral with losses in transfer, or just plain removal of isk due to fraud and stupidity. Player tools>npc automation. Spreadsheet warriors get more fun, players have to more to lose for flying unaware.
begin the idea hole poking, cause this would require quite a bit of work to implement.
BTW, how would you deal with the issue of separating equilibria? Or would you not deal with it?
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
711
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:54:11 -
[62] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Double the LP cost of CONCORD LP store items. Remove isk payouts by 50% from incursions.
Yes I'm making incursions 25% the profitability of what they used to be but they're one of the only sources of meta capital gear so I see it as self regulating.
Implicit to this is the assumption that TII capital mods won't significantly impact the market for the meta capital mods.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM XI
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
409
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 00:45:08 -
[63] - Quote
shot a great hole in the private insurance idea in one go. There is no secure way to find if someone can be trustworthy enough to make an even dicey insurance risk. Not without really messing with players privacy and security.
Clearly Nash equilibrium cannot apply, too many assholes looking for advantage and no one will agree to agree(and stick to it). The nature of the information available to the principal is imperfect and incomplete, so no payoff or even premium can really be calculated because as players we're all as trustworthy as a bunch of weasels at an egg hatchery( to the random pod person at least).
Thing is, even if you had that perfect info people can just turn around and change the rules, its a roleplaying game after all, and some people like backstabbing and scamming. Anyone setting up an insurance business would be hard pressed to keep up with demand and process the premiums and claims, even if automated. oh, and they'd los a crap ton of isk, because griefers gonna grief. Yes even those were covered in the links, good reading as always.
To bad, kinda liked the idea of having to deal with RL shysters in the game. No insurance is beat insurance when it comes to faucets I suppose
The cake is not a lie. Unfortunately, the fork is a parallel construction.
|
Stephanie Rosefire
Super Squirrel Omni Jump League
55
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 14:41:05 -
[64] - Quote
Maybe CCP should fix T2 and T3 insurance costs? i actually dont know if this is a problem or not, but the T2/T3 insurance costs are very VERY low (same with the payouts)
Should they fix this or just leave it? people lose ships everyday, and im going to assume that a large chunk of them are T2/T3 ships, so maybe fixing insurance costs might be a good way to create an isk sink
(yes i know, insurance isnt that big of a isk sink, you make most of it back if you lose the ship) |
Bobb Bobbington
The Cult of the Rare Pepes
170
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 16:56:14 -
[65] - Quote
You know insurance isn't an isk sink, right? It's a faucet. You pay 1 mil to insure your ship, and when it dies you get 5 mil. Gratz, you just put 4 mil into the economy.
Also, I think T2 and T3 are designed to be low insurance, so that you lose more isk when you lose the ship. Diminishing returns on isk and all, so newbies can still use cheap ships and be useful but players with lots of isk can get better ships but lose more isk.
This is a signature.
It has a 25m signature.
No it's not a cosmic signature.
Probably.
Btw my corp's recruiting.
|
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 01:15:03 -
[66] - Quote
Bobb Bobbington wrote:You know insurance isn't an isk sink, right? It's a faucet. You pay 1 mil to insure your ship, and when it dies you get 5 mil. Gratz, you just put 4 mil into the economy.
It depends on the ship - the insurance doesn't always cover the market cost of replacement
And it doesn't cover the refitting cost
And it doesn't cover the cost of re-insuring
etc
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2751
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 01:32:48 -
[67] - Quote
Paul Pohl wrote: It depends on the ship - the insurance doesn't always cover the market cost of replacement
And it doesn't cover the refitting cost
And it doesn't cover the cost of re-insuring
etc
Which is nothing to do with if something is an isk sink or faucet. Sinks and Faucets are about isk entering and leaving the overall economy. Transfers between players are neutral as far as sinks & faucets go. Though the wealth stockpiling in the hands of the elite has as much impact on EVE's economy as wealth inequality in the real world does as well.
So work out what you are trying to impact first. |
Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
214
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 04:24:48 -
[68] - Quote
Stephanie Rosefire wrote: Thoughts?
Not a broad enough appeal/usage.
A ton of ISK is generated from mission runners and the like so if you want to add a sink, that's the first place I'd look to add one.
I can has blogging skills!
|
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise Apocalypse Now.
169
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 07:36:54 -
[69] - Quote
First and foremost - PLEX have nothing to do with amount of ISK people have.
The ISK faucets do need to be looked at - Bounties, LP, insurance etc.
Insurance would be nice if they had a more RL policy like feel to them. Also don't just insure a ship - have it be more like property insurance.
So basically it would provide a few options to players Insurance would be based on Net Worth of Assets. The player would select a 1-5% payment option; they would select if they want ships, ship equipment, and/or other assets in hanger. How the system would work - player sets up policy, systems calculates the average value of assets. Charges player a % that. Player is then free to go about their business, blowing stuff up, selling stuff, buying stuff, whatever. At the end of the week - the insurance system would rescan all assets that fall in the insurance policy and charge the % fee. It would also tally up all loses from the previous week, and make a payout based on the previous policy.
I was going to do an example - but realized I am really bad at math.
But anyone: TL:DR Allow insurance to cover more than just ship hulls. And works like the iHub payments where it is a weekly fee
"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger
All of his fury and rage.
He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels"
- The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1
DIDE- is open to new members
|
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 09:21:06 -
[70] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Paul Pohl wrote: It depends on the ship - the insurance doesn't always cover the market cost of replacement
And it doesn't cover the refitting cost
And it doesn't cover the cost of re-insuring
etc
Which is nothing to do with if something is an isk sink or faucet. Sinks and Faucets are about isk entering and leaving the overall economy. Transfers between players are neutral as far as sinks & faucets go. Though the wealth stockpiling in the hands of the elite has as much impact on EVE's economy as wealth inequality in the real world does as well. So work out what you are trying to impact first.
I'm simply suggesting that the issue is not as clear cut as the memes you present
|
|
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 09:27:41 -
[71] - Quote
Amarisen Gream wrote: Insurance would be nice if they had a more RL policy like feel to them. Also don't just insure a ship - have it be more like property insurance.
Or apply more exceptions
For instance if you have low standing with an NPC and get blown up by that NPC for being in their space - no cover The same if you get blown up for having contraband etc
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1642
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 13:10:54 -
[72] - Quote
Could we have the contents of citadels get destroyed when the citadel gets destroyed.
You guys are bickering back and forth about NPC taxes on one hand while the game is safeguarding player assets hand over fist.
Players aren't just isk rich, they are stuff rich. To make players un-rich in stuff you have to blow it up. To make players un-rich in isk - get rid of system upgrades, nerf anoms and nerf incursions. I"m just not seeing the importance in the line folks are drawing between isk and all the other forms of wealth. Everything is just too easy to come by.
Taxes suck and add no value, fun or interesting game play. Don't add suck to the game. Bounties are the first step - that is where all the isk is injected to the game. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2418
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 15:47:27 -
[73] - Quote
Paul Pohl wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Paul Pohl wrote: It depends on the ship - the insurance doesn't always cover the market cost of replacement
And it doesn't cover the refitting cost
And it doesn't cover the cost of re-insuring
etc
Which is nothing to do with if something is an isk sink or faucet. Sinks and Faucets are about isk entering and leaving the overall economy. Transfers between players are neutral as far as sinks & faucets go. Though the wealth stockpiling in the hands of the elite has as much impact on EVE's economy as wealth inequality in the real world does as well. So work out what you are trying to impact first. I'm simply suggesting that the issue is not as clear cut as the memes you present
Except it IS clear cut. For insurance to not be a sink, you need to have the insurance level you collect expire over 2 times over and only collect on the 3rd. Heck it might be 4th but I can't check right now. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1188
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 16:43:28 -
[74] - Quote
Paul Pohl wrote:
I'm simply suggesting that the issue is not as clear cut as the memes you present
No, it's extremely clear cut.
The things it doesn't cover are utterly irrelevant. We're not talking about the amount of ISK in any individual's wallet, we're talking about the amount of ISK in the game.
The only time insurance ever truly acts as a "sink" is when it expires. Period. Full stop. Any insurance that is actually claimed is a net faucet.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Ageanal Olerie
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 17:42:38 -
[75] - Quote
See my NPC Bounty Hunter idea : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=458921&find=unread
When an NPC Bounty hunter takes out someone who has a bounty on them, that ISK reward goes to the NPC, thereby taking it out of circulation.
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
1933
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 18:22:03 -
[76] - Quote
You may also sink your ISK into me.
Problem solved
/thread
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3955
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 00:40:10 -
[77] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Could we have the contents of citadels get destroyed when the citadel gets destroyed.
You guys are bickering back and forth about NPC taxes on one hand while the game is safeguarding player assets hand over fist.
Players aren't just isk rich, they are stuff rich. To make players un-rich in stuff you have to blow it up. To make players un-rich in isk - get rid of system upgrades, nerf anoms and nerf incursions. I"m just not seeing the importance in the line folks are drawing between isk and all the other forms of wealth. Everything is just too easy to come by.
Taxes suck and add no value, fun or interesting game play. Don't add suck to the game. Bounties are the first step - that is where all the isk is injected to the game.
The thing is destroying assets in this manner may lead to even more ISK entering the economy as players kill even more rats to recover their lost assets.
Taxes on the other hand are a pure ISK sink, ISK literally disappears from the game.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3955
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 00:44:27 -
[78] - Quote
Paul Pohl wrote:Amarisen Gream wrote: Insurance would be nice if they had a more RL policy like feel to them. Also don't just insure a ship - have it be more like property insurance.
Or apply more exceptions For instance if you have low standing with an NPC and get blown up by that NPC for being in their space - no cover The same if you get blown up for having contraband etc
You know its funny....
Many here run around hurling the term 'risk aversion' like it is an insult. "I'm not risk averse! You are!!"
But then here we are, reducing insurance payouts so that people will be....more risk averse.
I don't even know why cognitive dissonance is even a concept since it appears most people are completely fine holding contradictory beliefs at the same time.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 01:56:59 -
[79] - Quote
There are number of things that could be introduced to create isk-sinks maintenance on hulls, guns etc, docking fees, storyline tax rises for NPCs in time of war
However, CCP apparently don't see inflation as an issue, and if anything have been moving in the opposite direction with the changes to custom houses, and citadels etc - perhaps in the belief that if you give people more, they will have more to spend, and therefore more to fight about. Whilst not appearing to notice the people asking 'what is the point of holding sovereignty'. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6527
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 02:28:14 -
[80] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:See we're back to eve needs more explosions. Every player out blowing up other players doesn't have his gaping maw sucking on some isk faucet. PVP permanantly removes stuff from the game AND it occupies folks so they aren't running incursions or carrier ratting in some upgraded anom laden system.
You want to remove isk from the game - get rid of those pathetic system upgrades. The pandering that allowed them is a bane on the game. No need to fight over good space.... just deploy this upgrade to make all space worth not fighting for.
You shouldn't be able to 'rent' good space from CCP via system upgrades. You should have to go take the good spots and then have to hold them.
Someone is bitter that nullsec residents are able to make money from space that they have sunk money in to. How horrible.
This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
|
|
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 02:56:29 -
[81] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Paul Pohl wrote:
I'm simply suggesting that the issue is not as clear cut as the memes you present
No, it's extremely clear cut. The things it doesn't cover are utterly irrelevant. We're not talking about the amount of ISK in any individual's wallet, we're talking about the amount of ISK in the game. The only time insurance ever truly acts as a "sink" is when it expires. Period. Full stop. Any insurance that is actually claimed is a net faucet. On balance, the amount of insurance that expires is nowhere near the amount that is paid out (the "free" payouts don't help, either), so on the whole, it's accurate enough to just say that insurance is a faucet.
No it's far more relative.
It's a tap if you buy the ship and it immediately gets blown up and you immediately make a claim.
But, the real issue is not the insurance but the loot you get from missions and ratting - hence my response to the proposition that the fittings are 'neutral'. It's not uncommon for the ship fittings to cost two or three times the value of the hull. And it is not hard to run missions or rat for a week or so, and get all the fittings you need to refit a new ship - in preparation for your next insurance claim
I'm suggesting that doing back of the *** packet arithmetic on the insurance is rather missing point. Since the loot is directly disadvantaging industrial players in a way that the insurance is doing them a service.... something that can be observed in the market prices for new ship hulls
At best insurance is a dripping tap.
But then as I have stated elsewhere in this thread I am in favour of restricting the circumstances that insurance is paid out.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3955
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 05:05:25 -
[82] - Quote
Paul Pohl wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Paul Pohl wrote:
I'm simply suggesting that the issue is not as clear cut as the memes you present
No, it's extremely clear cut. The things it doesn't cover are utterly irrelevant. We're not talking about the amount of ISK in any individual's wallet, we're talking about the amount of ISK in the game. The only time insurance ever truly acts as a "sink" is when it expires. Period. Full stop. Any insurance that is actually claimed is a net faucet. On balance, the amount of insurance that expires is nowhere near the amount that is paid out (the "free" payouts don't help, either), so on the whole, it's accurate enough to just say that insurance is a faucet. No it's far more relative. It's a tap if you buy the ship and it immediately gets blown up and you immediately make a claim. But, the real issue is not the insurance but the loot you get from missions and ratting - hence my response to the proposition that the fittings are 'neutral'. It's not uncommon for the ship fittings to cost two or three times the value of the hull. And it is not hard to run missions or rat for a week or so, and get all the fittings you need to refit a new ship - in preparation for your next insurance claim I'm suggesting that doing back of the *** packet arithmetic on the insurance is rather missing point. Since the loot is directly disadvantaging industrial players in a way that the insurance is doing them a service.... something that can be observed in the market prices for new ship hulls At best insurance is a dripping tap. But then as I have stated elsewhere in this thread I am in favour of restricting the circumstances that insurance is paid out.
No. If I spend 200 million ISK on a ship and its fittings and the ship gets blown up and I get 100 million ISK in insurance that 100 million ISK is brand new to the economy. Somebody else got my 200 million ISK (less taxes and fees) plus I got 100 million in an insurance pay out. Lets say that the taxes and fees are 1%. So, somebody got 198 million and I got 100 million (less the cost of the insurance lets say 60 million). So after all is said and done there is 238 million ISK in the economy...i.e. there is an extra 38 million ISK in the economy due to insurance.
Insurance is an ISK faucet.
And...here is the mind ****, it is not necessarily a bad thing. If I know I'll get 40 million back on my 200 million outlay I'll be more inclined to risk my assets in PvP. In short insurance is there to encourage PvP.
And contrary to the claims of some "blowing **** up" does not result in a net decrease in ISK in the economy.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |