EVE General Discussion

How so?

I'm fine with this as long as they also remove insurance payouts for non-combat ships which get killed in low/nullsec. After all, taking your shiny industrial out there is a completely irresponsible thing to do, amirite?

As far as I understand there is only one "company" insuring ships in EVE and it is legal, so paying inurance to criminals is illogical. Isurance companies that protects criminals usualy are called "mafias"

Bombers don't (last time I checked) cost more then 20-30M ISK and come with a Covops cloak, have a small sig radius, a decent velocity, the ability to align quickly, and are combat ships.

Exhumers & Barges are ships designed to sit in a single place for an hour at a time (or at a minimum, slowly move around while a 2-3 minute cycle runs). The only offense they can carry are either 5 small or 5 medium drones. That presents a very different target profile and makes them basically sitting ducks.

A zero-tank Mackinaw has about 6290 EHP (37.5% EMP resist, 50% THE are the weak points). At best (without using faction or T2 rigs), you can boost that to 12-13k EHP. A mammoth with a similar focus on tank over design function would end up at 23k EHP and an Iteron V would have 24k EHP.

(Personally, I applaud coordinated groups who use destroyers to gank vessels in hi-sec. It takes a degree of organization and teamwork to pull off. On the flip side, I think the ability of a solo ship to alpha-gank easy targets is being over abused at the moment and will not be surprised to see CCP change things even further)

I pretty much agree with the Insurance in war zones bit, however consider that real world militaries have insurance on many front line assets (including soldiers). I personally feel that Insurance being done away with completely would be great, however it would be extremely noob/small alliance unfriendly so probably best to leave as is for the sake of the game

edit: fail quote

The answer has been provided numerous times. It's just you don't like the answer. Suicidie ganking as it is allows "LOL" players to easily destroy hundreds of millions of isk with very little risk and consequence to themselves. And mining in hi sec shouldn't have to be an extremely perilous activity as it has become for miners. And the solution to miners shouldn't have to be "don't mine in hi sec and you'll be safe". Because as it stands this is pretty much their only option during this LOL-fest. And because there is little damage to the gankers activities like this can go on indefinitely.

When mining in hi sec has become more dangerous than mining in lo/null sec something is definitely out of whack,. considering that the mining rewards in hi sec are less.

Why don't you direct these questions to your buddy Tippia? :-) Or would you prefer a "How so" from me?

Well, never seen CONCORD saying "nah, I'll pass on this" when someone was kill in hisec so I think they care. And even there was a corruption not all insurances would be payed. Corruption make things depend on someones mood.

Low sec does not differ much from hi sec from legal point of view. You stil became a criminal if you attack someone (sec status) so I think insurance applies. Null sec, a the other hand, is different story. It's your Somalia, no penalty for attacking, 100% off the empire and CONCORD jurisdiction. And for death there insurance payment is, I think, questionable.

EDIT:
I general, the problem is that insurance mechanism doesn't care about anything except ships price. That is just stupid. In RL isurance payments depend on many factors including car owner history, his family etc. Eve keeps track of player kills and looses and insurance algorithms should take it into account, along with it's security status.
Imagine for example if you had to pay additional isk if you want to be compensated for ship loos in some specific region because you died there too many times already :)

Nope. Mainly because, once again, insurance in EVE is a game mechanic, not a business. Its purpose is not to make money, but to provide incentives to making ships blow up and to provide a base value for all minerals. Insurance in EVE is pretty much the exact opposite of real-life insurance.
Click their name in the panel to the left, and choose “Hide Posts” from the drop-down.

There are varying levels of insurance you can buy, which basically means that they let you asses your own risk. Hilarious no?



Yeah, don't read their posts.

Surely the real soluton would be to extend your solution and make Eve more of real sandbox, less of the faux sandbox that it currently is.

An explanation - currently crafting in Eve is no different than most other MMOs, it is just a more complex version than most. In real sandbox games players have far more freedom when it comes to building stuff, they really can invent new stuff, in some even create the graphics.

Now creating the graphics may be a step too far in an mmorpg, but the game could certainly do with being more like a sandbox where players get the freedom and the abilty to influence the enviroment when it comes to crafting.

So to expand on your example, it would be even better if ships simply had a set number of points (obviously with more expensive ships having more points), that the player was then able to use tofit out a ship in any way they wished, how many HP, how much CPU, cargo hold size, how many high/mid/low slots, etc.

This, to take the mining / ganking example would give the miner the choice to go for an all out mining ship, that was easy to gank, or they could go for anti-gank minng ship, which would be a less effecient miner, smaller cargo hold,etc, but be much more tanky (genuinely tanky, not tanking out a paper thin hull which is the only option people currently have).

It fit in with the alleged goal of a player being able to effect the enviroment and add some much needed variety to the game.