open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked DON'T RAISE INSURANCE ON TECH 2 / TECH 3 / FACTION
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

Author Topic

Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
Perditus Peregrinus
Posted - 2009.09.30 07:47:00 - [1]
 

Don't do this CCP!

This is a HORRIBLE idea that means that people can field ships with excellent performance at virtually no cost.

Unless you lower the mineral cost on the ships there is absolutely no reason for these ships to suddenly become cheaper.

Think of the ISK -- tech 2 ships are an ISK sink. You lose one, you eat the whole loss. This causes you to fit them aggressively so you get the most performance out of them. If you soften the blow, people are going to field more of them and more of them are going to likely be more poorly fitted, because 'they can afford to lose them.'

Tech 2 / Tech 3 / Faction ships should not be insurable. The price for performance is perfect as it is.

Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:08:00 - [2]
 

Seconded. Why the sudden Isk Faucet? (Yes its a Faucet. The only people who are going to put isk into the original "Sink" are going to get that isk back + more) ITs completely pointless and its taking a sudden opposing viewpoint on the fact that Many players take upon with insurance being a bad idea. Its another in a series of changes lately that make me go Neutral

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:14:00 - [3]
 

I'm hearing that the material requirements to produce the ships have been changed (increased) but I think this is due to the upcoming changes related to moon mineral production and the redistribution of r64 materials etc. throughout the new framework.

Either way, I say just remove all insurance and be done with it. Problem solved.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:16:00 - [4]
 

Well I guess it is a way to bring t2 prices down Laughing

While I dont think insurance is that necassary, I do think it would at least make some ships more viable in pvp such as field command and t2 bs...

Maybe cruiser and below shouldn't get insurance and bc+ does get insurance?

*shrug*

The only thing I like about this is that it boosts the casual player, so they dont have to rat for years to get a stockpile of decent t2 ships..

Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:26:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I'm hearing that the material requirements to produce the ships have been changed (increased) but I think this is due to the upcoming changes related to moon mineral production and the redistribution of r64 materials etc. throughout the new framework.

Either way, I say just remove all insurance and be done with it. Problem solved.
If this is indeed the case I will stop my rantmode, but otherwise without a CCP Statement /flameon.

Real Poison
Minmatar
Stormlord Battleforce
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:30:00 - [6]
 

huh? raising insurances?

sounds awesome! any link with more info?
in contrast to the OP i don't think t2 should be an isk sink anymore.

and what could be done wrong? even if you triple the payouts for current t2 it'll still be ok.

Mashashige
Minmatar
Eternal Perseverance
Hellstrome Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:31:00 - [7]
 

****
YOU
CCP
YOU
GUYS
ARE
****ING
MORONS

Is what I would have said had this change been for real - but ccp are stupid enough to do something like this. Right guys?
guys? guys?!?!?!?!
....

Anywho, I bet there's a reason for all of this (maybe moon minerals changes or whatever), it just sucks for it to be hidden and not even discussed by ccp - I mean, christ, is it so hard to add a patch note about it? Or a little explanation about the meaning/reasons behind it? Its not like they just changes a description of a ship or something (which they note in the notes btw...) - this **** has the potential to change much of the pvp scene in eve.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:36:00 - [8]
 

I am guessing you are reacting to a change on SiSi?

The sized rigs made all T2 combat ships affordable (cost up to half a hull before), removing any more of their cost will push all T1 options into the background.

With little to no cost associated with losing T2 ships they will be used as throw-aways just like T1 hulls are.

T2 should remain that which you strive for, not just character skill wise, but ISK and player skill wise.

Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:36:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Real Poison
huh? raising insurances?

sounds awesome! any link with more info?
in contrast to the OP i don't think t2 should be an isk sink anymore.

and what could be done wrong? even if you triple the payouts for current t2 it'll still be ok.
For example, plat insurance on the Zealot was 50mill now when i looked on SISI. PRorator up from 8mill to 28mill...etc.

Peryner
University of Caille
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:53:00 - [10]
 

ok wait... if you lost less when a ship is destroyed... wouldn't that increase the price? as more would die, thus more would be bought?

Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:05:00 - [11]
 

I wonder, should the insurance be increased on T2 ships, will it make them viable to be used in suicide ganks?


CCP Chronotis

Posted - 2009.09.30 09:31:00 - [12]
 


Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:45:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Wink


Why is it we have to drag every little piece of information out of you kicking and screaming? Mad

Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:53:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Wink


Why is it we have to drag every little piece of information out of you kicking and screaming? Mad
Because it just wouldn't be fun otherwise.

Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:59:00 - [15]
 


Kaito Haakkainen
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:17:00 - [16]
 

I'd much rather see insurance drop a certain percentage of the ships build materials at your clone station. No more ISK faucet, no more insurance fraud, and the value replaced is more closely tied to the market value of the ship.

No insurance would just lead to less targets.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:33:00 - [17]
 

One of the questions is: will this create a floor price for T2 production?

And that floor price is based on invention costs or BPO costs?


houndbite
Gallente
Sacred Templars
RED.OverLord
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:43:00 - [18]
 

Ok.. You don't have a clue there has been people asking for this for a long time now.. CCP feels its a good idea who are you to step in and tell them what to do.

Yeah so what if we can feild Tech 2 ships with tech 2 fit at virtualy no cost.

You don't even know how much the insurances is going up by.

And since when has it been up to you who flys what and what its gunna cost them is CCP want to do something THEY doing it with out people like you (Siigari kitawa). Judgeing their idea

Marmios
Rim Collection RC
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:48:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Marmios on 30/09/2009 10:49:01
Wait wait... you mean even non r64 holders can now afford t2 roaming pvp? teh win :D

HeliosGal
Caldari
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:55:00 - [20]
 

this is a big change to tech 2. given yes it takes so long to save for em. And the insurance only seems to cover if it goes through as is ships then youre going to get a lot back this will just boost tech 2 demand. 50% seems to be fair 50m to replace a zealot and then 50m insurance. REmember the skill requirements are being lowered to for a lot of tech 2

So either thye are reducing the isk sink, discouraging macros and increasing the in line with the 00 push to get more people out of empire then yes this makes sense just more quicker pew pew in line with the sov changes

Theres something missing and i think that is going to be a full range of tech 3 ships.
So 100% rebate on tech 1 at max insurance
50% rebate on tech 2
and mineral cost maybe 1-2% on tech 3 cruisers ( and maybe frigates, destroyers, battlecruisers and battleships ?)

Shade Millith
Caldari
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:00:00 - [21]
 

I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.

Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid

Merfio
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:06:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.

Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid


Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....

JitaPriceChecker2
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:14:00 - [23]
 

CCP. WTF ?

HeliosGal
Caldari
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:16:00 - [24]
 

Yup i expect the changes will be altered even 30% of full t2 cost would push the isk around and make it quicker to get into t2 especially if we are about to get hit with a full pack of tech 3 ships from frigs to battleships. Wormhole space becomes the new battleground. But yeah if dypso etc is about to become more common then it makes sense that the demand side for t2 would be kicked up as well and quickest way to make people risk their ships in pvp is to give em more back if they loose it and insurance is that avenue

Mikayla Grey
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:19:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Merfio
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.

Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid


Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....


It turns t1 cruisers into useless junk(even more than already), gives a bigger advantage to older players, and removes the exciting part of pvp where you actually risk something.

MIND SCR4MBLER
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:21:00 - [26]
 

why is this such a bad idea?

if you own a moon goo rich alliance, have tons of isk and T2 BPO's you can basically field your T2 fleet for free, whereas a non-moon goo owning roaming gang can't field T2 ships without a multi-billion loss per fleet battle that is entirely one sided, so i can see how large goo holding alliances would think this was a bad idea :) - btw since you can insure capital ships such as carriers and dreads its a bit odd you cant insure a HAC 1/10th the price....

If T3 is the new T2, then its logical that T2 should now be insurable, to encourage people to use T2 then T3 is the new T2. I'm sure CCP are very aware lots of T2 ships and faction ships are simply too expensive to PVP unless you have a moo goo isk tap to rely on, therefore making them insurable allows you to reduce the isk sink needed to play with them.

This is a good change because

More PVP with T2 means more T2 in lowsec/nullsec - more piracy targets, more PVP encouragement and more T2 salvage.
It allows non goo holding non BPO holding alliances to field ships on a equal basis.
if extended to faction ships it stops them becoming PVE hanger queens that never step out of empire.

Unless you have silly isk nobody is going to risk 100m for 30 secs of gateblob carnage, at least with insurance you might feel it worth it because the loss isnt so big and you have a fighting chance of killing someone else too.

the problem is when ships go beyond a certain cost psychologically people just wont field them for PVP, because for most ppl its too much grind to get the isk to pay for the losses, sisi faction test shows if you gave everyone 10 faction ships with no cost consequence they would throw them away on PVP like disposable frigates, surely anything that encourages more PVP/risk taking is good for the game as a whole, if it means the goo holding alliances face some proper fleet competition then boo hoo, im sure they have enough resources to recover, but for everyone else its win, especially inventors since bigger demand and more ships going pop = profit.


Shade Millith
Caldari
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:21:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Merfio
Originally by: Shade Millith
I hope to hell this is a case of 'Magic crystal ball', and not an actual change.

Because having T2 be fully insurable would be stupid


Where is it fully insurable? 50% is far from full. This will get other players the chance to get into more pvp. Not only the ones who have been sitting on their moon gold for a long time. Yeah i can see why you dont like this change....


ANY insurance for T2 is stupid

If you wanna fly HAC's you have to pay for it. Too expensive? Fly a BC

Linas IV
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:26:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Linas IV on 30/09/2009 11:29:01
Dear CCP-Devs:

Please don't do anything like it!


non-T1-Insurance is Stupid!

This will be the final nail in the coffin for small Gang-PVP

Edit: Even better remove Insurance alltogether!

Mashashige
Minmatar
Eternal Perseverance
Hellstrome Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:28:00 - [29]
 

GO GO WORLD OF WARCRAFT!

Oh wait, eve is consequence based pvp no?

FFS maybe I should start trolling the forums more, seems like any stupid idea trolls raise up gets promoted in no time, and yet fixing projectiles took *only* 2 years ish? (btw so far the changes have been so underwhelming it might just be best not to change anything - atleast then when I lose I ship I can blame it on ****ty weapons).

Also, biggest issue with this whole **** isn't the change itself (though I think its somewhat stupid, though I wont cry about being able to replace t2 cruisers) - the issue is that CCP likes to introduce changes to the game without telling anybody, just waiting on someone to find them and then start a ****storm on the forums.

OH WAI, IS CCP TROLLING US?!?!

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:29:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Linas IV
Dear CCP-Devs:

Please don't do anything like it!


non-T1-Insurance is Stupid!

This will be the final nail in the coffin for small Gang-PVP


How? Seriously, Unless it's a BS RR gang most people seem to be using T2 ships in small gangs anyway.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

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