Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Yakia TovilToba
Halliburton Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:51:00 -
[1]
Removing shuttles from NPC stores was a small step in the right direction, but it should not be the last one.
The next step can be removal of the insurance system. It does nothing good for the game, but causes a lot of troubles:
1. It creates a minimum price cap for minerals. Mineral prices can't go down for like 20% of current prices, because then it's possible to build ships, insure and destroy them for a profit. The natural market mechanics (and with them the reputation of EvE's economy) are highly affected by this artifical factor. It feeds macrominers, since no matter how much ore they mine / flood the market with, it'll never get cheaper than around the current prices.
2. It causes inflation. After the destruction of the insured ship the [MONEY<=>GOODS] balance is affected twice: MONEY increases AND (unlike ratting or missions for example) GOODS decreases. The destruction of an insured battelship contributes several times more to inflation than any level 4 missions (can do the maths on this if required. Note: if you like to criticise this, you need some basic understanding on how infaltion works, if you don't have this, please resist the desire to flame on this particular statement).
3. It makes pvp more WoW-like. Lose a ship, but don't pay anything, no real "death-penalty", just pew pew without risk -> this carebearism must stop, a loss of ships must cost more than only the fittings. Insurance allowes things like suicide ganking and lowers the thrill for pvp.
So to sum up: insurance causes nothing but problems, it's time to remove it completely. Eve would be better off without insurance, it's time for change.
|
DasDizzy
Violent Vikings Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:53:00 -
[2]
Next time, fit your ships with something other than T1
In federate gallente, armor tanks YOU |
CrayC
Gallente CrayC Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:54:00 -
[3]
Insurance stays, as it should be...
|
Ishall Marvoni
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:55:00 -
[4]
I disagree. The removal of NPC shuttle vendors was done because shuttles are fairly useless now that you can fly around in a pod, and was done to remove the upper price limit that they placed on the price of trit.
|
El'Niaga
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:56:00 -
[5]
Insurance does help out new players.
However soon prices will rise such that insurance will not take care of even t1 ships, but its going to take about 2 months I think.
Therefore I wouldn't remove it, I would make is such that those engaged in criminal activity had their insurance canceled.
|
tradeya
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:59:00 -
[6]
Edited by: tradeya on 26/04/2008 10:59:00
|
Nickyo
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 10:59:00 -
[7]
Here we go i havent bothered reading your thread your title says it all,
you are one of the older selfish players who dont care about the new players and expect eve to change to suit you as it becomes more easy for you.
you are a selfish person
|
Yakia TovilToba
Halliburton Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:00:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ishall Marvoni I disagree. The removal of NPC shuttle vendors was done because shuttles are fairly useless now that you can fly around in a pod, and was done to remove the upper price limit that they placed on the price of trit.
Yes, thats right, the shuttles had impact on the uppter price limit, while insurance affects the lower, but both mess up the natural cours of the market by creating limits/caps. It's just a mess that noone needs, t1 ships cost nothing, while this doesn't count for faction or t2 ships. Or why does this count for ships but not modules - it doesn't belong in such a natural and sophisticated economy like that of eve.
|
Trokiel
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:03:00 -
[9]
Yeah,right. Let's remove your vehicle insurance in RL as well.
No matter where you go, there you are. PUPPIES, mother natures health food.
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:03:00 -
[10]
No pwease to general isurance removeal. But pwease do remove isurance for crimnal and 0.0 aktivity. That is ballance. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Go vote! Put voice for silent majority. LOVE PVP, HATE grief |
|
Pak Narhoo
Gallente Pacific Starfleet Command
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:04:00 -
[11]
Like said: insurance is there helping starting players, without it there would be a *lot* more first time players leaving EVE
On another note, why do you totally step over the fact that insurance only covers for lost ships, not your weapons, not your ammo, not your mods and not your rigs, which are often way more expensive then the ship that got lost.
/*not* signed. ----------------------------- No, you cannot have my stuffÖ. |
Yakia TovilToba
Halliburton Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:04:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Nickyo Here we go i havent bothered reading your thread your title says it all,
you are one of the older selfish players who dont care about the new players and expect eve to change to suit you as it becomes more easy for you.
you are a selfish person
No i'm not not, i don't profit from this. Nor does it affect new players specifically harder than older ones, it improves the things for everyone alike.
|
Kilhu Emmek
Minmatar Redshift Industrial
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:07:00 -
[13]
Certain classes of ship can be bought from (stupid) producers, insured, and blown up at a profit--a profit greater than the recycle value of the ship. This might change soon, but I predict a shift in macroers from ice to veld and scord, and trit and pyerite prices that may actually fall, in the medium term.
Unless, of course, someone bans the incredibly hard to spot, clandestine gangs of 30 or 40 hulks and five or six iteron IVs in continual but silent (part of their stealth, you see) motion around the belts in a tight handful of systems twenty-three hours of every day (I think they use this tactic to blend in to the background).
And you thought ninjas came from Japan ... --
|
WashuChanUK
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:08:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Yakia TovilToba
Originally by: Nickyo Here we go i havent bothered reading your thread your title says it all,
you are one of the older selfish players who dont care about the new players and expect eve to change to suit you as it becomes more easy for you.
you are a selfish person
No i'm not not, i don't profit from this. Nor does it affect new players specifically harder than older ones, it improves the things for everyone alike.
How? How does the removal of insurance help anyone? The only people its going to help ARE selfish miners who want more money for their materials. You want to generate a spurt in the market to captialise on is all I can see here. Grow up.
No Love, Washu.
|
Drazi1
Minmatar The Knights Templar Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:25:00 -
[15]
Not signing Either
Insurance must and will stay
|
Seriya
Caldari Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:30:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Seriya on 26/04/2008 11:30:51 Death in EVE is harsh; a noob's life is tough enough as it is. Removing insurance makes the early game for the inexperienced unnecessarily difficult.
My chief problem with insurance is its abuse in the form of suicide-ganking. I'd support the removal of insurance for those with a global criminal countdown if it weren't so easy to get one accidentally; I lost my first NPCing Raven to Concorde after my smartbomb clipped a gangmate's drones. Yes that was a bit silly, but I was fairly nooby and it was quite devastating at the time.
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:39:00 -
[17]
Restrict insurance availability to trial accounts. There. Now the newbies are still protected and the rest can't misuse insurance anymore. -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
|
Shoukei
Caldari Boobs Ahoy
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:48:00 -
[18]
OP is very correct. Killing a fleet of insured battleships amounts to almost nothing. PvP in EVE is about the loss you can potentially inflict and rendering your opponent unable to fight without investing significant effort. Isk conjured from the thin air using this method is rendering PvP very meaningless since anyone can just shrug off the losses.
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:52:00 -
[19]
No.
Insurance doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made more realistic.
1) No payout for criminal behavior (suicide gankers get no payout)
2) No rewarding criminal lifestyles. (no real insurance company would) Thus, overall payout for any situation based on sec status. (High sec status = full payout, low sec status = low payout)
3) No payout for SD You pop your own ship, it's just like intentionally crashing your own car. No Insurance payout, and higher rates in the future.
That would fix most, if not all of the OP's concerns.
|
Adonis 4174
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:01:00 -
[20]
I could support removing insurance but for a different reason.
It's knackered.
Not only do you get insurance for self destruct, you also get automatic reminders to renew which aren't automatic reminders at all because you have to look yourself to get them. You get a notice that you will not get a payout if your ship is destroyed in the possession of another player when in fact giving it to another player at all will remove the insurance completely even if you get it back in 30 seconds.
Fix it or get rid of it please. ---- Infiniband can do more than just prevent lag |
|
5pinDizzy
Amarr Pwnage Distribution Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:07:00 -
[21]
The only way ship insurance would become a price cap is if minerals became near worthless, and trends are pointing in the other direction.
Posting in the 500th remove insurance thread that never bothered to;
- Come up with a substitute measure or just alter existing insurance but instead just blurts out REMOVE INSURANCE!11.
- Put any great deal of thought in considering the likely pros and cons if this change was to come into effect.
|
Everyone Dies
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:34:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Everyone Dies on 26/04/2008 12:35:06
Originally by: Bish Ounen No.
Insurance doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made more realistic.
1) No payout for criminal behavior (suicide gankers get no payout)
2) No rewarding criminal lifestyles. (no real insurance company would) Thus, overall payout for any situation based on sec status. (High sec status = full payout, low sec status = low payout)
3) No payout for SD You pop your own ship, it's just like intentionally crashing your own car. No Insurance payout, and higher rates in the future.
That would fix most, if not all of the OP's concerns.
THIS
|
WashuChanUK
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:40:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Everyone Dies Edited by: Everyone Dies on 26/04/2008 12:35:06
Originally by: Bish Ounen No.
Insurance doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made more realistic.
1) No payout for criminal behavior (suicide gankers get no payout)
2) No rewarding criminal lifestyles. (no real insurance company would) Thus, overall payout for any situation based on sec status. (High sec status = full payout, low sec status = low payout)
3) No payout for SD You pop your own ship, it's just like intentionally crashing your own car. No Insurance payout, and higher rates in the future.
That would fix most, if not all of the OP's concerns.
THIS
So say, you take your car to...I dont know, Iraq. Your driving along, happy as can be. You park up to visit the local "cafT" shall we say and enjoy a nice ice cold bottle of Quafe. Mean while, some bumbling idiot in a Challenger tank accidently "parks" on your beloved pride and joy. It's not your fault your car was destroyed but the insurance company turns round and states "oh, well because you were in a semi-dangerous area we arent going to pay you squat".
In other words no.
Insurance is there to fund a ship. The SHIP. Can I make it any clearer perhaps? You only get back the money for the ship, 99% of the time the items attached to the ship costs in excess of the value of the vessel your flying!
Frankly the insurance system *can* be abused, but guys your forgetting one big big thing.
This is a fantasy game, reality was told to take a hike the moment you logged on. After all, when was the last time you took that Covert-Ops ship to work!
No /signed from me folks, infact /burnthisthreaduntilitisjustahorriblehorriblememory
No love, Washu
|
Sinder Ohm
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:40:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Bish Ounen No.
Insurance doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made more realistic.
1) No payout for criminal behavior (suicide gankers get no payout)
2) No rewarding criminal lifestyles. (no real insurance company would) Thus, overall payout for any situation based on sec status. (High sec status = full payout, low sec status = low payout)
3) No payout for SD You pop your own ship, it's just like intentionally crashing your own car. No Insurance payout, and higher rates in the future.
That would fix most, if not all of the OP's concerns.
actually quite reasonable will be shooting myself in the foot, but it never made sense to me that insurance payed me out even though I commited a crime, also no insurance after self desctructing ( I only self desctruct my pod for traveling so no idea about ships) I wholey support! |
Uriam
Trinity Corporate Services
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 13:04:00 -
[25]
Insurance stays! I mean it will do more harm to the market I think! and thats how i see it agree or not!
Also Only think it needs changing on the insurance if you committed an offence as in breaking the law you don't get insurance payout like ganking in high sec! That is it!
The Insurance System works fine and with out it it be less fun on PVP and War will be shorter! as wallet soon go! that will ruin the game as people wont enjoy it as much as well. Most of all EVE still lags out at battle so if you get it with the lag stick wont hurt so much. You still lose money but not as fast!
I like lasting wars not short wars!
PS i am drunk so yer
|
Ishall Marvoni
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 13:12:00 -
[26]
I agree that there should be some changes made to the insurance system (definately remove insurance for self destruct, if it exists). But, I don't think removing the entire system entirely is a good idea.
My understanding was that insurance was based on the average mineral worth of the ship. So, if industry people are selling at ridiculous prices and people are buying them, insuring and getting more than the combined cost of the ship, insurance and fittings, then they got a good deal. There's not really much you can do to combat manufacturers not knowing the worth of their product.
WRT "suicide gankers", yeh - it sucks that they get compensated, so perhaps if someone gets blown up by concord they shouldn't get a payout. But then, not everyone who gets blown up by concord actually deserves it. Ie, people with low security status who actually don't do anything wrong in high sec space....
|
Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 13:20:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 26/04/2008 13:25:38 I agree completely with the OP.
Get rid of NPC insurance.
Introduce a verifiable loss framework for the creation of player-driven insurance.
Nubs don't need a safety net, they need to learn what loss means early while it's relatively easy to recover.
Mature players don't need insurance, it makes them plan like nubs.
I would, however, support removal of insurance from all except those in NPC corp, if NPC corp players were to be subject to enforced pacificsm. This would be a reasonable trade off IMO.
Bandures > tommy you like a cowboy harry ) |
Ambien Torca
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 13:30:00 -
[28]
Automatic 40% no-cost insurance and concorded insurance need to go. Declining insurance from self-destruct, well it would make "fraud" bit harder but most of us can get buddy to blow the ship up for you, this would mostly hurt people who are SD:ing their capitals when they got caught, which actually isnŠt such a bad idea to pursue...
Beginners actually donŠt need much help they should stay in cruisers for a while as they are building their money supply and skills/knowledge before going for BC/BS class unlike now.
|
Astarte Nosferatu
Minmatar Canes Pugnaces
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 13:47:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Ishall Marvoni I disagree. The removal of NPC shuttle vendors was done because shuttles are fairly useless now that you can fly around in a pod, and was done to remove the upper price limit that they placed on the price of trit.
You've always been able to fly in a pod, besides, shuttles are still much faster than a pod to travel with, certainy when going afk on autopilot. Removing NPC's selling shuttles didn't remove the 3.6 isk/unit trit cap, as there are still other NPC sold items on the market that sustain the cap. Even if they completely removed the upper limit cap, the minimum cap would still be in place.
Originally by: Trokiel Yeah,right. Let's remove your vehicle insurance in RL as well.
RL comparisons serve no use when applied to a game.
Originally by: WashuChanUK
How? How does the removal of insurance help anyone? The only people its going to help ARE selfish miners who want more money for their materials. You want to generate a spurt in the market to captialise on is all I can see here. Grow up.
Removing insurance wouldn't benefit only the miners, but PvP might become less of a blobfest with less people flying Battleships. |
Euriti
Gallente SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 14:00:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Euriti on 26/04/2008 14:02:57
Originally by: Bish Ounen No.
Insurance doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be made more realistic.
1) No payout for criminal behavior (suicide gankers get no payout)
2) No rewarding criminal lifestyles. (no real insurance company would) Thus, overall payout for any situation based on sec status. (High sec status = full payout, low sec status = low payout)
3) No payout for SD You pop your own ship, it's just like intentionally crashing your own car. No Insurance payout, and higher rates in the future.
That would fix most, if not all of the OP's concerns.
You are a ******* moron.
Stop suggesting piracy nerfs and forcing every PvPer to grind bloody missions even more. We do it enough, no need to make it even worse.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |