EVE Search - Capital ships should not be protected by insurance

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Capital ships should not be protected by insurance

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DigitalCommunist Obsidian Core	Posted - 2008.03.29 02:16:00 - [1] The topic says it all. I have always found this incredibly stupid and offensive, and have spoken against it in the past. I guess what prompts me to repeat myself once again is the game design chat recording. Hearing certain devs blame the playerbase for using them in ways they were not designed is rather facetious. The players are using capitals exactly as they were designed. But half the problem with "Capitals Online", is that they've proliferated faster than they can be destroyed. Made possible with large thanks to the idiotic mechanic of Insurance. Remove insurance from capitals. Remove it. Just erase it and pretend it never existed. It doesn't even require you to change your ways, I promise! 1. No basic insurance for capitals. Basic insurance is a safety net for actual newbies to EVE. Even though most capital pilots suck at the game and can be called newbies, they're not new to it. They know how to play and what the consequences are, they just suck. Basic insurance was only put in to help new players get over the steep early learning curve, and nothing more. It is not there to make authentic losers feel less like losers. It just isn't. Let me repeat how utterly, insanely demented paying out hundreds of millions, or billions of ISK is. With no justifiable reason, the 40% basic insurance rule is pumping the economy with ISK, and contributing to the inflation we've wrestled with for years. Every dread lost generates the same isk as ten battleships lost. A capital slugfest is damaging the economy more than weeks of major fleet battles. 2. Remove standard insurance from capitals. About the only thing stopping Supercapitals from being a complete and utter joke, is not being able to dock and insure them fully. T2 fitted dreads in massive blobs can be lost day and night without really affecting people's ability to replace them, only their willpower to keep flying. Nearly all of the hurt in a badly executed capital fight is in the morale hit. Your entire alliance gets worried when it can't win with the biggest force they have. Why does the quintessential flagship class of EVE pander to people whose psyche gets shattered by softcore cable ****? There is no nicer way of saying this, but if you think removing insurance from Capitals is too rough and not in line with the spirit of EVE, you are playing the wrong game. Please remove insurance from capital ships. The pain is only temporary if you lube up right. _______________________________ http://epicwords.net/
Vitrael Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.03.29 02:24:00 - [2] From the moment I realized capital ships were insurable as normal t1 ships I was totally appalled. I am an advocate of reducing the coverage on capital insurance rather than eliminating it completely. Capital pilots must already deal with the hassle of building (or buying) a new ship with that isk. That's something of a compromise. But it's not nearly enough.
DigitalCommunist Obsidian Core	Posted - 2008.03.29 03:32:00 - [3] Why compromise? _______________________________ http://epicwords.net/
Bagoon Mortis Incarnatus	Posted - 2008.03.29 03:33:00 - [4] nerfing isk won't deter anyone from flying them, just look at t2 ships.
Marcus TheMartin Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.03.29 05:13:00 - [5] Originally by: Bagoon nerfing isk won't deter anyone from flying them, just look at t2 ships. it will make self destruction a harder choice
Tank CEO Dark Cartel Synchr0nicity	Posted - 2008.03.29 13:59:00 - [6] This won't happen. Long time ago I brought up a change about lowering basic insurance to 20% for BS, 30% cruiser, 40% for frigates. It got rejected at the dev blog and sole reason for the rejection is "more people will quit more often if we remove the basic feature or even modify it" ------------- Remove sentries from low-sec.
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2008.03.29 16:52:00 - [7] thats why tey need to do it now rather then later, when all the whiny motsu babies have got their caps too. digi is perfectly right. Insured caps cost too little to lose. You wan't to stop caps online ? Nerf insurance on them. [center] Old blog
Jacob Mei Slacker Industries Limited	Posted - 2008.03.29 17:06:00 - [8] Keep in mind that this is still a game so the developers are given the difficult task of finding a happy medium between realism and being fun to play. That said I do think that insurance needs a revamp. Things like self distruct and suicide ganking in empire need to be rethought in their insurance payout.
Zenethalos White Shadow Imperium	Posted - 2008.03.30 23:59:00 - [9] I agree capital insurance needs a nurf. If I were to lose my capital at the cost to build(I purchased the minerals from my corp at discount) and fit then insure it I would lose around 180m t2 fit. Thats a pretty big joke in comparison to the ship cost itself of around 1.6b + fittings normally. People cry that they lose 30-40m on a fully insured t2 fit Battle ship. I remember when the t2 market wasn't a huge nurf and if I lost a t2 fit sniping tempest I was out atleast 60-70m for just the arties. There needs to be some linear progression/regression in line with the eve economy that way losing a ship is not more then a mere waste of time because you have to fit a new one.
Reatu Krentor Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2008.03.31 08:41:00 - [10] Originally by: DigitalCommunist The topic says it all. I have always found this incredibly stupid and offensive, and have spoken against it in the past. I guess what prompts me to repeat myself once again is the game design chat recording. Hearing certain devs blame the playerbase for using them in ways they were not designed is rather facetious. The players are using capitals exactly as they were designed. But half the problem with "Capitals Online", is that they've proliferated faster than they can be destroyed. Made possible with large thanks to the idiotic mechanic of Insurance. Remove insurance from capitals. Remove it. Just erase it and pretend it never existed. It doesn't even require you to change your ways, I promise! 1. No basic insurance for capitals. Basic insurance is a safety net for actual newbies to EVE. Even though most capital pilots suck at the game and can be called newbies, they're not new to it. They know how to play and what the consequences are, they just suck. Basic insurance was only put in to help new players get over the steep early learning curve, and nothing more. It is not there to make authentic losers feel less like losers. It just isn't. Let me repeat how utterly, insanely demented paying out hundreds of millions, or billions of ISK is. With no justifiable reason, the 40% basic insurance rule is pumping the economy with ISK, and contributing to the inflation we've wrestled with for years. Every dread lost generates the same isk as ten battleships lost. A capital slugfest is damaging the economy more than weeks of major fleet battles. 2. Remove standard insurance from capitals. About the only thing stopping Supercapitals from being a complete and utter joke, is not being able to dock and insure them fully. T2 fitted dreads in massive blobs can be lost day and night without really affecting people's ability to replace them, only their willpower to keep flying. Nearly all of the hurt in a badly executed capital fight is in the morale hit. Your entire alliance gets worried when it can't win with the biggest force they have. Why does the quintessential flagship class of EVE pander to people whose psyche gets shattered by softcore cable ****? There is no nicer way of saying this, but if you think removing insurance from Capitals is too rough and not in line with the spirit of EVE, you are playing the wrong game. Please remove insurance from capital ships. The pain is only temporary if you lube up right. yes. I'd actually go a bit further too. Remove insurance in 0.0. No Concord observation, no insurance. => Player-based insurance? someday maybe -- stuff --
Anjinha	Posted - 2008.03.31 10:58:00 - [11] Edited by: Anjinha on 31/03/2008 10:58:23 Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: DigitalCommunist The topic says it all. I have always found this incredibly stupid and offensive, and have spoken against it in the past. I guess what prompts me to repeat myself once again is the game design chat recording. Hearing certain devs blame the playerbase for using them in ways they were not designed is rather facetious. The players are using capitals exactly as they were designed. But half the problem with "Capitals Online", is that they've proliferated faster than they can be destroyed. Made possible with large thanks to the idiotic mechanic of Insurance. Remove insurance from capitals. Remove it. Just erase it and pretend it never existed. It doesn't even require you to change your ways, I promise! 1. No basic insurance for capitals. Basic insurance is a safety net for actual newbies to EVE. Even though most capital pilots suck at the game and can be called newbies, they're not new to it. They know how to play and what the consequences are, they just suck. Basic insurance was only put in to help new players get over the steep early learning curve, and nothing more. It is not there to make authentic losers feel less like losers. It just isn't. Let me repeat how utterly, insanely demented paying out hundreds of millions, or billions of ISK is. With no justifiable reason, the 40% basic insurance rule is pumping the economy with ISK, and contributing to the inflation we've wrestled with for years. Every dread lost generates the same isk as ten battleships lost. A capital slugfest is damaging the economy more than weeks of major fleet battles. 2. Remove standard insurance from capitals. About the only thing stopping Supercapitals from being a complete and utter joke, is not being able to dock and insure them fully. T2 fitted dreads in massive blobs can be lost day and night without really affecting people's ability to replace them, only their willpower to keep flying. Nearly all of the hurt in a badly executed capital fight is in the morale hit. Your entire alliance gets worried when it can't win with the biggest force they have. Why does the quintessential flagship class of EVE pander to people whose psyche gets shattered by softcore cable ***? There is no nicer way of saying this, but if you think removing insurance from Capitals is too rough and not in line with the spirit of EVE, you are playing the wrong game. Please remove insurance from capital ships. The pain is only temporary if you lube up right. yes. I'd actually go a bit further too. Remove insurance in 0.0. No Concord observation, no insurance. => Player-based insurance? someday maybe And I go even further: no insurance payment if you agressed first. Industrialists' ideas for EVE "We don't need Santa Claus... we need his factory"*
Tarron Sarek	Posted - 2008.03.31 11:42:00 - [12] These are good proposals. I fully agree. ___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well - Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters
ViolenTUK	Posted - 2008.03.31 11:43:00 - [13] No. Please leave insurance alone. Insurance needs a boost not a nerf. Eve will loose players if this happens. www.eve-players.com
Tarron Sarek Cadien Cybernetics	Posted - 2008.03.31 12:08:00 - [14] Originally by: ViolenTUK No. Please leave insurance alone. Insurance needs a boost not a nerf. Eve will loose players if this happens. If EVE loses players due to removed insurance on capital ships, then those are most likely the risk averse and/or short attention span players who would've left anyway at some point. I really don't see it as a reason not to make this well-founded change, for the better of the game. ___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well - Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters
Captator Blue. Blue Federation	Posted - 2008.03.31 12:25:00 - [15] I think Digi makes a sound case for the removal of capital ship insurance, and this also creates a window for a new line of corporation, one that for a weekly/monthly premium insures a capital ship for you, making the insurance part of the economy, so no isk is created when a capital ship dies, merely transferred. Perhaps to stem the likely outcry from the fluffy playerbase, one could then consider having an insurance payout modifier based on what the ship dies to in empire/lowsec. For example 0.5x payout if killed by concord, 0.75x payout if killed by sentries. This idea is a suggestion only, put out for debate, I personally am unsure if it would benefit me or cause me a problem (suicide ganking becomes a lot more selective).
ViolenTUK Vindicated Exiles	Posted - 2008.03.31 14:35:00 - [16] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Remove insurance from capitals. Remove it. Just erase it and pretend it never existed. It doesn't even require you to change your ways, I promise! 1. No basic insurance for capitals. Basic insurance is a safety net for actual newbies to EVE. Even though most capital pilots suck at the game and can be called newbies, they're not new to it. They know how to play and what the consequences are, they just suck. Basic insurance was only put in to help new players get over the steep early learning curve, and nothing more. It is not there to make authentic losers feel less like losers. It just isn't. No it wasnÆt. although it does help new players. Basic insurance is there to help regain loss of capital where an insurance premium wasnÆt taken. Considering many pilots will spend a great amount of time and effort into funding a capital ship they can simply over look the cost of an insurance premium. I understand completely that this is their fault if any loss was incurred whilst the ship wasnÆt insured but this scenario is so common that this type of insurance is likely to stay in place. Originally by: DigitalCommunist Let me repeat how utterly, insanely demented paying out hundreds of millions, or billions of ISK is. With no justifiable reason, the 40% basic insurance rule is pumping the economy with ISK, and contributing to the inflation we've wrestled with for years. Every dread lost generates the same isk as ten battleships lost. A capital slugfest is damaging the economy more than weeks of major fleet battles. No. This isnÆt pumping isk into the economy and causing inflation. As you have stated basic insurance simply does not cover the entire cost of the ship let alone fittings. The net effect of the purchase and fit of a capital ship for it to be lost and replaced is a great loss. You lose 60% of the value of the ship and the fittings unless you manage to salvage any. Let me repeat that every time you lose a ship you lose the money you invested in that ship and only get a small 40 % reimbursement. You have to make the money if you want to replace that ship. This doesnÆt add to inflation this negates it. Originally by: DigitalCommunist 2. Remove standard insurance from capitals. About the only thing stopping Supercapitals from being a complete and utter joke, is not being able to dock and insure them fully. T2 fitted dreads in massive blobs can be lost day and night without really affecting people's ability to replace them, only their willpower to keep flying. Nearly all of the hurt in a badly executed capital fight is in the morale hit. Your entire alliance gets worried when it can't win with the biggest force they have. Why does the quintessential flagship class of EVE pander to people whose psyche gets shattered by softcore cable **? There is no nicer way of saying this, but if you think removing insurance from Capitals is too rough and not in line with the spirit of EVE, you are playing the wrong game. Please remove insurance from capital ships. The pain is only temporary if you lube up right. The loss of a capital ship is a great loss for any alliance and is at a cost to them since they have to replace it if they want to continue using one. This money has to be earned. IÆm sorry you have made no justifiable reason to remove basic insurance from capital ships whatsoever. www.eve-players.com**
Mystic Pete	Posted - 2008.03.31 14:48:00 - [17] Sounds good. - No insurance for Capitals - Agree - No insurance in 0.0 - Debabtable bit intersting My contribution, partly in light of current suicide ganking trends. - No insurance if CONCORD kill you. Makes too much sense not to be the case to me. I agree totally that insurance is there for new pilots to get on their feet. It's not supposed to fund 0.0 aliance wars.
Viral Effect	Posted - 2008.03.31 14:50:00 - [18] Edited by: Viral Effect on 31/03/2008 14:50:38 Originally by: DigitalCommunist Let me repeat how utterly, insanely demented paying out hundreds of millions, or billions of ISK is. With no justifiable reason, the 40% basic insurance rule is pumping the economy with ISK, and contributing to the inflation we've wrestled with for years. If this is the case why has the cost of capital ships and battleships dropped over the years? If we were suffering from inflation the price of these would of risen. It hasnÆt.
Ellaine TashMurkon CBC Interstellar The Unseen Company	Posted - 2008.03.31 15:07:00 - [19] Originally by: ViolenTUK No. This isnÆt pumping isk into the economy and causing inflation. As you have stated basic insurance simply does not cover the entire cost of the ship let alone fittings. The net effect of the purchase and fit of a capital ship for it to be lost and replaced is a great loss. You lose 60% of the value of the ship and the fittings unless you manage to salvage any. Let me repeat that every time you lose a ship you lose the money you invested in that ship and only get a small 40 % reimbursement. You have to make the money if you want to replace that ship. This doesnÆt add to inflation this negates it. It does generate inflation. Inflation is a macroeconomical factor and has nothing to do with what single player does or not. Inflation happens where amount of money in system increases and this monetary value of products falls. Player building ship buys minerals from other players - no money is removed from the economy. Insurance puts new money into the economy. Tadam - inflation. And by the way, Eve has no problem with inflation and in fact its negative (it has deflation) lately. Also, inflation is good in this case :)
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.03.31 15:10:00 - [20] I'd remove insurance for all ships.
Wesley Lawson	Posted - 2008.03.31 15:17:00 - [21] I haven't read every post in the topic, but how's this for a compromise? Keep the insurance, but the cost doubles every time you try to cash in your policy.
ViolenTUK Vindicated Exiles	Posted - 2008.03.31 15:35:00 - [22] Edited by: ViolenTUK on 31/03/2008 15:35:55 Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon It does generate inflation. Inflation is a macroeconomical factor and has nothing to do with what single player does or not. Inflation happens where amount of money in system increases and this monetary value of products falls. Player building ship buys minerals from other players - no money is removed from the economy. Insurance puts new money into the economy. Tadam - inflation. Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon Inflation is a macroeconomical factor and has nothing to do with what single player does or not. Every individualÆs action will have an effect on the economy. When a capital ship is lost the isk value of that ship is lost into the ether. This isk value was removed from the economy. For example the destroyed ship was removed from the game and canÆt be sold or reprocessed. This is was the basis for my reply. The net effect is a loss. You are correct that a basic insurance premium does put isk back into the economy, which could lead to inflation. The reality is as we can see from the ship market currently which is deflation. www.eve-players.com

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.