These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Self-destructing your ship should not give you insurance money

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
#61 - 2012-07-25 20:25:34 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
The problem with removing insurance is you completely lose the safety net for newer players. Insurance as it exists prevents someone from losing that first battlecruiser and ragequitting because they just watched a month of PVE go down the drain. Insurance softens the blow and lets them keep going.

Now if you want to void insurance on PVP, fine. But don't gut the new player experience just because experienced players can get by without it.


Self-destructing should not yield insurance. How many noobs do you see self-destructing their ships?
Dusenman
Sensible People
Sigma Grindset
#62 - 2012-07-25 20:26:46 UTC
Parsee789 wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
The problem with removing insurance is you completely lose the safety net for newer players. Insurance as it exists prevents someone from losing that first battlecruiser and ragequitting because they just watched a month of PVE go down the drain. Insurance softens the blow and lets them keep going.

Now if you want to void insurance on PVP, fine. But don't gut the new player experience just because experienced players can get by without it.


Self-destructing should not yield insurance. How many noobs do you see self-destructing their ships?


By accident maybe. But you bring up a good point.

GM Homonoia: In other words; feel free to use the tactic, but don't be an utter and total ***.

CCP Tallest_: _And by "we have made it so", I mean Punkturis has made it so.
Dusenman
Sensible People
Sigma Grindset
#63 - 2012-07-25 20:28:04 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Another +1 for removing Insurance entirely, but especially in the case of Self Destruct.

Further more regarding Self Destruct, make it a means for people to potentially capture ships.

* As soon as you activate SD, your pod is ejected from the ship.
* Hacking Mod can be used to shut off a SD timer and pass ownership to the Hacker.





It would make hacking even more useful. Interesting idea to say the least.

GM Homonoia: In other words; feel free to use the tactic, but don't be an utter and total ***.

CCP Tallest_: _And by "we have made it so", I mean Punkturis has made it so.
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#64 - 2012-07-25 20:29:58 UTC
Not the craziest idea I've ever heard. And I hear a lot of crazy ideas. Some of them I even come up with myself.

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#65 - 2012-07-25 21:16:11 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Gritz1 wrote:
Othran wrote:
Remove the ability to self-destruct would seem to be the best solution.

If self-destruct actually caused area of effect damage to other ships there might be a valid reason for retaining it but it doesn't so there isn't.

Get rid of self-destruct.


So you get pointed in the middle of no where, say, in your pod. And you have no way of self destructing, and now these bad people can hold you there for hours. See a problem?

It would also suck to get stuck in a wormhole system with no probes and no friends. You should always have the option of putting a gun to your head.
If that option results in a killmail, no insurance, a loot-drop, a nice AOE fireball, or a mark-of-shame on your character, that is one thing. But getting rid of self-destruct entirely is not really an option, for reasons such as those mentioned above.

As long as you thing having a self destruct is a good thing, could you add it to POSes, please?

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Epiphaniess
Verboten Technologies
#66 - 2012-07-25 21:18:40 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Not the craziest idea I've ever heard. And I hear a lot of crazy ideas. Some of them I even come up with myself.


See you can't tell us something like this without giving us a few examples.

Just makes us want to speculate.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#67 - 2012-07-25 21:37:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:

It would also suck to get stuck in a wormhole system with no probes and no friends. You should always have the option of putting a gun to your head.
If that option results in a killmail, no insurance, a loot-drop, a nice AOE fireball, or a mark-of-shame on your character, that is one thing. But getting rid of self-destruct entirely is not really an option, for reasons such as those mentioned above.


If that did happen, you would not see any complaints about self destructs


It happens. I live in a WH and got a free Drake form someone who got stuck in it, ejected and hit SD. No idea why he left the ship.

Edit: Options

No insurance at all
No insurance for SD
Insurance only for PVE losses
Insurance only for players less than x months old
Insurance based on space sec level

One thing to consider: Some players slap together LOL fleets and go out to low/null and do silly things. Insurance helps encourage such behavior. I think such activity should be encouraged.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Alexzandvar Douglass
Motiveless Malignity
Deepwater Hooligans
#68 - 2012-07-25 21:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexzandvar Douglass
You guys know Navys in real life used to scuttle there vessels if they were doomed to lose them to prevent them from being captured right? Just think of self destructing a valid way or robbing your enemy of a kill mail, ye olde style.
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
#69 - 2012-07-25 21:41:39 UTC
Alexzandvar Douglass wrote:
You guys know Navys in real life used to scuttle there vessels if they were doomed to lose them to prevent them from being captured right? Just think of self destructing a valid way or robbing your enemy of a kill mail, ye olde style.


Do you see them getting money from any insurance agency for doing that?
Jim Luc
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#70 - 2012-07-25 23:16:21 UTC
I might have a solution to the problem that I thought of when I was watching the Alliance panel and one of the devs was talking about the upcoming contract changes.


Insurance should be a service that's run the same way insurance is run in real life. The monthly price should be based off location, type of vehicle, and "driver" record, with a deductible. Lower deductible means higher premiums. Pilots who self-destruct can get a payout, but it adds a point to their record for 3 months. 3 points, and they aren't able to get insurance, or their premium is extremely high. Deductible is optional by the way, if you don't pay it then your risk doesn't go up but you don't get the payout.

Think DUI before you're 25 years old insurance prices.

Also, the payout should be tallied every 3 months taking into account your sec status, risk (k/d ratio), points on your record, etc, with the option to add in an extra amount of ISK that would get repaid to you, but also causes your premiums to go up. This could then cover the loss of faction modules and fittings if you so desire.


SECOND PART:

By modifying the current contract system you can give us players the ability to start our own insurance corporations. This would allow player-run corps to insure capitals, and a modified contract system would allow first ask the insured party if they wish to pay the deductible, then it would automatically pay out the previously defined amount. It would also allow the insurance corp to set breach of contract stipulations:


  • Self-destruction outside of a wormhole for instance - it can use the killmail's details of the location and add to risk points based on this (wormhole might be ok for self-destruct, but get a 20% reduced payout or something),
  • Destruction in an off-limits system (allows the company to set higher premiums for low/null-sec dwellers)
  • etc ... Idunno - we'll have to wait and see what they come up with in the new contracts system...



Oh, and here's another thought - for new players that are very risk-averse, we can have the ability to replace your t1 frigate and cruiser class ship, complete with any t1 modules and weapons, at the lowest station price at select hub highsec locations (where an ample supply are stocked).

This would do a couple things - it would allow n00bs the chance to get out and fight and die without as much worry, and it would promote the sale of the covered items in the locations provided. Just a thoughtSmile
Barakach
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#71 - 2012-07-26 01:31:18 UTC
This is the new chewbacca defense.

You must acquit, getting paid to blow up your ship does not make sense!
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2012-07-26 03:50:06 UTC
Jim Luc wrote:
I might have a solution to the problem that I thought of when I was watching the Alliance panel and one of the devs was talking about the upcoming contract changes.


Insurance should be a service that's run the same way insurance is run in real life. The monthly price should be based off location, type of vehicle, and "driver" record, with a deductible. Lower deductible means higher premiums. Pilots who self-destruct can get a payout, but it adds a point to their record for 3 months. 3 points, and they aren't able to get insurance, or their premium is extremely high. Deductible is optional by the way, if you don't pay it then your risk doesn't go up but you don't get the payout.

Think DUI before you're 25 years old insurance prices.

Also, the payout should be tallied every 3 months taking into account your sec status, risk (k/d ratio), points on your record, etc, with the option to add in an extra amount of ISK that would get repaid to you, but also causes your premiums to go up. This could then cover the loss of faction modules and fittings if you so desire.


SECOND PART:

By modifying the current contract system you can give us players the ability to start our own insurance corporations. This would allow player-run corps to insure capitals, and a modified contract system would allow first ask the insured party if they wish to pay the deductible, then it would automatically pay out the previously defined amount. It would also allow the insurance corp to set breach of contract stipulations:


  • Self-destruction outside of a wormhole for instance - it can use the killmail's details of the location and add to risk points based on this (wormhole might be ok for self-destruct, but get a 20% reduced payout or something),
  • Destruction in an off-limits system (allows the company to set higher premiums for low/null-sec dwellers)
  • etc ... Idunno - we'll have to wait and see what they come up with in the new contracts system...



Oh, and here's another thought - for new players that are very risk-averse, we can have the ability to replace your t1 frigate and cruiser class ship, complete with any t1 modules and weapons, at the lowest station price at select hub highsec locations (where an ample supply are stocked).

This would do a couple things - it would allow n00bs the chance to get out and fight and die without as much worry, and it would promote the sale of the covered items in the locations provided. Just a thoughtSmile




The only way to do this would be with full disclosure of all losses. It also doesn't take into account the "here's a ship, go get it blown up" training missions.

So... CCP sets up a full lossmail board for all pilots -- showing how many losses to NPC's as well as to players?

You'd need to know how many ships are being lost and to what type of attacks for players to provide insurance and "trust" isn't all that hot a gig for most EVE players.

I think the shock-value of seeing all those NPC losses would be funny. Gankers no longer hiding their failures, the mass amount of mission and plex runner losses... Yeah, having that published would be a bit funny and data-mining it would probably show a radically different view of how "safe" PvE is vs PvP.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#73 - 2012-07-26 04:03:11 UTC
It's a game mechanic, not a business.

That aside, turn ISK into a fiat currency, and remove inherent value from mining? Well, it would allow for market crashes on a new and unprecedented scale, and that could be fun…
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#74 - 2012-07-26 04:09:16 UTC
Mocam wrote:
So... CCP sets up a full lossmail board for all pilots -- showing how many losses to NPC's as well as to players?

You'd need to know how many ships are being lost and to what type of attacks for players to provide insurance and "trust" isn't all that hot a gig for most EVE players.

I think the shock-value of seeing all those NPC losses would be funny. Gankers no longer hiding their failures, the mass amount of mission and plex runner losses... Yeah, having that published would be a bit funny and data-mining it would probably show a radically different view of how "safe" PvE is vs PvP.

Killed by a Guristas station torp, opps~

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#75 - 2012-07-26 06:41:42 UTC
Removing insurance entirely would have massive and far-reaching implications for the EVE economy and for ship balance. CCP would have to do a big rebalancing act.

But insurance for self-destructed ships? Yeah, no, I've never thought that made any sense.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Mag's
Azn Empire
#76 - 2012-07-26 09:15:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Parsee789 wrote:
Alexzandvar Douglass wrote:
You guys know Navys in real life used to scuttle there vessels if they were doomed to lose them to prevent them from being captured right? Just think of self destructing a valid way or robbing your enemy of a kill mail, ye olde style.


Do you see them getting money from any insurance agency for doing that?
Maybe not, but that wasn't his point.

There are some situations that insurance companies do pay out in RL, they don't in game. But comparing RL insurance with the game mechanic, is ridiculous. They are the same in name only.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#77 - 2012-07-26 11:38:12 UTC
Alexzandvar Douglass wrote:
You guys know Navys in real life used to scuttle there vessels if they were doomed to lose them to prevent them from being captured right? Just think of self destructing a valid way or robbing your enemy of a kill mail, ye olde style.

Scuttling denied loot, not credit for the destruction of the ship.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Alexzandvar Douglass
Motiveless Malignity
Deepwater Hooligans
#78 - 2012-07-26 11:46:28 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Alexzandvar Douglass wrote:
You guys know Navys in real life used to scuttle there vessels if they were doomed to lose them to prevent them from being captured right? Just think of self destructing a valid way or robbing your enemy of a kill mail, ye olde style.

Scuttling denied loot, not credit for the destruction of the ship.


Thing is, in EVE a good amount of times the Kill-mail it's self is the loot, on an expensive ship or well known pilot.
Ariel Dawn
State War Academy
Caldari State
#79 - 2012-07-26 13:20:44 UTC
Self-destruct is fine.

The real problem is that people care far too much about killmails.

"Wow, I'm so impressed how you participated in killing a ship in EVE Online, now I want to sleep with you!" - said no one ever
Sarcasim
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#80 - 2012-07-26 13:27:58 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Gritz1 wrote:
Othran wrote:
Remove the ability to self-destruct would seem to be the best solution.

If self-destruct actually caused area of effect damage to other ships there might be a valid reason for retaining it but it doesn't so there isn't.

Get rid of self-destruct.


So you get pointed in the middle of no where, say, in your pod. And you have no way of self destructing, and now these bad people can hold you there for hours. See a problem?

It would also suck to get stuck in a wormhole system with no probes and no friends. You should always have the option of putting a gun to your head.
If that option results in a killmail, no insurance, a loot-drop, a nice AOE fireball, or a mark-of-shame on your character, that is one thing. But getting rid of self-destruct entirely is not really an option, for reasons such as those mentioned above.

that's a poor excuse, removing self destruct from ships isn't the same as removing it from your pod.

I mean I'm willing to hear why ships should be able to self destruct. I think it would be awesome if you could come across empty ships in wormhole space to steal, since the players had to jump out and self destruct his pod.


what do you think?

I think its good to see people can take NO its not gonna happen and be ok with it.