These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.

First post
Author
Hrald
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#81 - 2011-10-30 05:56:50 UTC
If it's such a small amount of isk, why put the effort into making changes to the existing system?

I lose ~20m every time I attempt a gank since I've used T2 fit Omens. Losing ~22m isnt going to deter me. So who cares? Why waste dev hours on it?
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2011-10-30 07:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Ris Dnalor
Mirima Thurander wrote:
I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.


I want to know why you the gank masters of eve have so much hate for having your ability to only lose a small amount of isk when you gank something removed.


Any post that can be summed up as "" because ganking wont be free any more"" is not valid.


I'm fine with or without insurance.

The small amount of return is irrelevant to me, and wouldn't change a thing about what I do with my time in eve.

However, Insurance is a good thing for newer players, and sometimes they get ganked by concord without realizing it is going to happen.

Now for a very new player, that could be devastating to their wallet and their enjoyment of the game.

My thought is that insurance should only apply for the first 6 months you play eve and after that no more insurance, but hey I'm not complaining about the free isk so...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Mirima Thurander
#83 - 2011-10-30 15:33:12 UTC
Any way, i wonder why no one at ccp ever posts in these types of threads...

All automated intel should be removed from the game including Instant local/jumps/kills/cynos for all systems/regions.Eve should report nothing like this to the client/3rd party software.Intel should not be force fed to players. Player skill and iniative should be the sources of intel.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#84 - 2011-10-30 15:36:45 UTC
Mirima Thurander wrote:
I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.


I want to know why you the gank masters of eve have so much hate for having your ability to only lose a small amount of isk when you gank something removed.


Any post that can be summed up as "" because ganking wont be free any more"" is not valid.


I don't understand the hate for moving level 4s out of hi-sec either.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#85 - 2011-10-30 15:45:51 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
becuase noob players would do stupid things and lose a ship to concord.


Meh, you only do that once. :)
Like I once, could barely fly a BC, started repping a NPC in a mission.



*Boom!*
Lol
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#86 - 2011-10-30 15:48:52 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Mirima Thurander wrote:
I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.


I want to know why you the gank masters of eve have so much hate for having your ability to only lose a small amount of isk when you gank something removed.


Any post that can be summed up as "" because ganking wont be free any more"" is not valid.


I don't understand the hate for moving level 4s out of hi-sec either.



Yes you do. Now don't fib. :)
Hauling Hal
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2011-10-30 16:07:29 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Mirima Thurander wrote:
I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.


I want to know why you the gank masters of eve have so much hate for having your ability to only lose a small amount of isk when you gank something removed.


Any post that can be summed up as "" because ganking wont be free any more"" is not valid.


I don't understand the hate for moving level 4s out of hi-sec either.


Because most hard-core players are ignorant about what makes the game a success and don't realise that what they want, to suit their hard-core play style, will often kill the game. The game exists because of casual players, as they make up the majority of the player base. This means that the hard-core players get to play their game off of the backs of the carebears mining and running missions in high-sec. Oooh, contentious statement! A game with nobody in high sec and 20,000 subscribers would be dull and not financially viable. It's a bit like pirates telling carebears they are stupid and should be pirates, as its a better game. Dumb thing to aspire to, because if everyone was a pirate, nobody would be a pirate. Be careful what you wish for, as you might get it.

This attitude is common for all MMOs that have a PvP element and these are generally the players with the louder voice and larger ego, as they try to 'win' at the game or are using it to make money in RL, whereas most casual players have other things in their life. This sums it up quite nicely: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/online_gaming

Mirima Thurander
#88 - 2011-10-30 16:12:56 UTC




WIN! i loled

All automated intel should be removed from the game including Instant local/jumps/kills/cynos for all systems/regions.Eve should report nothing like this to the client/3rd party software.Intel should not be force fed to players. Player skill and iniative should be the sources of intel.

Morganta
The Greater Goon
#89 - 2011-10-30 16:19:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Morganta
Andski wrote:


You show me one real world police force that is impossible to avoid.


when you are standing in the middle of a field with no place to run, a troop of boy scouts would be impossible to avoid
Solo Player
#90 - 2011-10-30 16:19:41 UTC
I don't gank.
I believe in consequences.
Yet I'm not sure about just removing insurance for CONCORD kills.
For one, there will be ways to exploit this for even more tears.
But mainly, because insurance still wouldn't make sense. Pend Inc. shouldn't care about who killed you - they should remain neutral as they are in all other cases and assume the player might have a good reason to quarrel with CONCORD.
Instead: Make Pend act in an economically sound way. Maybe insurance rates and payouts don't exactly need to be balanced in order to make ship loss bearable, but they should consider a pilot's past performance in defining the insurance rate.
And insurances should be time-limited. No sense in insuring something for a one-time flat rate until it is destryed, as this will almost guarantee eventual payout, something any insurer sould seek to avoid.
Embrace My Hate
Bitmap Brothers
#91 - 2011-10-30 18:44:11 UTC
Hauling Hal wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Mirima Thurander wrote:
I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.


I want to know why you the gank masters of eve have so much hate for having your ability to only lose a small amount of isk when you gank something removed.


Any post that can be summed up as "" because ganking wont be free any more"" is not valid.


I don't understand the hate for moving level 4s out of hi-sec either.


Because most hard-core players are ignorant about what makes the game a success and don't realise that what they want, to suit their hard-core play style, will often kill the game. The game exists because of casual players, as they make up the majority of the player base. This means that the hard-core players get to play their game off of the backs of the carebears mining and running missions in high-sec. Oooh, contentious statement! A game with nobody in high sec and 20,000 subscribers would be dull and not financially viable. It's a bit like pirates telling carebears they are stupid and should be pirates, as its a better game. Dumb thing to aspire to, because if everyone was a pirate, nobody would be a pirate. Be careful what you wish for, as you might get it.

This attitude is common for all MMOs that have a PvP element and these are generally the players with the louder voice and larger ego, as they try to 'win' at the game or are using it to make money in RL, whereas most casual players have other things in their life. This sums it up quite nicely: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/online_gaming




This game is not like other MMO's. From its very conception it has been fueled by hardcore players willing to do whatever it took to get the job done. Today's mass of lazy pubbies has taken so much out of this game by simplifiying it and dumbing it down that all we are left with is 3 or 4 blocks in nullsec all staring at each other fapping because nobody has the motivation or is hardcore enough to lead a charge. Highsec in and of itself are so ******* lazy they cant even fly from point A to point B without autopilot and ***** about getting ganked.

The rich history of this game was created by the hardcore. This game belongs to the hardcore. Without the hardcore everything stops and stalemates and THAT's when EVE will die. You can have all the highsec pubbies paying all the subscriptions you want to but without player driven conflict and storyline everybody gets bored and leaves.

And you guys wonder why bittervets are so pissed. This game is turning vanilla as ****.
David Grogan
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2011-10-30 19:07:08 UTC  |  Edited by: David Grogan
foxnod wrote:
Why don't people just take responsibility for properly fitting and flying their ships? If they did then suicide ganking would probably drop by 80%. All the so called fixes I've seen are exploitable and in the long run would solve nothing. Basically most of the fixes proposed are trying to protect failbears who don't want to take the initative and harden themselves against ganks.


ok so let's see if u can come up with a tanked fit that doesn't get solo'd by a lone goon standard gank fitted alpha pest the following ships

1. Retreiver
2. Covetor
3. Mackinaw
4. Hulk

So see if u can make a gank proof mining barge/exumer fit for all 4 ships

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.

Embrace My Hate
Bitmap Brothers
#93 - 2011-10-30 19:10:40 UTC
David Grogan wrote:
foxnod wrote:
Why don't people just take responsibility for properly fitting and flying their ships? If they did then suicide ganking would probably drop by 80%. All the so called fixes I've seen are exploitable and in the long run would solve nothing. Basically most of the fixes proposed are trying to protect failbears who don't want to take the initative and harden themselves against ganks.


ok so let's see if u can come up with a tanked retreiver fit that doesn't get solo'd by a lone goon standard gank fitted brutix


**** the fit, why are you sittign there when a brutix enters the belt in the first place? Stay aligned and once he lands on grid gtfo.
David Grogan
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2011-10-30 19:12:57 UTC  |  Edited by: David Grogan
Embrace My Hate wrote:
David Grogan wrote:
foxnod wrote:
Why don't people just take responsibility for properly fitting and flying their ships? If they did then suicide ganking would probably drop by 80%. All the so called fixes I've seen are exploitable and in the long run would solve nothing. Basically most of the fixes proposed are trying to protect failbears who don't want to take the initative and harden themselves against ganks.


ok so let's see if u can come up with a tanked retreiver fit that doesn't get solo'd by a lone goon standard gank fitted brutix


**** the fit, why are you sittign there when a brutix enters the belt in the first place? Stay aligned and once he lands on grid gtfo.


have u actually flown a mining barge? they take ages to align and get into warp. there is no way to warp out in time if one lands on top of u. remember ganks ships are fitted with 2 or 3 sensor boosters......they insta lock u

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.

Danks
Fat Angry Toe Tappin Inbreds
#95 - 2011-10-30 19:17:25 UTC
I always laugh when I see these threads. 99% of the time I suicide gank I forget to insure my ship, even so making a profit isn't an issue.

Go ahead and remove it, won't change suicide ganking much no matter how much you idiots wish it would.
Embrace My Hate
Bitmap Brothers
#96 - 2011-10-30 19:18:40 UTC
David Grogan wrote:
Embrace My Hate wrote:
David Grogan wrote:
foxnod wrote:
Why don't people just take responsibility for properly fitting and flying their ships? If they did then suicide ganking would probably drop by 80%. All the so called fixes I've seen are exploitable and in the long run would solve nothing. Basically most of the fixes proposed are trying to protect failbears who don't want to take the initative and harden themselves against ganks.


ok so let's see if u can come up with a tanked retreiver fit that doesn't get solo'd by a lone goon standard gank fitted brutix


**** the fit, why are you sittign there when a brutix enters the belt in the first place? Stay aligned and once he lands on grid gtfo.


have u actually flown a mining barge? they take ages to align and get into warp. there is no way to warp out in time if one lands on top of u. remember ganks ships are fitted with 2 or 3 sensor boosters......they insta lock u


Yes I have flown a mining barge, Fit istabs, nanos whatever you have to. And if you are already aligned out of the belt you get to warp much quicker. Yes it will take effort, and yes your min/max setup isnt going to fly. But don't expect rules to be changed because you too stubborn to adapt.
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
#97 - 2011-10-30 19:36:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Teamosil
Danks wrote:
I always laugh when I see these threads. 99% of the time I suicide gank I forget to insure my ship, even so making a profit isn't an issue.

Go ahead and remove it, won't change suicide ganking much no matter how much you idiots wish it would.


Well, the people actually doing the ganking aren't necessarily the ones reaping the profits, but there are boatloads of profits being made. "Goonswarm shrugged" has resulted in roughly 100 billion per day in profits for those who have oxygen isotopes stockpiled. Presumably that is mostly the goonswarm leadership that ordered the campaign. So there is tons of profit in it, it's just that the foot soldiers aren't getting a cut of those profits.

But, regardless, you're right that people would still do it even if it were rebalanced. That's great. The goal of rebalancing it shouldn't be to make it so nobody ever does that career, it should just be so that it the challenge and the rewards are in roughly the same balance as anything else, and so that the targets have a reasonable way to counter it. If CCP rebalances a particular ship that they think has become overpowered, their goal isn't to stop people from flying that ship, it's just to keep it in balance with the other ships. Same deal with this.

I don't really know if ganking needs rebalancing or not. I haven't done it and don't have a good sense of how easy it is. It certainly seems pretty easy, and given the huge rewards, that makes me suspect that it is out of balance. But, I don't really know that. Maybe it's a lot harder than it sounds.

Or, on the flip side, maybe it is mining that is out of balance. Maybe the risk you need to accept and the knowledge of the game required to minimize that risk has gotten too high relative to the rewards. Keep in mind that the rewards are absurdly low. If that's the case, then CCP should be figuring out how to rebalance mining to make it a viable option at least for newer players earning up enough ISK for their first battleship.

Either way though, I think CCP should take a look at it. If they do rebalance it and people still want to do it, by all means, have at it.
Embrace My Hate
Bitmap Brothers
#98 - 2011-10-30 19:43:04 UTC
Teamosil wrote:
Danks wrote:
I always laugh when I see these threads. 99% of the time I suicide gank I forget to insure my ship, even so making a profit isn't an issue.

Go ahead and remove it, won't change suicide ganking much no matter how much you idiots wish it would.


Well, the people actually doing the ganking aren't necessarily the ones reaping the profits, but there are boatloads of profits being made. "Goonswarm shrugged" has resulted in roughly 100 billion per day in profits for those who have oxygen isotopes stockpiled. Presumably that is mostly the goonswarm leadership that ordered the campaign. So there is tons of profit in it, it's just that the foot soldiers aren't getting a cut of those profits.

But, regardless, you're right that people would still do it even if it were rebalanced. That's great. The goal of rebalancing it shouldn't be to make it so nobody ever does that career, it should just be so that it the challenge and the rewards are in roughly the same balance as anything else, and so that the targets have a reasonable way to counter it. If CCP rebalances a particular ship that they think has become overpowered, their goal isn't to stop people from flying that ship, it's just to keep it in balance with the other ships. Same deal with this.

I don't really know if ganking needs rebalancing or not. I haven't done it and don't have a good sense of how easy it is. It certainly seems pretty easy, and given the huge rewards, that makes me suspect that it is out of balance. But, I don't really know that. Maybe it's a lot harder than it sounds. Either way though, I think CCP should take a look at it. If they do rebalance it and people still want to do it, by all means, have at it.



Good post dude +1. I believe people should be asking for agility buffs to their exhumers to be honest. If I was a miner that is what I would want. Provide carebears with an exit strategy instead of nerfing ganking. If gank victims were provided with more tools to avoid ganking it would provide a challenege to the gankers without limiting what people could do in EVE. It would preserve the sandboxness and peopel would learn to play o ntheir toes at the same time.
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#99 - 2011-10-30 19:44:01 UTC
I pretty much only pay out for insurance on my Battleships now. Kinda not worth it on anything else. When you pvp you're going to die at some point. Your goal should be to kill and loot enough before you die to pay for your ship. Beats paying 8m to get 23m back if your cane dies.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#100 - 2011-10-30 19:49:42 UTC
Mirima Thurander wrote:
I don't understand the hate for removing insurance pay outs on Concorded ships.


I want to know why you the gank masters of eve have so much hate for having your ability to only lose a small amount of isk when you gank something removed.


Any post that can be summed up as "" because ganking wont be free any more"" is not valid.


and the gankers always say its not about the insurance lol

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.