These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Ship Insurance Idea

First post
Author
Krazie Hanaya
Fire Fliers
#41 - 2014-06-22 05:55:11 UTC
On a somewhat related note (and somewhat unrelated) I must ask:

1) Why is a ship like the Gnosis (which has such retardedly low requirements to fly) insured for pennies when a ship of the same class (battlecruiser) at any tier is insured for millions?

2) Why is a ship like the most exclusive Leopard not even truly insurable? Those things are worth a good load and you can't even get double digit ISK insurance on it...
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#42 - 2014-06-22 06:33:55 UTC
Krazie Hanaya wrote:
On a somewhat related note (and somewhat unrelated) I must ask:

1) Why is a ship like the Gnosis (which has such retardedly low requirements to fly) insured for pennies when a ship of the same class (battlecruiser) at any tier is insured for millions?

2) Why is a ship like the most exclusive Leopard not even truly insurable? Those things are worth a good load and you can't even get double digit ISK insurance on it...


Everything's based on mineral requirements of construction.

The Gnosis is made by BPC's and uses 1 Tritanium to build. It's insured for that amount.

The Leopard can't even be made, but it has a base mineral cost of close to 2500 Tritanium, so it gets insured for that much.

So yeah, you're getting a payout based on how much it costs to construct. Working as intended.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2014-06-22 07:06:08 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Because as we all know, everybody in this game is absolutely prevented from flying whatever the hell he want just because it stings less in the wallet to lose a T1 cruiser instead of a T2 frig and there is absolutely no way for player to make a choice based on what they want. People flying cruisers are definitely all want to fly AF and inty but can't because of the insurance payout right.


No-one is "prevented", but consider what's the #1 point in eve any time something blows ups?

"Don't fly what you can't afford to lose"

Insurance lowers that bar for people. Simple as that.

SRPs are great though, but not everyone can take those hits so the insurance helps a bit again.
Udonor
Doomheim
#44 - 2014-06-26 04:41:31 UTC
Insurance exists to encourage people to risk PVP (or it they really suck at combat PVE). Effectively they are not risking 100% of ship value.

But CCP should reconsider. Insurance is a very timid incentive that hangs around long after player either learn to take PVP risks or FAIL to learn.


I say Drop insurance.

Instead

1) POSITIVE incentive
give extra rewards to players for their first few ship kills. Maybe Everything drops on first frigate kill then drop rate tapers off rapidly to the normal 50% odds. Perhaps the same for each faction of frigate and for T2 and T3. Heh if multiple toons are on killmail then average their bonus drops or even make it run off lowest drop rate of all on KM.

2) Negative incentive
One of the chief signs of CAREBEAR disease is amassing huge fleets of personal ships which are never used for combat or powerful ships that never get risked. The simple answer is to make old ships too expensive to keep.
Quote:
Ships should die young and leave a beautiful wreck



So CCP should also implement ship AGING where after 10 days players start finding increasing wear damage after each logon or docking or approach near any refitting maintenance (for the POS/depot people who with other player's assistance never dock). Also the cost or effort for repairs themselves battle damage or aging increase exponentially as ships age.

At a certain point players with high age cost will find good reason to make brave stands against the odds or attack things far above their weight class.

Negative incentive will force PVP and really make people reconsider low sec and null sec.

PS this will also greatly reduce CCP operational database costs and even speed server responsiveness as the number of idle ship hulls plummets.




3) Maybe think about agents that give PVP kill missions (maybe free location and some NPC Logi ships to appear after firing starts).
Udonor
Doomheim
#45 - 2014-06-26 04:42:16 UTC
Ship aging vs insurance...

Since ship age clocks would need to be preserved across repackaging to prevent exploits such ship would only be sold on contract -- meaning used ship salesmen will join the ranks of EVE scam artists. I even suggest skills to turn back ship "odometers" and test flight contracts with collateral. Capital ships should of course have somewhat slower and longer initial age clocks due to assembly time but not greatly so (double at max).

Perhaps even null sec blob battles will become more strategic as it becomes very expensive to maintain maximum sized standing battle groups. Instead first actually planning where, when, and why will be less accidental as logistics and positioning of capital ship parts prior to final assembly will be very important. Even strategies for picking which people will stay behind to prepare sustaining and reinforcing forces - versus sending everyone in sight to man ships from a huge collection of ships.
Udonor
Doomheim
#46 - 2014-06-26 04:53:21 UTC
CODE and every pirate or merc should support ship aging as obviously aged ships will sell much cheaper but for one day ops or suicide ganks be just as capable in battle.


Hmmm...why even allow repackaging of ship hulls? Say that assembly permanently fuses them together in one configuration.
Instead add Fleet Ship Transporters class similar to Freighters but specializing in hauling assembled ships. Maybe even different makes based on ship class transported.




Udonor wrote:
Insurance exists to encourage people to risk PVP (or it they really suck at combat PVE). Effectively they are not risking 100% of ship value.

But CCP should reconsider. Insurance is a very timid incentive that hangs around long after player either learn to take PVP risks or FAIL to learn.


I say Drop insurance.

Instead

1) POSITIVE incentive
give extra rewards to players for their first few ship kills. Maybe Everything drops on first frigate kill then drop rate tapers off rapidly to the normal 50% odds. Perhaps the same for each faction of frigate and for T2 and T3. Heh if multiple toons are on killmail then average their bonus drops or even make it run off lowest drop rate of all on KM.

2) Negative incentive
One of the chief signs of CAREBEAR disease is amassing huge fleets of personal ships which are never used for combat or powerful ships that never get risked. The simple answer is to make old ships too expensive to keep.
Quote:
Ships should die young and leave a beautiful wreck



So CCP should also implement ship AGING where after 10 days players start finding increasing wear damage after each logon or docking or approach near any refitting maintenance (for the POS/depot people who with other player's assistance never dock). Also the cost or effort for repairs themselves battle damage or aging increase exponentially as ships age.

At a certain point players with high age cost will find good reason to make brave stands against the odds or attack things far above their weight class.

Negative incentive will force PVP and really make people reconsider low sec and null sec.

PS this will also greatly reduce CCP operational database costs and even speed server responsiveness as the number of idle ship hulls plummets.




3) Maybe think about agents that give PVP kill missions (maybe free location and some NPC Logi ships to appear after firing starts).

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#47 - 2014-06-26 16:30:56 UTC
Krazie Hanaya wrote:
On a somewhat related note (and somewhat unrelated) I must ask:

1) Why is a ship like the Gnosis (which has such retardedly low requirements to fly) insured for pennies when a ship of the same class (battlecruiser) at any tier is insured for millions?

2) Why is a ship like the most exclusive Leopard not even truly insurable? Those things are worth a good load and you can't even get double digit ISK insurance on it...


I can't speak for the Gnosis but the Leopard is a shuttle. Insurance is based on mineral costs so it insures like a shuttle
CompleteFailure
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2014-06-27 23:29:46 UTC
Val'Dore wrote:
Why does CCP insist on insurance in the first place?


They don't, they simply made it available for you to use if you wish.
Captain Davy
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2014-07-07 15:59:49 UTC
This insurance "problem" is still not "fixed" in singularity.

My understanding is that it should be automaticly fixed once the extra materials are gone. There is any word on that?
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#50 - 2014-07-09 15:40:25 UTC
Carniflex wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:
[quote=CCP Rise]

Why does CCP insist on insurance in the first place? It doesn't promote PvP and it injects ISK into an economy that doesn't need it.


It takes off some the edge from losing the ship for the younger players.

if only the younger players could instead fly a smaller and cheaper ship, but alas that would require more training time... oh, wait.

I should buy an Ishtar.

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#51 - 2014-07-10 16:21:49 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
Carniflex wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:
[quote=CCP Rise]

Why does CCP insist on insurance in the first place? It doesn't promote PvP and it injects ISK into an economy that doesn't need it.


It takes off some the edge from losing the ship for the younger players.

if only the younger players could instead fly a smaller and cheaper ship, but alas that would require more training time... oh, wait.

So you mean it's not smart to fly a battleship in lowsec with my two week old pilot? Lol
stoicfaux
#52 - 2014-07-10 17:24:09 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
To the OP and the situation with the Augoror:

The reason the payout is so low is that the insurance formula doesn't take 'extra materials' in the build cost into account when figuring out the insurance value even though you have to pay for the cost of those materials in the build and market price for the ship.

In the coming Crius release we are going to be able to roll all the old extra materials back into the normal materials for all ships, which is quite a lot as we've had to use extra materials when adding build cost to any ship with rebalanced build cost in the last couple years. After awhile this will mean that insurance payouts will reflect the ship value much more accurately.

Hope that helps!

edit: I'm only like 90% sure about this so I'm going to track down someone and find out for sure

So all those mining ships that were built and stockpiled before their costs went up due to extra materials being added (to prevent insurance fraud) due to the mining ship rebalance, and which are now selling below current build costs due to being stockpiled....

Two words: Insurance Fraud is back, baby!

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#53 - 2014-07-10 18:37:19 UTC
Wow some terrible ideas in this thread (Just my opinion)

Insurance should be to help poor new pilots recover from unexpected losses. I'm flying my Vexor and it goes pop awesome insurance helped me get a new one.

If you're flying T2 ships you're not a noob anymore. If you can't afford to replace it don't fly it. Eve is about choices and the painful sting of failure. We don't need to make insurance where it removes that.
Baron' Soontir Fel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#54 - 2014-07-11 15:39:27 UTC
Because when I lose 500mil or more in ships every month, getting 100mil back is extremely helpful.
Previous page123