EVE Search - [Issue] Fix insurance

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] Fix insurance

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.25 16:05:00 - [1] Right now, insurance is a rather problematic system. At the moment, I see three problems with it. Firstly, it's incredibly discriminatory against T2 ships. A T1 ship insures for more than its market value, a T2 ship ensures for a small fraction of its market value. Somebody flying a T2 ship can't get worthwhile insurance at the moment. Secondly, due to mineral price deflation, we're starting to get to the point where you can buy a ship, insure it, lose it, and only be down a few percent of its value. For example, in my current region, a Scorpion sells for 53.9 million isk, and its base price is 71.25 million, meaning full insurance costs 21.375 million. Ship costs plus insurance costs are only 4 million more than insurance payouts, meaning that you can fit it out with lower-end gear and get the combat(or in this case ECM) power of a battleship for the cost of a T1 cruiser or T2 frigate. PvP is nearly free for people who use T1 ships. And thirdly, a person who gets shot by Concord for breaking the law gets their ship reimbursed by the SCC, which is an agency of Concord. This is just nonsensical - not only in RP terms, but also because in conjunction with problem #2, it means that suicide ganking is insanely cheap - it's worth losing an Armageddon to Concord to kill a hauler with a single +4 implant in it, because the 50% chance of a module 1/3 the price of your ship dropping pays for your battleship loss easily. My proposed solution is relatively simple. Insurance prices and payouts will be based on average Eve-wide market prices, not "base prices" that have been obsolete for many years now, and anyone killed by Concord will not be reimbursed anything more than maybe their insurance fee. There's two holes I see in this setup, however, and we'd need a way to patch them. The first is faction ships - since they aren't on market, you can't get a market average price for them. The two possible fixes for this are to marketize them or to use average contract prices - it doesn't much matter which. The second problem is ships that are rare enough that there's no useful price data for them - how do you price an Erebus or an Imperial Apocalypse? I honestly don't know what the solution to that problem is, and maybe that's a spot where keeping base prices intact(or maybe just have GMs make **** up, which is really the same thing) might be a good idea, but it'd need to be addressed. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.25 16:05:00 - [2] Right now, insurance is a rather problematic system. At the moment, I see three problems with it. Firstly, it's incredibly discriminatory against T2 ships. A T1 ship insures for more than its market value, a T2 ship ensures for a small fraction of its market value. Somebody flying a T2 ship can't get worthwhile insurance at the moment. Secondly, due to mineral price deflation, we're starting to get to the point where you can buy a ship, insure it, lose it, and only be down a few percent of its value. For example, in my current region, a Scorpion sells for 53.9 million isk, and its base price is 71.25 million, meaning full insurance costs 21.375 million. Ship costs plus insurance costs are only 4 million more than insurance payouts, meaning that you can fit it out with lower-end gear and get the combat(or in this case ECM) power of a battleship for the cost of a T1 cruiser or T2 frigate. PvP is nearly free for people who use T1 ships. And thirdly, a person who gets shot by Concord for breaking the law gets their ship reimbursed by the SCC, which is an agency of Concord. This is just nonsensical - not only in RP terms, but also because in conjunction with problem #2, it means that suicide ganking is insanely cheap - it's worth losing an Armageddon to Concord to kill a hauler with a single +4 implant in it, because the 50% chance of a module 1/3 the price of your ship dropping pays for your battleship loss easily. My proposed solution is relatively simple. Insurance prices and payouts will be based on average Eve-wide market prices, not "base prices" that have been obsolete for many years now, and anyone killed by Concord will not be reimbursed anything more than maybe their insurance fee. There's two holes I see in this setup, however, and we'd need a way to patch them. The first is faction ships - since they aren't on market, you can't get a market average price for them. The two possible fixes for this are to marketize them or to use average contract prices - it doesn't much matter which. The second problem is ships that are rare enough that there's no useful price data for them - how do you price an Erebus or an Imperial Apocalypse? I honestly don't know what the solution to that problem is, and maybe that's a spot where keeping base prices intact(or maybe just have GMs make **** up, which is really the same thing) might be a good idea, but it'd need to be addressed. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Piitaq 19th Star Logistics	Posted - 2008.05.25 16:42:00 - [3] I support this! Loosing a ship by self destruct or engaging in criminal activities, should void the insurance. Makes perfect sense. The issue with extremely rare ships, isnt that big a problem IMHO (+ I dont have any) when you have something extremely rare or extremely valuable, it should be impossible to insure, or very very costfull. Those special faction ships, isnt meant to be used in a day to day roaming gang, more like a parade ship or something you would field in epic battles that REALLY means something, and can change the history of EVE. just my 0.02 ISK
Havohej The Defias Brotherhood DEFI4NT	Posted - 2008.05.25 20:10:00 - [4] Originally by: Piitaq I support this! Loosing a ship by self destruct or engaging in criminal activities, should void the insurance. Makes perfect sense. The issue with extremely rare ships, isnt that big a problem IMHO (+ I dont have any) when you have something extremely rare or extremely valuable, it should be impossible to insure, or very very costfull. Those special faction ships, isnt meant to be used in a day to day roaming gang, more like a parade ship or something you would field in epic battles that REALLY means something, and can change the history of EVE. just my 0.02 ISK You're dumber than the OP. Originally by: techzer0 I'm invincible until proven wrong
Kame Malice	Posted - 2008.05.25 20:45:00 - [5] Originally by: Havohej Originally by: Piitaq I support this! Loosing a ship by self destruct or engaging in criminal activities, should void the insurance. Makes perfect sense. The issue with extremely rare ships, isnt that big a problem IMHO (+ I dont have any) when you have something extremely rare or extremely valuable, it should be impossible to insure, or very very costfull. Those special faction ships, isnt meant to be used in a day to day roaming gang, more like a parade ship or something you would field in epic battles that REALLY means something, and can change the history of EVE. just my 0.02 ISK You're dumber than the OP. If i recall, this is the kind of comment people get reported for... and would you look at that, i just reported you... Back on topic, I kind of like the concept, but it needs to be flushed out a bit.
Havohej The Defias Brotherhood DEFI4NT	Posted - 2008.05.25 21:23:00 - [6] Oooooh, that's never happened before. Dump idea is dumb, dumb reply is dumber, and I'm going to post it every time I see it - report away, dummy. Originally by: techzer0 I'm invincible until proven wrong
Demiurges	Posted - 2008.05.25 21:37:00 - [7] /signed
MentaFox StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.05.25 22:34:00 - [8] Edited by: MentaFox on 25/05/2008 22:34:05 /signed especially the broken T2 insurance ----------------------
De Vito Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.25 23:59:00 - [9] agree for T2 ships
Skogen Gump	Posted - 2008.05.26 00:16:00 - [10] I agree, with the side-motion that Insurance be nerfed for Suicide gankers in high-sec.

MindBender coracao ardente Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2008.05.26 00:22:00 - [11] Tech 2 Ships have always been an issue with insurance though with the bringing of Invention, the prices of T2 Ships have dropped significantly and are much more reasonable, though Insurance doesn't match these cost. What would be nice is a system that takes a Universe wide average for the month for ships across all Empire Region (Using a Median system to avoid sort of price tampering) and then applies that number towards Insurance returns/costs. Overall, my support for a revamp of Insurance. [This Space for Sale]
Zetjur Jilnou Rapid Deployment Industries	Posted - 2008.05.26 01:16:00 - [12] No support. T2 is supposed to be expensive, having full insurance is a bad thing for them. Losing them is supposed to be a kick in the teeth. Remove T2 (and perhaps capital) insurance and fix the rest to market prices and you might have my support on that...
AtomizerX	Posted - 2008.05.26 02:22:00 - [13] I do agree to adjusting the insurance payouts, particularly for T2 ships. Even though they're supposed to be expensive, we should still be able to insure them fully; if desired, CCP could simply make the premiums higher for T2 ships. Surprisingly, I disagree on the insurance payouts for losses due to criminal acts, due to the nature of the insurance itself. It only makes sense if you insure a ship against loss that you are reimbursed upon any loss. However, to counteract criminal acts, there could be some sort of penalty system whereby a criminal is fined either according to his actions or based on the ship used, so this could counterbalance the insurance payouts. In short, it doesn't make sense to revoke insurance payouts under certain conditions, but penalizing criminals another way gets around the problem.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.26 04:05:00 - [14] Originally by: Zetjur Jilnou No support. T2 is supposed to be expensive, having full insurance is a bad thing for them. Losing them is supposed to be a kick in the teeth. Remove T2 (and perhaps capital) insurance and fix the rest to market prices and you might have my support on that... 30% of hull price, plus all your mods and rigs, isn't cheap. I'm not sure it's quite as much of a kick in the teeth as you'd like, but it'd still hurt. It's not that I really oppose your solution, but the current anemic middle ground of T2 ships insuring like T1 is just asinine. ------------------ Fix the forums!
shuckstar Hauling hogs CryoGenesis Mining Syndicate	Posted - 2008.05.26 06:16:00 - [15]
Divad Ginleek Gateway Industries House of Mercury	Posted - 2008.05.26 06:24:00 - [16] puts the jihadswarm in perspective when you think that the most they lost on any of those suicide ships was a few mil. while the miners in the hulks they blasted probably didn't even bother buying insurance, since it costs 11 mil to buy 29 mil worth of coverage on a 100-ish mil ship... the numbers just don't work out right. We need us some Geico in EVE =). ::insert witty signature here::
Mael DeVries Hobbit Enterprises GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.05.26 07:05:00 - [17] Support, because I want to sell me some billion ISK Ravens to boost regional insurance payouts. [SIZE="1"]"Nothing the EVE client can do can affect the game state" CCP Wrangler[/SIZE]
M4g3ll4n Circle of Shadows	Posted - 2008.05.26 10:31:00 - [18] jep, revise insurance.
Ameliorate	Posted - 2008.05.26 10:34:00 - [19] Supporting this, rather long and drawn-out issue ---- Train skills, check mail and pay bills from your mobile: Support my CSM issue
Esmenet	Posted - 2008.05.26 10:54:00 - [20] The insurance is working as intended. T2 is supposed to be expensive.

Inanna Zuni The Causality Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.05.26 11:56:00 - [21] Insurance in EVE as in 'real life' needs some sort of fixed odds in regards to the level of benefit received otherwise it is easy to game (as noted above, sell a few billion-isk ravens) and the present levels of payout were set ages back when minerals costed more, so there could be an argument to revise payouts down generally to reflect the new cost of building a (T1) ship. Using an "average mineral price of last 90 days" would work and not be too gameable. T2 ships are, aiui, intentionally under-insured, although a fixed cost could probably be determined on a similar basis to the existing T1 calculation. Self-destruction and suicide ganking in hisec / Empire would seem to me to be situations in which there should be no insurance payout. "Insurance" is defined as a payment made to cover unexpected losses. Intentionally getting your ship blown up is planned so should not be covered. Whilst it is currently possible to buy a T1 ship and fit it too for the insurance payout there is still the expenditure you make for that insurance cover! No ship is therefore ever "free". IZ My principles
Kuranta Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.05.26 13:23:00 - [22] Originally by: Esmenet The insurance is working as intended. T2 is supposed to be expensive. I'll support you instead.
Jelek Coro Art of War Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2008.05.26 14:33:00 - [23] Nothing wrong with insurance... if demands pusges prices above the insurance level... tough. Treat it as a luxury.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.26 15:12:00 - [24] Originally by: Inanna Zuni Insurance in EVE as in 'real life' needs some sort of fixed odds in regards to the level of benefit received otherwise it is easy to game (as noted above, sell a few billion-isk ravens) and the present levels of payout were set ages back when minerals costed more, so there could be an argument to revise payouts down generally to reflect the new cost of building a (T1) ship. Using an "average mineral price of last 90 days" would work and not be too gameable. T2 ships are, aiui, intentionally under-insured, although a fixed cost could probably be determined on a similar basis to the existing T1 calculation. Self-destruction and suicide ganking in hisec / Empire would seem to me to be situations in which there should be no insurance payout. "Insurance" is defined as a payment made to cover unexpected losses. Intentionally getting your ship blown up is planned so should not be covered. Whilst it is currently possible to buy a T1 ship and fit it too for the insurance payout there is still the expenditure you make for that insurance cover! No ship is therefore ever "free". IZ I'll also agree on self-destruction, that's just regular insurance fraud and should also be uncompensated. I'd want to see a displayed countdown to self-destruction, of course, but that's yet another thing that should always have been in the game and whose continued absence stuns me. Concerns about gameability I'll accept, and a mineral-based insurance scheme wouldn't bother me. Give a bit of a markup(5-10%) for builder prices, inefficient BP's, and the like, but that would also be acceptible to me. You'd still have concerns about T2 being misrepresented, because the invention system produces drastically different prices than the BPO system, but that's implementation details, which I won't worry too much about. That said, you misunderstand my point with regards to free T1 ships. At the moment, ship insurance prices are based on mineral "base prices", which are 2/8/32/128/512/2048/8192 for the seven minerals. Trit and zyd are over those prices, but the other five are way under, meaning that the actual cost of a ship is dramatically less than its base price. Full insurance costs 30% of base price and pays out 100%, meaning that if market price is 70% of base price, you can compensate yourself for both the hull and the insurance premium with the insurance payout. If hull prices ever get to 65% of base prices, you can turn a profit by buying, insuring, and self-destructing your ship(or getting it shot up, if self-destruct insurance goes away). Similarly, it is proper play style at the moment for you to self-destruct an unrigged T1 ship on the last day of insurance, because the payout is higher than the hull cost, and you'll have to re-insure anyways. I'm not forgetting the price of insurance premiums - my whole issue here is that it's possible for players to just about forget them, since the ships are all so dramatically overinsured. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Domosan The Singularity Amalgamation Pure.	Posted - 2008.05.26 17:10:00 - [25] No. CCP has the right direction in giving more power to the playerbase in the economy. here is another area where the playerbase should rule. Put insurance in the hands of players. Make it possible for players to create insurance contracts. Loss history should be available for those writing contracts. Insurance is the largest source of isk in the game. Take that out and a lot of the inflation problems go away Regards
Che Biko	Posted - 2008.05.26 17:10:00 - [26] I agree that insurance needs to be revised, particularly insurance paid for CONCORD destroyed ships. It also might be a good idea to have insurance costs depend on, for example, the amount of insurance payouts received by the player last year.
Slickdrac JET FORCE Ka-Tet	Posted - 2008.05.26 17:16:00 - [27] Originally by: Esmenet The insurance is working as intended. T2 is supposed to be expensive. This TBH You want to pay more for an edge, that's your own doing. I suck at forums
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.26 18:51:00 - [28] Originally by: Domosan No. CCP has the right direction in giving more power to the playerbase in the economy. here is another area where the playerbase should rule. Put insurance in the hands of players. Make it possible for players to create insurance contracts. Loss history should be available for those writing contracts. Insurance is the largest source of isk in the game. Take that out and a lot of the inflation problems go away Regards There are no inflation problems in Eve. Have you not been reading Dr. EyjoG's econblogs/QENs? Eve has had a deflationary economy for what looks like as far back as they have data. And while I don't have data to support this, my supposition would be that insurance isn't even inflationary to any great degree - there's enough people who insure without losing to compensate those who lose their ships. Besides, NPC insurance(especially the 40% baseline) exists for a good reason - it prevents players from going totally broke off a ship loss. The worst-case is enough money to buy a ship one class down, usually, which is enough to recover without feeling like you've lost everything. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.05.26 21:54:00 - [29] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto My proposed solution is relatively simple. Insurance prices and payouts will be based on average Eve-wide market prices, not "base prices" that have been obsolete for many years now, and anyone killed by Concord will not be reimbursed anything more than maybe their insurance fee. This would be far too vulnerable to exploit. For example: - build 10k units of the least used frig (tourmentor, imicus, etc) - insure 5k of them at what, 10k/ship? - Put for sell the remaining 5k at 5 millions/unit - Have an alt buy them all. - start self-destructing the insured ships and receive 5 millions each time. There's tons of variants of the thing you can do. Because a market average is just too easy to manipulate. A price calculated from average mineral prices, however, THAT is far harder to cheat with, because manipulating it in a signifiant way would require the kind of capital that even bob and RA would be hard-pressed to put on it. About insurance of T2, no. CCP stated long ago that if the advantage given by T2 over T1 stuff was one side of the coin, the possibility of real loss was the other side. ------------------------------------------
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.05.27 01:39:00 - [30] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto My proposed solution is relatively simple. Insurance prices and payouts will be based on average Eve-wide market prices, not "base prices" that have been obsolete for many years now, and anyone killed by Concord will not be reimbursed anything more than maybe their insurance fee. This would be far too vulnerable to exploit. For example: - build 10k units of the least used frig (tourmentor, imicus, etc) - insure 5k of them at what, 10k/ship? - Put for sell the remaining 5k at 5 millions/unit - Have an alt buy them all. - start self-destructing the insured ships and receive 5 millions each time. There's tons of variants of the thing you can do. Because a market average is just too easy to manipulate. A price calculated from average mineral prices, however, THAT is far harder to cheat with, because manipulating it in a signifiant way would require the kind of capital that even bob and RA would be hard-pressed to put on it. About insurance of T2, no. CCP stated long ago that if the advantage given by T2 over T1 stuff was one side of the coin, the possibility of real loss was the other side. Like I said, I'm fine with using mineral prices as your baseline instead of market prices. This is an exploit I didn't consider, and I'm fine with fixing it as you suggest. Re T2, I thought the drawback was that they cost 5-20x as much as their T1 equivalents. And this isn't the "ships are all-but-free" insurance that exists now, it's the "even an insured ship still hurts to lose" insurance that should exist but doesn't. I can see the other side of that argument, but I think the cost:benefit ratio is appropriate even with my proposed changes. ------------------ Fix the forums!



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.