Ships & Modules

If T2 & T3 insurance paid out more than they would a huge ISK sink would be removed from the game. Money that comes into the economy needs to be able to leave it, and the amount of 'free isk' being injected into the game economy is already higher than the sinks that are around to reduce it, without making the situation even worse.

It is not simply a question of how 'easy' it would be to redesign the insurance formula to include T2/T3 ship production costs, the wider economical implications also have to be considered and it is these implications that mean what you're asking for will never be put in game.

Besides which, there should be a drawback for using T2/T3.

I'd be up for them reducing T1 insurance to 50-60% and removing insurance on T2/3 completely.

The whole insurance mechanic makes absolutely no sense anyway. What insurance company in their right might would insure ships specifically designed to be taken into a combat situation?


Also, new players leaving because they can't afford T2/T3? Is that some sort of joke? I've never once met or heard of anyone that has claimed to be leaving because of T2/T3 ship price levels. Maybe you need to learn how to make more isk....

[

That would be a solid arguement if the use of T2 hulls would stay the same, though there would probably a increase in the use, which would be more money rolling in the economy, nor are the insurances infinate, several of my insurances ended without the need to pay out, wich is money that really doesn't come back.





Nobody said it should be a total insurance, T1 platina insuranses roughly pay up 30% to 50% of the invested amount.





Within a time limit and a to a percentage of the new value, that is actualy quite possible. but completely irellevant for this discussion.



Neverheard that either, though I do hear a lot of complaining about EVE being dominated by T1 Battlecruisers, and it's quite safe to assume price has something to do with that, CCP has spoke out they like to see more divercity in the ships flying New Eden.

The only way to do that is by making the gap (cost effective) smaller between the lines of spaceships, untill then there will be a small group of T1 ships that will dominate the battlefield. There should be a gap between T1 and T2 ships I totaly agree, though it should be in proportion.

T2 costs aren't the issue, T1 costs are. Several T1 ships have become increasingly more expensive and it's making the low-cost PvP alternative less and less viable.

You shouldn't be crippled in PvP just because you don't wish to invest (I say invest but most people don't expect to see a return on their isk spent) in T2 or faction ships. We're not at that point yet but we're getting there as the arsenal of ships available to the impoverished PvP'er has greatly been reduced in size.

Cheaper PvP would mean more people pew-pew'ing (= more fun) and a little more forgiving profit margins to the for-profit PvPers.

Somehow the nature of EVE PVP has gone from affordable, fun and common to expensive, risk-adverse and rare.
This is directly because of continual PVP inflation.

The devs are trying to deal with the problem with the rich having excess ISK so they engineer rising costs of ships and deny insurance for T2 and T3.
However, in so doing, they directly are hurting EVE PVP for the not-rich.

This is the direction EVE is headed. PVP is becoming more expensive, more rare, more cautious and less fun.
Find some other ISK sinks that do not hurt PVP.
Stop taxing PVPers and PVP in order to deal with the completely unrelated problem of income inequality and excess ISK in EVE![/quote]

PvP is not expensive, nor is it hard to find.

A Rupture Fit, Rigged, Droned and with ammo is a mere 35m isk. Cheap as ****. Buy 10 of them stage yourself in a low sec entry system undock fly around kill or die, come back rinse and repeat. 10 chances of pew pew fun, and all for 350m isk. This is cheap pvp.

However if you're stupidly poor replace rupture with rifter and 35m a ship with 4m and go be a poor ass scurb pvp'er for a while. You'll have fun, but its frigs and only poor people fly frigs.

35 or 350 million isn't cheap PvP, 900k is cheap PvP.

I don't care about insurance on T2 hulls and fly them all the time, but I think some people need some ISK perspective.

The last BC I bought, I got for 17 mil. They work fine; T2 is not required.

I also think some people are focusing too much on solo PvP. In 2-3 days a noob can be helping out in a gang/fleet.

Back to topic.

T2 and T3 insurance.
Why should it remain so very low?

Yes 35m for a full fit Rupture is cheap pvp. Its not hard to make 35m isk in eve, not at all.

I can't believe you scrubs actually want more insurance. The whole system needs to be removed from the game. This thread is bad and if you posted in it, you should feel bad.

If so, why did you post in here?

Get out, troll.