Quote:

---

Bob, I dont see what your point is.

Dont you want more people to get into PvP?

The less it actually costs to loose a ship the more likely people are to risk them.

---

Quote:

---

That is basically right but you have to keep in mind that this is a game and people want fun. Mining for more than a week to replace something simply to get back into PvP is not something a casual player considers fun. That's the reason why the 12 week insurance was implemented in the first place. It was put in to encourage people to engage others.

---

Quote:

---

I agree with Bob about there being no way to defeat your enemy, but I disagree that removing insurance is a way to fix this.

We don't want to bankrupt individual players. We want to defeat their *corporation*. I think that if there were a way to drive a corporation away from a region of space (by loss of offices in battle or something), there would be no need to bankrupt a player. It sucks no end for a player who is used to a battleship to be forced back into a cruiser, and in the end it will only drive him to quit the game. A defeat that can somehow be enforced on a corporation however, that's a different thing.

Perhaps Shiva will make this argument redundant. I hope it will.

---

Quote:

---

If you want to make insurance more realistic then add a premium system based on sec status and number of claims. Peeps with low sec rating pay more and for every claim you make your insurance costs more. Therefore those in prolonged corp wars would have VERY large insurance premiums thus making it possible to win a war through attrition. Peeps who don’t claim would build up a no claims bonus and thus could reduce there insurance premiums by up to say 65%.

---