These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Insurance and Loss due to criminal activity

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tarkoauc
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1 - 2011-10-22 15:45:23 UTC
It is about time that Pend insurance in Eve wakes up to what Earth insurance companies have done for ever.: Stop paying for insurance claims where the insured item was used in a criminal activity or if the item gets destroyed through your deliberate actions.

Insurance should not pay out if CONCORD kills your ship because of your criminal actions. Insurance should not pay if you self-destruct your ship.

Any self-respecting insurance company would not pay for these shenanigans and neither should
Kilrayn
Caldari Provisions
#2 - 2011-10-22 15:51:07 UTC
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool

"Music is a mysterious thing. Sometimes it makes people remember things they do not expect. Many thoughts, feelings, memories... things almost forgotten... Regardless of whether the listener desires to remember or not." - Citan Uzuki, Xenogears
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#3 - 2011-10-22 15:51:48 UTC
I will paraphrase a comment by Tippia from the past few days.

Eve's economy is drvien by the destruction of ships and others stuffs, therefore we should double the payout of ships used in ganking TwistedLol

Also, the obligatory. Here we go again.


Slade
Vastek Non
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2011-10-22 15:56:49 UTC
Kilrayn wrote:
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool


And of course Insurance Companies 'want' to insure people they are guaranteed to make payouts to.. That 7m isk excess really makes the 33m payout worth it because...... Ugh


Oh, and like usual I second the OP's thoughts. It has never made sense for suicide gankers to get payouts, doesn't now.
Kilrayn
Caldari Provisions
#5 - 2011-10-22 16:00:34 UTC
Vastek Non wrote:
Kilrayn wrote:
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool


And of course Insurance Companies 'want' to insure people they are guaranteed to make payouts to.. That 7m isk excess really makes the 33m payout worth it because...... Ugh


Oh, and like usual I second the OP's thoughts. It has never made sense for suicide gankers to get payouts, doesn't now.

As far as I'm aware, Insurance is paid when you ship blows up, not WHY it was blown up. I personally see no issue with it.

"Music is a mysterious thing. Sometimes it makes people remember things they do not expect. Many thoughts, feelings, memories... things almost forgotten... Regardless of whether the listener desires to remember or not." - Citan Uzuki, Xenogears
David Grogan
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2011-10-22 16:06:38 UTC  |  Edited by: David Grogan
Kilrayn wrote:
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool


its actually not good for business.............. the more miners cannot use their hulks "because of tornado" (suicide ganking) the more likely they will unsub.

more unsubbed accounts = less revenue for CCP

less revenue for CCP = more staff layoffs.

more staff layoffs = longer development times + longer times to fix bugs

personally i dont care about afk miners.... BUT i do care about the game and i'd hate to have to wait even longer for some basic bug fixes and game balancing because CCP can't afford to pay for extra devs to fix the game.

Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs.
Kilrayn
Caldari Provisions
#7 - 2011-10-22 16:09:52 UTC
David Grogan wrote:
Kilrayn wrote:
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool


its actually not good for business.............. the more miners cannot use their hulks "because of tornado" (suicide ganking) the more likely they will unsub.

more unsubbed accounts = less revenue for CCP

less revenue for CCP = more staff layoffs.

more staff layoffs = longer development times + longer times to fix bugs

personally i dont care about afk miners.... BUT i do care about the game and i'd hate to have to wait even longer for some basic bug fixes and game balancing because CCP can't afford to pay for extra devs to fix the game.

Wasn't being serious there, just posting silly reply to a post I thought was silly.

"Music is a mysterious thing. Sometimes it makes people remember things they do not expect. Many thoughts, feelings, memories... things almost forgotten... Regardless of whether the listener desires to remember or not." - Citan Uzuki, Xenogears
Khazarn Areth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2011-10-22 16:18:44 UTC
I like the free ISK as my corp hands out suicide ships at no cost to me so on top of killing a few hundred mill of ship i get a nice little cash bonus, everyones a winner..... well except the poor chump who was brutally ganked...... que sera sera......

Bloody Omir's coming back Monsters from the endless black Wading through a crimson flood Omir's come to drink your blood

Alexandra Delarge
The Korova
#9 - 2011-10-22 16:28:13 UTC
Tarkoauc wrote:
It is about time that Pend insurance in Eve wakes up to what Earth insurance companies have done for ever


This is special 'space insurance' from the future and is exclusive to pod pilots. It is not the same as the old fashion 'earth bound' insurance that was available for planet dwellers in the past.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#10 - 2011-10-22 16:31:07 UTC
Tarkoauc wrote:
Insurance should not pay out if CONCORD kills your ship because of your criminal actions. Insurance should not pay if you self-destruct your ship.
Why?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#11 - 2011-10-22 16:39:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tarkoauc wrote:
Insurance should not pay out if CONCORD kills your ship because of your criminal actions. Insurance should not pay if you self-destruct your ship.
Why?
This.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
The Offerer
Doomheim
#12 - 2011-10-22 16:44:15 UTC
Vastek Non wrote:
Kilrayn wrote:
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool


And of course Insurance Companies 'want' to insure people they are guaranteed to make payouts to.. That 7m isk excess really makes the 33m payout worth it because......


... the pirate lost a 40 mil ship and 20 mils of modules in the process.Cool
Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
#13 - 2011-10-22 16:50:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Fille Balle
Tarkoauc wrote:
It is about time that Pend insurance in Eve wakes up to what Earth insurance companies have done for ever.: Stop paying for insurance claims where the insured item was used in a criminal activity or if the item gets destroyed through your deliberate actions.

Insurance should not pay out if CONCORD kills your ship because of your criminal actions. Insurance should not pay if you self-destruct your ship.

Any self-respecting insurance company would not pay for these shenanigans and neither should


Look, that wouldn't make much difference. Besides, suicide ganks have been around for a long time, and there here to stay. Not really a problem afaik.

What is a problem, that's going to get worse with the new BC's, is recycling alts to to get around the sec status problem. It is considered an exploit, but it's very hard to keep track of. For this, I believe another solution is in order.

I think a fine should be applied each time your ship is popped by concord, and repeated offences in a short span of time should increase that fine. Raising your sec status should recuce it, and if your character has a negative balance you should be unable to biomass. Call it unable to pay the biomassing fee.

I think that's aviable solution anyways.

Stop the spamming, not the scamming!
Mag's
Azn Empire
#14 - 2011-10-22 17:02:28 UTC
Fille Balle wrote:
What is a problem, that's going to get worse with the new BC's, is recycling alts to to get around the sec status problem. It is considered an exploit, but it's very hard to keep track of. For this, I believe another solution is in order.
So you're saying that people will train an alt for the new Tier 3 BC get the sec status to a certain point, bio and train another etc.etc?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
#15 - 2011-10-22 17:06:11 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Fille Balle wrote:
What is a problem, that's going to get worse with the new BC's, is recycling alts to to get around the sec status problem. It is considered an exploit, but it's very hard to keep track of. For this, I believe another solution is in order.
So you're saying that people will train an alt for the new Tier 3 BC get the sec status to a certain point, bio and train another etc.etc?


You are correct. People are already doing it. It is considered an exploit. I you think this not happening due to the amount of time it takes, load up evemon on a fresh character and see how much time it takes to do so.

Stop the spamming, not the scamming!
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#16 - 2011-10-22 17:09:48 UTC
Fille Balle wrote:
You are correct. People are already doing it. It is considered an exploit. I you think this not happening due to the amount of time it takes, load up evemon on a fresh character and see how much time it takes to do so.


The only people that would do that would be those that have already trained all they want on their main and other slot and do not mind sacrificing the SP's for a throw away alt.

I wonder what percentage of the EVE population would find that a viable use of their SP gains.


Slade
Mag's
Azn Empire
#17 - 2011-10-22 17:27:04 UTC
Fille Balle wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Fille Balle wrote:
What is a problem, that's going to get worse with the new BC's, is recycling alts to to get around the sec status problem. It is considered an exploit, but it's very hard to keep track of. For this, I believe another solution is in order.
So you're saying that people will train an alt for the new Tier 3 BC get the sec status to a certain point, bio and train another etc.etc?


You are correct. People are already doing it. It is considered an exploit. I you think this not happening due to the amount of time it takes, load up evemon on a fresh character and see how much time it takes to do so.
You best tell me how long it will take to train, I don't even know what you consider needed skills. Best list them too.

Also, I'm sure there will be a stipulations in regards to alt recycling, time and uses etc, may be you could list that too.
Or, as you seem to be well informed in this regard, you could simply point me towards the information.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Adunh Slavy
#18 - 2011-10-22 17:46:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tarkoauc wrote:
Insurance should not pay out if CONCORD kills your ship because of your criminal actions. Insurance should not pay if you self-destruct your ship.
Why?



Why Not?

I'll give you a reason why insurance should not pay for suicides, it distorts behaviors. Risk is far too heavily mitigated, in fact completely, in favor of the suiciding player, leading players to do things that would other wise be unreasonable. This unreasonable behavior is only supported because of a completely unrealistic policy by an NPC corporation that has a magical balance sheet.

Now, your turn.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Thomas Abernathy
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#19 - 2011-10-22 17:48:24 UTC
Kilrayn wrote:
I'd say its rather smart by Concord. They offer insurance for criminals, making they're ship losses to have less of an impact, thus creating more criminal activity and providing more work for themselves. Good business if you ask me Cool



Art imitates life?

"Fighting CCD since 2139"
Rocky Deadshot
In The Goo
EVE Trade Alliance
#20 - 2011-10-22 17:57:26 UTC
Normally Insurance companies are in it to make money. (assuming they aren't being paid off by the Jove) So logically it would make since that if the company could find a reason to deny your claim and keep all of the isk you paid them, they would.

Receiving insurance for being killed by concord, is like running from the police after committing a crime, then wrecking your car and expecting your insurance company to cover it. Which to most people sounds lubricious... but I here in the UK you can get sued for defending yourself from a mugger... so I guess they have a different point of view
123Next pageLast page