CCP, I believe there is a small, but growing segment of the Eve population that may be averse to PvP not so much from losing a ship, but losing a clone.

We can insure ships, why not clones and perhaps even implants?

Case in point.
Assume I am whizzing about in a Hurricane fully fit, that may top out at 40M.
Eventually the ship pops. Big deal. I have it insured and get a sizable amount of that loss back.

But say I get podded as well. My implantless med clone is now in excess of 20M.
The financial loss of the pod is more than the loss of the insured Cane and its modules.

I would suggest that if people could insure their med clones, you might seen an uptick in PvP.
If you allowed people to insure their clone AND implants, even at some reduced value, I am SURE you would see an uptick in PvP.

And for those that say this will create inflation, as we create another ISK faucet, that is crap.
The ISK that can be returned from a insured loss can always be altered to be less than the overall investment in insurance.

The concept is to mitigate the clone/implant losses, and encourage more PvP.
It is not to make PvP completely free of financial loss.

CCP, I believe there is a small, but growing segment of the Eve population that may be averse to PvP not so much from losing a ship, but losing a clone.

We can insure ships, why not clones and perhaps even implants?

Case in point.
Assume I am whizzing about in a Hurricane fully fit, that may top out at 40M.
Eventually the ship pops. Big deal. I have it insured and get a sizable amount of that loss back.

But say I get podded as well. My implantless med clone is now in excess of 20M.
The financial loss of the pod is more than the loss of the insured Cane and its modules.

I would suggest that if people could insure their med clones, you might seen an uptick in PvP.
If you allowed people to insure their clone AND implants, even at some reduced value, I am SURE you would see an uptick in PvP.

And for those that say this will create inflation, as we create another ISK faucet, that is crap.
The ISK that can be returned from a insured loss can always be altered to be less than the overall investment in insurance.

The concept is to mitigate the clone/implant losses, and encourage more PvP.
It is not to make PvP completely free of financial loss.

@morganta : i think u must have little sp to say such a thing, come back and comment when u have well over 120m sp

@morganta : i think u must have little sp to say such a thing, come back and comment when u have well over 120m sp

Honestly, I think clone insurance is ripe for a player owned service/corp.

Thread moved to Features and Ideas section.

Oh great... where good and decent threads go to die.

ISD mods are over-zealous babies.

Sad and true.
This is the forum that CCP dumps stuff they don't want to look at.

Actually, if you scan the threads here you will see there are regulars that frequent this area. The discussions here tend to be a lot more realistic and analytical; thought out if you like. There is far less of the relentless trolling from GD.

This also provides CCP with a useful avenue to scan through ideas, rather than sifting through the morass of trolling and ***** that is GD.

Note the rather extensive sticky at the top of frequently suggested features as well.

All in all?

Best place to put a Feature / Idea is here if you actually want a sensible, useful discussion and to bring it to CCP's direct attention.

So - you can carry on discussing the idea; or whine that it has been moved here. Your choice.

in comparison to T1 combat ships, good implants are a luxury. So you have to pay for that luxury, noone else.
That is absolutely fine.

My Med clone is no luxury.
That is an absolute key item, and costs more than the loss from an Insured T1 BC.

like someone already pointed out, if you cant pay for your clone, you are doing something wrong.
clone/imp costs are an important ISK sin and shouldt not be removed or nerfed.

I personally think the cost of clones is just out of balance...

The benefits of more skillpoints provide a linear benefit for an exponentially more skillpoints...

Why must the cost of maintaining skillpoints also increase exponentially? That's a double hit in my mind.

A more fair price would only increase linearly with skillpoints.

To put it more succinctly, since in the benefits of skillpoints decrease exponentially, keeping a linear cost to maintaining skillpoints still adhere's to EvE's diminishing returns paradigm. Rebalance the cost of clones accordingly.