| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tank CEO
   |
Posted - 2004.03.06 17:32:00 -
[1]
This insurance pay out is too much in my opinion and I will explain why. First let me throw out some ideas here. This is the way I think it should be:
Frigates - 40% (All newbies start out in frigates and are not rich so this should be 40%)
Industrials - 35% (Newbies are getting the hang of the game and start to mine/trade)
Cruisers - 30% (Newbies are becoming well aware of the game and are slowly losing the name newb)
Battleships - 25% (Anyone who owns a battleship is no longer considered a noob and have worked out a way a source of good income to buy and support a battleship and does not need more then 25% default compensation if blown up.)
-or-
Lvl 1 Battleship - 25%
Lvl 2 Battleship - 20%
(As far as interceptors go, dunno how much default insurnace should pay?)
This whole 40% default insurance were made for newbs and to help with lose situations. In my honest opinion, now that insurance is now 12 months long, anyone who cant afford 3-5 mill 50% compensation insurance shouldnt be in a battleship.
---
|
Fartracker
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 17:37:00 -
[2]
Your right and wrong.
Battleships should be 75%
Not everybody can afford the 30+mil to insure them all the way.
And as a rat, your the reason for this.
Consider your job the 'influence' for this state of afairs.
|
Tank CEO
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 17:38:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Tank CEO on 06/03/2004 17:42:21
Edited by: Tank CEO on 06/03/2004 17:40:09
Yea and if I didnt kill ships, ship builders and blueprint researchers would be out business so end yourself. And if you cant afford the Platinum incursance, theres a basic insurance that only costs 3-5 million. God damn your spoiled. O btw, why is it my fault? Im only playing the game, you should look at the carebears, they are the ones that whined because they couldnt trade afk and travel afk and have it risk free.
---
|
Fartracker
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 18:10:00 -
[4]
Anybody who AFK's needs to be shot on general principal.
Eat My Shorts! |
Bruen
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 20:01:00 -
[5]
 Quote:
O btw, why is it my fault? Im only playing the game,
Let me guess, you are role-playing a serial killer.
That excuse has been around since the early days of role-playing, it was lame then and its lame now.
-----------------
The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
- J. B. S. Haldane |
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 20:30:00 -
[6]
Quote:
Quote:
O btw, why is it my fault? Im only playing the game,
Let me guess, you are role-playing a serial killer.
That excuse has been around since the early days of role-playing, it was lame then and its lame now.
Probably was true back then, at least it's true today.
There are LOTS of pirates - "proper" pirates and the serial killer type, that are actually really nice guys/girls IRL and definately doesn't do it to cause grief.
Most of the people who "turn" pirate do it because they want more PvP action = fun.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 20:33:00 -
[7]
Quote:
Your right and wrong.
Battleships should be 75%
Not everybody can afford the 30+mil to insure them all the way.
And as a rat, your the reason for this.
Consider your job the 'influence' for this state of afairs.
If you can't afford insurance you can't afford a battleship.
That's the problem with this game, it's getting totally carebeared up, battleships are the best ships in this game, they have no equal, they should cost a ton and be a huge money drain.
People like you are the reason frigates/cruisers are obsolete and everyone who mines ark for a week is a billionaire.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 20:55:00 -
[8]
Agreed.
Except on this:
Quote:
Anyone who owns a battleship is no longer considered a noob
More then 90% of all battleship owners are still n00bs.
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 20:56:00 -
[9]
Quote:
Your right and wrong.
Battleships should be 75%
Not everybody can afford the 30+mil to insure them all the way.
And as a rat, your the reason for this.
Consider your job the 'influence' for this state of afairs.
ROFLMAO
It's always amusing to see a carebear.
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
Psychopath
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:06:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Psychopath on 06/03/2004 21:07:05
The the insurance changes have made pirating even less profitable than it was. The length change has made it easier for everyone to have full insurance so we cannot ransom bs because they just let you blow them up. The 40% even when not insured has eliminated the possiblity of someone ejecting from a bs.
Overall pirates get less isk and with sentry changes, 0.1-0.4 are not a good option anymore.
The insurance is another change to help carebears travel safely in any system.
Change it CCP 
A Corp 1 pirate I was meant to be, trim the sails and roam the sea |
McWatt
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:13:00 -
[11]
how about no free insurance for battleships?
and 12 weeks? lots of ppl are going to go for 100% and cash it shortly before it runs out.
|
Morkt Drakt
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:14:00 -
[12]
Quote:
Anybody who AFK's needs to be shot on general principal.
Hehe - ive lost most of my ships through being afk...
kind of proves Tank's point though... its no real loss to somebody like me to lose a ship and that simply perpetuates the AFK play which perpetuates the increasing "carebearism".
Only implant loss seems to be any real effect to getting killed with your ship and all its contents.. what next? Cargo insurance?
|
ClawHammer III
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:18:00 -
[13]
Edited by: ClawHammer III on 06/03/2004 21:21:50
As much as it pains me to do so I must agree with Tank on this one. Having 40% coverage for free is too much. Especialy for battleships.
The free insurance is intended to prevent noobs from loosing everything but once you get a battleship you can no longer be concitered a true noob. Ignorant perhaps but not a true noob.
I think the tiered approach similar to Tank's suggestion is the way to go or just simply lower the free insurance to 25% across the board. 25% should be enough to at least buy the top of the line ship in the class below the one you lost and equip it with standard modules which is generous enough IMHO.
|
Xavier Cardde
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:20:00 -
[14]
Christ leave Zap alone... its not as if they are generally mean people anyway. they keep the EVE economy moving and make carebears wet themselves... and hell im in the CA.
They are something to watch out for and make for bad guys in the game that at least unlike Zombie dont cheat and exploit for every kill...
When I was a newbie I used to follow j0rt around in a merlin while he flew a rupture and later one of the first Dominixes... I was like a little puppy following a bear (more like Shardik)
they arnt bad people even though they now will shoot me on site 
|
Ma'at
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:22:00 -
[15]
well with named modules and your implants if podded, your looking at 100mil+ for the loss...
plus i doubt many stick with 40%
|
ClawHammer III
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:36:00 -
[16]
Edited by: ClawHammer III on 06/03/2004 21:37:43
Quote:
well with named modules and your implants if podded, your looking at 100mil+ for the loss...
plus i doubt many stick with 40%
Named modules and implants are luxury items and shouldn't be covered by free insurance. It is unlikely a noob would have those items anyway and it's allmost impossable to get pod killed unless you are afk or really don't know what the hell you are doing...
|
Tank CEO
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:44:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Tank CEO on 06/03/2004 21:44:37
Its very easy to pod kill, just gota time your missile launcher right when the blow up... so you dont ahve to lock the pod
---
|
ClawHammer III
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 21:57:00 -
[18]
Edited by: ClawHammer III on 06/03/2004 21:57:55
Quote:
Edited by: Tank CEO on 06/03/2004 21:44:37
Its very easy to pod kill, just gota time your missile launcher right when the blow up... so you dont ahve to lock the pod
Well I ment now that they took off the splash damage for missles... but I guess torpedos still do splash.
|
Tank CEO
|
Posted - 2004.03.06 23:21:00 -
[19]
You can do it with cruiser missiles.
---
|
Soren
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 00:24:00 -
[20]
Quote:
Your right and wrong.
Battleships should be 75%
Not everybody can afford the 30+mil to insure them all the way.
And as a rat, your the reason for this.
Consider your job the 'influence' for this state of afairs.
stfu thx
_________________________________________________________
|
kurg
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 00:48:00 -
[21]
just remove the whole default insurance crap
give noobs a evemail telling them they have 2 months of insurance on all ships they purchase in that period, and give them a new one when it ends.. final..
its all capr anyway
even the paranoid has real enemies...
|
Organizer
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 02:49:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Organizer on 07/03/2004 02:53:38
Why are you at all whining about insurance? Let me know the day we can't insure our cars, houses, etc. and stuff for whatever amount we want to... it's normal, it's real... this game has enough non believable and stupid limits allready...
We don't need more of them, so you all look somewhere else to fix whatever problem you believe exist in insurance part, I would even say that cargo insurance should be implementet, in what galaxy in the future do you think that it not would be able to insure cargo?
End of discussion....lets make an beliveable game!
|
kurg
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 09:00:00 -
[23]
this level of insurance decreases the margin in wars created by destroying an enemy ship.
perhaps the insurance should just not go for waring opponents?
even the paranoid has real enemies...
|
Meau
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 09:00:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Meau on 07/03/2004 09:29:42
40% insurance for free it not really too much, if you consider that you can get 50% with a battleship for 3-6 million nowadays, and thats for 12 weeks, resulting in 250k to 500k per week which is a ridiculously small sum.
If you think the whole system is borked, you may be right, but the 40% for free fit in.
Edit: and having a 12 week period without being able to change the contract during that time some free insurance really is needed. Id normally insure some ships at 50%, and then 100% if i go to war, but as i cant change during the 12 weeks, i cant do that.
|
Meau
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 09:05:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Meau on 07/03/2004 09:06:40
Quote:
this level of insurance decreases the margin in wars created by destroying an enemy ship.
perhaps the insurance should just not go for waring opponents?
As its perfectly possible to fight all day or have a war without declaring it, its hard to solve it that way.
What would be sensible, though, is to move you into a higher risk category each time you lose a ship (modified by cost) making insurance pay out less of cost more or both, and you go down again for each week you dont lose one.
|
McWatt
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 13:29:00 -
[26]
Quote:
Edited by: Organizer on 07/03/2004 02:53:38
Why are you at all whining about insurance? Let me know the day we can't insure our cars, houses, etc. and stuff for whatever amount we want to... it's normal, it's real... this game has enough non believable and stupid limits allready...
End of discussion....lets make an beliveable game!
you show me where i can get a 40% free insurance, and you just made the first RL comparision that makes sense!
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 14:01:00 -
[27]
There is nothing in the game that causes loss
It's no longer as brutal as advertised.
I can understand the need to attract and keep new players, but there seems to be no valid reason i can think of to automatically insure cruisers and battleships..
Loss needs to be -real-. It needs to -hurt-. Especially when gflying the larger 'elite' ships (cruisers and battleships).
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Red girl
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 16:30:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Red girl on 07/03/2004 16:32:58
Quote:
Edited by: Meau on 07/03/2004 09:29:42
40% insurance for free it not really too much, if you consider that you can get 50% with a battleship for 3-6 million nowadays, and thats for 12 weeks, resulting in 250k to 500k per week which is a ridiculously small sum.
If you think the whole system is borked, you may be right, but the 40% for free fit in.
Edit: and having a 12 week period without being able to change the contract during that time some free insurance really is needed. Id normally insure some ships at 50%, and then 100% if i go to war, but as i cant change during the 12 weeks, i cant do that.
Changing is easy enough. Repackage the ship and youre done.
Btw, i agree, 40% free is stupid, 12 weeks running time is even more so. With 12 weeks insurance period everyopne should just insure 100%, it will still be more profitable than insuring at 50% was. End result is that shipbuilders lose their jobs.
|
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 16:35:00 -
[29]
Quote:
Btw, i agree, 40% free is stupid, 12 weeks running time is even more so. With 12 weeks insurance period everyopne should just insure 100%, it will still be more profitable than insuring at 50% was. End result is that shipbuilders lose their jobs.
LOL, that's one of the most stupid comments made.
"shipbuilders lose their jobs"?
This should INCREASE the number of ships sold.
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
foster
|
Posted - 2004.03.07 17:48:00 -
[30]
i agree with tank ceo. with insurance at 12 weeks now, 30mil over 3 weeks is not alot. and the default insurance shouldn't be 40%. it should only be enough to put you back into a fairly good cruiser. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |