open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked The Official Tech I Insurance Nerf Threadnought \0/
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

Author Topic

DJWiggles
Gallente
Eve Radio Corporation
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:10:00 - [31]
 

In my view its a step in the right direction, all that needs to happen now is concord payouts dropped by at least half again and we will be in a workable state IMHO

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:14:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Steve Celeste
Mineral prices will just drop under the new insurance payout.

Nothing will change, there are just too many minerals being mined.


Exactly.

Minerals prices will adjust until they are in equilibrium with the new insurance prices again.

Alchemist's Alt
Gallente
Hysteria Nexus
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:18:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails
Originally by: Sig Sour

There is more than one way to skin a cat.


Shocked


Hey cat

I think I love you lol

Ella C'Tronix
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:28:00 - [34]
 

But what is the purpose of the insurance system?
I'm pretty sure it's not to go "oh, sorry you lost your ship, here's enough money to buy some ammo for your next one"

It's to offset the cost of loss in a standard ship.

I would happily trade off some T1 insurance payout for better T2 payout. That stuff is just nuts. Most of the T2 insurance deals I've seen don't even pay for my ammo :)

Boomershoot
Caldari
Suddenly Ninjas
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:32:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Ella C'Tronix
But what is the purpose of the insurance system?


Material to Valute Fixed Rate Conversion.

You insert Material
You recieve Valute
Material Value cannot drop below the Fixed Rate.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:37:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: DJWiggles
In my view its a step in the right direction, all that needs to happen now is concord payouts dropped by at least half again and we will be in a workable state IMHO
No. An increase in ganks (especially against miners) when mineral prices drop below insurance rats is just another way for the market to find a balance – that mechanism should not be touched.

DJWiggles
Gallente
Eve Radio Corporation
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:40:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: DJWiggles
In my view its a step in the right direction, all that needs to happen now is concord payouts dropped by at least half again and we will be in a workable state IMHO
No. An increase in ganks (especially against miners) when mineral prices drop below insurance rats is just another way for the market to find a balance – that mechanism should not be touched.


As I said it SHOULD be dropped so that if you lose a ship you have something going towards getting a replacement, if its at the hands of the police/concord you SHOULD get nothing as you are a criminal, this is how it happens in real insurance cases.

Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:41:00 - [38]
 

words won't do this post justice so

LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing
LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:44:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: DJWiggles
this is how it happens in real insurance cases.
Irrelevant. EVE insurance has nothing to do with real insurance.

DJWiggles
Gallente
Eve Radio Corporation
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:46:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: DJWiggles
this is how it happens in real insurance cases.
Irrelevant. EVE insurance has nothing to do with real insurance.


Well I know this BUT we can also say the market has nothing to do with real life ... oh wait it does supply and demand. All I know is that there will be MANY pirate tears over this.

Boomershoot
Caldari
Suddenly Ninjas
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:48:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: DJWiggles
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: DJWiggles
this is how it happens in real insurance cases.
Irrelevant. EVE insurance has nothing to do with real insurance.


Well I know this BUT we can also say the market has nothing to do with real life ... oh wait it does supply and demand. All I know is that there will be MANY pirate tears over this.


Think of the backslash when CCP trashes the idead LaughingLaughingLaughing

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:52:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 12/03/2010 22:53:19
Originally by: DJWiggles
Well I know this BUT we can also say the market has nothing to do with real life ... oh wait it does supply and demand.
Your point being?
Quote:
All I know is that there will be MANY pirate tears over this.
Unlikely. Unless you see a lot of pirates in capships.

DJWiggles
Gallente
Eve Radio Corporation
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:52:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Boomershoot
Originally by: DJWiggles
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: DJWiggles
this is how it happens in real insurance cases.
Irrelevant. EVE insurance has nothing to do with real insurance.


Well I know this BUT we can also say the market has nothing to do with real life ... oh wait it does supply and demand. All I know is that there will be MANY pirate tears over this.


Think of the backslash when CCP trashes the idead LaughingLaughingLaughing


Maybe they will be maybe not BUT at least I will have something to talk about on the radio :D

Abrazzar
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:52:00 - [44]
 

Now they only need to nerf mineral input from secondary sources and prices may even stabilize instead of dropping further.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:55:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Abrazzar
Now they only need to nerf mineral input from secondary sources and prices may even stabilize instead of dropping further.
…or they can just do that, and achieve the same effect without resorting to a risky gamble with the game's fundamental value-giving mechanism.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2010.03.12 22:57:00 - [46]
 

CCP is getting warmer

Sig Sour
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:03:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Or, more likely: insurance 100% removed = less reason to mine = more reason to run missions for your ISK = more ISK seeded = mineral value decreases even further = less reason to mine…


Fair logic, assuming the "less reason to mine" holds true - keep in mind ships still require minerals to be built. Yes there will be less of a demand as people wont be ganking freighters on a whim.

Even if the mineral market crashed off this, so what. I didn't complain about the scanning mechanics being changed, and it 'crashed' scanning related items like you wouldn't believe. That was my income before the improvements came to the scanning system. Everything exploration dive bombed in prices when the change came. My income was cut into 1/3 - I adapted and I enjoy the improvements, I didn't complain because it MADE THE GAME BETTER even if it was not good for me.

DJWiggles
Gallente
Eve Radio Corporation
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:07:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Sig Sour
Originally by: Tippia
Or, more likely: insurance 100% removed = less reason to mine = more reason to run missions for your ISK = more ISK seeded = mineral value decreases even further = less reason to mine…


Fair logic, assuming the "less reason to mine" holds true - keep in mind ships still require minerals to be built. Yes there will be less of a demand as people wont be ganking freighters on a whim.

Even if the mineral market crashed off this, so what. I didn't complain about the scanning mechanics being changed, and it 'crashed' scanning related items like you wouldn't believe. That was my income before the improvements came to the scanning system. Everything exploration dive bombed in prices when the change came. My income was cut into 1/3 - I adapted and I enjoy the improvements, I didn't complain because it MADE THE GAME BETTER even if it was not good for me.


THIS ^^

That is what I think a lot of people will forget is that eve is a MMO and not a single player game. With changes there will always be haters and lovers of the changes, its like RL you adapt or you stop.

Alchemist's Alt
Gallente
Hysteria Nexus
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:07:00 - [49]
 

So im thinking reduce refinable drops from missions like 80% but increase bounties, wouldnt this increase mineral prices and encourage mining :D

SweetHoney
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:08:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Sig Sour
Originally by: Tippia
Or, more likely: insurance 100% removed = less reason to mine = more reason to run missions for your ISK = more ISK seeded = mineral value decreases even further = less reason to mine…


Fair logic, assuming the "less reason to mine" holds true - keep in mind ships still require minerals to be built. Yes there will be less of a demand as people wont be ganking freighters on a whim.

Even if the mineral market crashed off this, so what. I didn't complain about the scanning mechanics being changed, and it 'crashed' scanning related items like you wouldn't believe. That was my income before the improvements came to the scanning system. Everything exploration dive bombed in prices when the change came. My income was cut into 1/3 - I adapted and I enjoy the improvements, I didn't complain because it MADE THE GAME BETTER even if it was not good for me.


I don't think anybody was whining about this change ...
Getting all the T1 ships 40% cheaper ... can be good for the game , will see.

Turiel Demon
Minmatar
Celtic industries
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:18:00 - [51]
 

What I want to know is: is this just a reset of the mineral base prices, or have they been made dynamic?

If it's a reset and they're now fixed at the new prices (pretty much current prices it seems) then really this doesn't matter. All that will happen is T1 ships and minerals become worth a bit less... well, about a third less actually.

If they've changed the mineral base price to a dynamic value dependent on a daily/monthly/yearly whatever index, then they just wrecked the basic eve economy. Minerals will trend towards 0 value and ships - even capital ships - will follow.

DJWiggles
Gallente
Eve Radio Corporation
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:19:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: SweetHoney
Originally by: Sig Sour
Originally by: Tippia
Or, more likely: insurance 100% removed = less reason to mine = more reason to run missions for your ISK = more ISK seeded = mineral value decreases even further = less reason to mine…


Fair logic, assuming the "less reason to mine" holds true - keep in mind ships still require minerals to be built. Yes there will be less of a demand as people wont be ganking freighters on a whim.

Even if the mineral market crashed off this, so what. I didn't complain about the scanning mechanics being changed, and it 'crashed' scanning related items like you wouldn't believe. That was my income before the improvements came to the scanning system. Everything exploration dive bombed in prices when the change came. My income was cut into 1/3 - I adapted and I enjoy the improvements, I didn't complain because it MADE THE GAME BETTER even if it was not good for me.


I don't think anybody was whining about this change ...
Getting all the T1 ships 40% cheaper ... can be good for the game , will see.


atm the cost to build is the same in mats, its just a drop in payouts, yes it would be nice to have a 40% cost drop BUT that would then take all the money out of production

Turiel Demon
Minmatar
Celtic industries
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:35:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: DJWiggles
Originally by: SweetHoney
Originally by: Sig Sour
Originally by: Tippia
Or, more likely: insurance 100% removed = less reason to mine = more reason to run missions for your ISK = more ISK seeded = mineral value decreases even further = less reason to mine…


Fair logic, assuming the "less reason to mine" holds true - keep in mind ships still require minerals to be built. Yes there will be less of a demand as people wont be ganking freighters on a whim.

Even if the mineral market crashed off this, so what. I didn't complain about the scanning mechanics being changed, and it 'crashed' scanning related items like you wouldn't believe. That was my income before the improvements came to the scanning system. Everything exploration dive bombed in prices when the change came. My income was cut into 1/3 - I adapted and I enjoy the improvements, I didn't complain because it MADE THE GAME BETTER even if it was not good for me.


I don't think anybody was whining about this change ...
Getting all the T1 ships 40% cheaper ... can be good for the game , will see.


atm the cost to build is the same in mats, its just a drop in payouts, yes it would be nice to have a 40% cost drop BUT that would then take all the money out of production



You're missing why this is a big deal:

The cost to build in mats is determined by the value of insurance. Insurance has for the past few years provided a (soft) price-floor to the mineral basket ensuring that all the minerals that go into say, a battleship, are always worth at least as much as a battleship.

See, the way it that works is that there are many more minerals entering the market than there is demand for them. Well, that's not exactly true there is demand for them because there's insurance, but say insurance was gone, there wouldn't be demand and so prices would drop. And by drop I mean crater.

Look at the historical prices of Zydrine, now look at Mega, now look at Pyer. See how while zyd and mega were going down pyer was going up? That's because it was 'relatively' more rare in the available minerals... So how did a drop in zyd and mega force pyer up?

Well, imagine all minerals becoming cheaper (which they have been doing), now look at insurance: at a certain point it becomes actually profitable to build a ship, and then immidiately suicide it because you paid less for the minerals than you're getting for the insurance payout. That's what happened with dropping zyd and mega, there was some industrial-scale building of tier 3 BS (something like 30.000 battleships built for suicide in november alone) and that ate up all the 'spare' minerals, forcing prices back up, particularly the price of pyer.

So what happens if insurance doesn't ensure that there is a price floor? Minerals drop. It becomes less costly to build a ship until it bumps into the new floor... if there is one. That's why it's important whether the mineral base-prices have been reset, in which case minerals just drop by that 30% or so that insurance payouts have or whether the base-price is now dynamic in which case minerals crash. Completely.

Sig Sour
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:37:00 - [54]
 

I just canceled all my mineral buy orders. LET THE CRASH BEGIN!

Turiel Demon
Minmatar
Celtic industries
Posted - 2010.03.12 23:56:00 - [55]
 

I'll cross-post from another forum, but as some people think this will somehow mean cheaper ships:

Originally by: "DStopia"
...

but if this means cheaper hurricanes then im all in for it

anything to reduce the ****ing grind to generate isk


This will not result in cheaper hurricanes. Sorry.


What will happen is at first hurricanes (as an example, actually all t1 ships) will cost the same as they do now, but their insurance payout will be less. Over time, the price of minerals will continue to fall, and eventually the hurricane will cost about as much to build as the insurance gives you back again.

So in the end, it will cost you exactly as much to lose a hurricane as it does now, seeing as how 90% of that cost is in modules/rigs whatever anyway. In the intervening time - and that could be months before minerals fall enough - a hurricane will cost you more to lose than it does now.

Again, if the base-price is dynamic it pretty much forever cost you more to lose a hurricane than it costs you now rather than just for a little while.


I suppose that eventually sustaining a capital ship fleet might end up slightly cheaper... Rolling Eyes

Caelum Mortuos
Gallente
Zero G Research and Development
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:03:00 - [56]
 


Siroh
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:05:00 - [57]
 

I wondered why blowing up my dread only yielded 980 m in insurance, A+ to fix CCP.

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:08:00 - [58]
 

Removal of insurance is good. Most everything in the game should be player market driven, and not artificially supported by NPCs or game mechanics. If min prices, and consequently T1 prices fall, so what. The end result will likely be that ship cost remains roughly the same as when full insurance is purchased and the ship is lost.

There is much greater supply than demand as it is right now. But this does not mean it will always remain so. Ammunition min requirements can go up, consuming excess minerals. New planetary infrastructure/production may require minerals, Dust may require minerals, ship and mod BPOs could be changed as well, all those POS modules could be handed over too, they could consume minerals as well. Demand can be increased. It is likely better that overabundance be evaluated with out insurance, before creating additional demand. As a step towards freeing the Eve economy from NPCs, this is a good move in that direction.

Those most impacted by the removal of insurance are new players. A safety net for anyone under three months old could be created - Noob insurance.

Callista Sincera
Amarr
Hedion University
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:22:00 - [59]
 

I always wondered why they didn't have their economist update baseprices on a quarterly basis.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.03.13 01:25:00 - [60]
 

All hands, brace for major laughter.
Let the mineralopocalypse begin !


Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only