EVE Search - [Idea]Increase paid insurance? Insurance available for modules?

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Idea]Increase paid insurance? Insurance available for modules?

» 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)
Celeste DeVall Darksaber Technologies The Nexus Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.02 14:56:00 - [1] Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 15:03:39 Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 15:02:10 Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 15:01:59 Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 14:58:47 Any thoughts or opinions on the current reimbursement percentages of insurance coverage for ships. I feel that the amount insurance pays when a ship is lost is out of tune with the actual value and cost of ships. Anyone agree or disagree? Any thoughts on impact to economy if paid insurance amounts were increased, is it even possible, is it wanted, etc. Also, is it possible for insurance to cover items other than ships...expensive modules, implants, etc? Thanks in advance for discussion on this, and if a previous thread exists, i apologize. Thanks
Celeste DeVall Darksaber Technologies The Nexus Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.02 14:56:00 - [2] Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 15:03:39 Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 15:02:10 Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 15:01:59 Edited by: Celeste DeVall on 02/07/2008 14:58:47 Any thoughts or opinions on the current reimbursement percentages of insurance coverage for ships. I feel that the amount insurance pays when a ship is lost is out of tune with the actual value and cost of ships. Anyone agree or disagree? Any thoughts on impact to economy if paid insurance amounts were increased, is it even possible, is it wanted, etc. Also, is it possible for insurance to cover items other than ships...expensive modules, implants, etc? Thanks in advance for discussion on this, and if a previous thread exists, i apologize. Thanks
Kalintos Tyl	Posted - 2008.07.02 15:01:00 - [3] well buy command ship for 150mln and you will get max 20mln from insurence :D. forget about fitting also.
Kalintos Tyl	Posted - 2008.07.02 15:01:00 - [4] well buy command ship for 150mln and you will get max 20mln from insurence :D. forget about fitting also.
Doc Extropy Kinda'Shujaa	Posted - 2008.07.02 15:29:00 - [5] Insurance should be about market price, fluctuating with the market situation. This should also cover T2. Modules... hm... dunno. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected])
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.07.02 15:32:00 - [6] I've discussed my thoughts on this here - put simply, market-based insurance for everything. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Rakshasa Taisab Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Ursa Stellar Initiative	Posted - 2008.07.02 15:41:00 - [7] I assume this is a request for _lowering_ insurance payout, as anything else would be pretty braindead as a suggestion.
Khirzan Wolfson MicroFunks	Posted - 2008.07.02 16:14:00 - [8] I do not feel T2 ships should be fully covered or eve mostly covered. Correct me if im wrong but Insurance is based upon actual build material costs. This is pretty agreeable with T1 ships across the board (being able to fit and insure a domi with only a few million isk loss is proof), the only think left is T2. One of the purposes of T2 is the elevated risk in flying it. But you cant have insurance cover a T2 ship otherwise people could invent, insure, self-destruct, repeat, and make billions. However if material build cost is drastically different then insurance, MAYBE CCP should take a gander at it. However I personally think there are many more important issues they should address first. Even when a cerberus was 3x what it costs now, people agreed with this approach. -Khirzan Wolfson \|------------------------------\| \|Keeping it real since 1983\| \|------------------------------\|
nVChicky	Posted - 2008.07.02 16:28:00 - [9] why not just make everything free.............. the idea of some insurance for your ship means you don't loose everything, If you can't afford to loose it then don't fly it.
Celeste DeVall Darksaber Technologies The Nexus Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.02 18:14:00 - [10] Thanks for pointing me to the correct thread, moving my thoughts there.
El Yatta Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2008.07.02 18:25:00 - [11] Market based insurance - i.e. if you can build an insurable item, you can generate infinite free isk! 1) I build a Zealot 2) I sell it for the billion or so I have in the wallet, to my alt. Its easy, because nobody else is stupid enough to buy it. 3) I now insure it for like... 300m, thats roughly what the platinum cost would be 4) I blow it up, I now have 700m, and obviously, the billion in my alts wallet. 5) Repeat 6) ??? 7) Profit. Any situation which takes average market prices, instead of specifics, obviously leaves it open to massive manipulation effects, as well as the fact that everyone would fly their gear to syndicate to insure and blow it up for free isk, as there's loads of stations with bugger all on the market. Can you see now why T2 insuring for what it costs would be bad? Insurance needs to be decreased or at the least, stay as it is. We dont need even safer PVP. _______________________________________________ Mercenary Forces
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.02 20:44:00 - [12] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've discussed my thoughts on this here - put simply, market-based insurance for everything. Buy 2 ships. Insure one ship. Other ship: Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk ... ... ... Buy your ship. Self destruct other ship. Get rich. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Artemis Rose Eleckrostatik	Posted - 2008.07.03 06:32:00 - [13] Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab I assume this is a request for _lowering_ insurance payout, as anything else would be pretty braindead as a suggestion. This. You pay more in modules/T2 ships to get better performance, and your trade-off is to take a bigger ISK hit when it dies. Why should this be changed? __________________________________________________ Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine. WTB Purple Nerf Bat.
Tmarte Caldari Explora Empire Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.07.03 08:28:00 - [14] If this is an Idea, shouldn't it be put into the F&I discussion forum?
Kalintos Tyl	Posted - 2008.07.03 08:36:00 - [15] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've discussed my thoughts on this here - put simply, market-based insurance for everything. Buy 2 ships. Insure one ship. Other ship: Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk ... ... ... Buy your ship. Self destruct other ship. Get rich. Ever heard of median price? 1 zealot at 10b wont change insurence price if there are 1000 at 80mln price. It wil increse about 2mln. You fail
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.03 12:02:00 - [16] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl Originally by: Avon Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've discussed my thoughts on this here - put simply, market-based insurance for everything. Buy 2 ships. Insure one ship. Other ship: Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk. Buy your ship. Place on market for 10bil isk ... ... ... Buy your ship. Self destruct other ship. Get rich. Ever heard of median price? 1 zealot at 10b wont change insurence price if there are 1000 at 80mln price. It wil increse about 2mln. You fail It think you missed the importance of the ...'s Just keep doing it until you hike the price enough, all it is costing you is broker fees, which are negligible with trade skills. Fail indeed Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2008.07.03 14:32:00 - [17] This is easy enough to fix - base it on Eve-wide mineral prices. Nobody is a big enough player to manipulate those meaningfully. ------------------ Fix the forums!
Xaen Caldari Caritas.	Posted - 2008.07.03 14:39:00 - [18] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto This is easy enough to fix - base it on Eve-wide mineral prices. Nobody is a big enough player to manipulate those meaningfully. That's how it currently is slappy. Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. - Support fixing the UI\|Suggest Jita fixes\|Compact logs
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.07.03 14:40:00 - [19] Originally by: Xaen Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. And thats a good thing.
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2008.07.03 15:03:00 - [20] No support. EVE needs insurance REMOVED from the game entirely, there is no need for this isk faucet in the game anymore. ...if anything make it possible to have player insurance corporations
Doc Extropy Gallente Kinda'Shujaa	Posted - 2008.07.03 15:30:00 - [21] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Xaen Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. And thats a good thing. No, it isn't. Except for a selfish minority. The majority would get a lot of more fun if T2 ships were more... casual. --- Skill queue now! Nerf skillpoint loss and half done skills! WE ARE PAYING CUSTOMERS AND DESERVE MAXIMUM COMFORT!
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2008.07.03 15:34:00 - [22] Originally by: Doc Extropy Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Xaen Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. And thats a good thing. No, it isn't. Except for a selfish minority. The majority would get a lot of more fun if T2 ships were more... casual. You already have invention pushing prices to the effective floor. Insurance is not needed.
Doc Extropy Gallente Kinda'Shujaa	Posted - 2008.07.03 15:38:00 - [23] Originally by: Kazzac Elentria Originally by: Doc Extropy Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Xaen Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. And thats a good thing. No, it isn't. Except for a selfish minority. The majority would get a lot of more fun if T2 ships were more... casual. You already have invention pushing prices to the effective floor. Insurance is not needed. 80 million ISK+ for a throw away - PVP - ship (Deimos) still isn't exactly what I call "on the effective floor". With 100% insurance payout it would be ok. --- Skill queue now! Nerf skillpoint loss and half done skills! WE ARE PAYING CUSTOMERS AND DESERVE MAXIMUM COMFORT!
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.07.03 15:55:00 - [24] Originally by: Doc Extropy Originally by: Kazzac Elentria Originally by: Doc Extropy Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Xaen Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. And thats a good thing. No, it isn't. Except for a selfish minority. The majority would get a lot of more fun if T2 ships were more... casual. You already have invention pushing prices to the effective floor. Insurance is not needed. 80 million ISK+ for a throw away - PVP - ship (Deimos) still isn't exactly what I call "on the effective floor". With 100% insurance payout it would be ok. The ship you are looking for is called a thorax.
Doc Extropy Gallente Kinda'Shujaa	Posted - 2008.07.03 15:57:00 - [25] Edited by: Doc Extropy on 03/07/2008 15:57:16 Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Doc Extropy Originally by: Kazzac Elentria Originally by: Doc Extropy Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Xaen Problem is, T2 ships aren't made directly from minerals, and thus they get royally gimped insurance payouts. And thats a good thing. No, it isn't. Except for a selfish minority. The majority would get a lot of more fun if T2 ships were more... casual. You already have invention pushing prices to the effective floor. Insurance is not needed. 80 million ISK+ for a throw away - PVP - ship (Deimos) still isn't exactly what I call "on the effective floor". With 100% insurance payout it would be ok. The ship you are looking for is called a thorax. Oh, really? --- Skill queue now! Nerf skillpoint loss and half done skills! WE ARE PAYING CUSTOMERS AND DESERVE MAXIMUM COMFORT!
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2008.07.03 16:31:00 - [26] Originally by: Doc Extropy 80 million ISK+ for a throw away - PVP - ship (Deimos) still isn't exactly what I call "on the effective floor". With 100% insurance payout it would be ok. 100% insurance on T2 items would be economy suicide. Insurance is a faucet, it injects money into the game. It would also effectively put a floor price on ALL t2 components. No, if you want to help make T2 more affordable, I suggest you mosey on over to the Critical EVE ISK issue in this same forum and lob your support for a change in the way moon minerals are derived and used through the various T2 processes. As it stands, you have prices the way they are because demand is high, and supply of just two moon minerals (which account for 80% of the make up of component cost) are low.

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.