open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Terrorism in Eve Online as a tool for forcing game design change
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

Author Topic

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.12.20 07:34:00 - [1]
 

Yep. Myself and a few of my mates are going to become terrorists in game in the hope of forcing CCP to change their game design.

The issue is insurance. It's a huge ISK faucet, and when exploited on an industrial scale it's capable of dumping literally hundreds of billions of raw ISK into the game every month. This is a bad thing.

Carebears want insurance removed from suicide ganking payouts but they don't want the insurance removed from their own ships. I simply want insurance removed completely from every ship, at every level. Let new characters enjoy a three month grace period of insurance use and ban people for using 'insurance alts' for insurance fraud, just like you would if you were using alts as disposable hitmen and recycling them after their sec is ruined.

Right now it's very easy to use a T1 fit Geddon as an example and have the total loss be around 4m ISK after insurance. I can kill just about any sort of smallish cruiser size ship solo in high sec with this, and I can kill BCs and BS with only a pair or maybe three or four. No ship is safe in highsec with some simple tactics and a little bit of coordination from a few friends.

Ramp up the scale and you can kill freighters and Orcas quite easily. But my goal isn't to simply kill freighters. It's to make CCP sit up and take notice of the horribly broken game design that is insurance.

Currently there are multiple players that are self destructing ships on a literally industrial scale, making tens of billions of raw ISK per month with 'insurance fraud'. This causes inflation and will in the long term hurt the economy. So I'm going to start using this mechanism to inflict the pain of financial loss upon as many players as possible so that they now have a direct and personal stake in seeing insurance removed from the game completely.

Is this griefing? Absolutely not. I'm profiting from my actions, so it's piracy. Completely legit gameplay. Insurance simply facilitates my particular tactics, and once those are made obsolete by the removal of insurance, I'll revert to more traditional ways of doing things.

The in game killings will continue on as wide a scale as possible until the game is changed for the better with the removal of insurance. Anyone interested in assisting me with this campaign of militant destruction can contact me in game. The more the merrier.

Oh, and one more thing- jump freighter pilots, we're coming for you.

Zartanic
Posted - 2009.12.20 07:40:00 - [2]
 

What a boring post.

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
Posted - 2009.12.20 07:48:00 - [3]
 

I for one welcome all the salvage that is one of the results of this terror act Very Happy

Cpt Jagermeister
United Systems Navy
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2009.12.20 07:49:00 - [4]
 

Payout is way too high but completely removing it makes for more broke pvpers. This is really a big risk vs reward problem just like l4 missions in high sec, jump freighters etc. But anyways there is no point in talking about it because these subjects have been brought up a billion times and ccp clearly wont do **** to annoy there carebear playerbase. So cool idea man and good luck to you. Best of luck. Maybe you can inspire more to do this and get something changed for once.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.12.20 08:20:00 - [5]
 

Have 160 Geddons sitting and ready to go, should keep me busy for a bit.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.12.20 08:20:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Cpt Jagermeister
Payout is way too high but completely removing it makes for more broke pvpers. This is really a big risk vs reward problem just like l4 missions in high sec, jump freighters etc. But anyways there is no point in talking about it because these subjects have been brought up a billion times and ccp clearly wont do **** to annoy there carebear playerbase. So cool idea man and good luck to you. Best of luck. Maybe you can inspire more to do this and get something changed for once.


What carebear playerbase will be annoyed?

Those that lose ships on a daily base? Not carebears (or very incompetent)

Those that lose capital ships? Not carebear generally

Those that lose multi billion ships with faction, deadspace or officer fittings? insurance don't make a difference.

If you leave a 3 play months grace periods for account(i.e. you have insurance in the first 3 months of active subscription on one account, not per character) most players would have learned to avoid most mistakes that cause the loss of ships to Concord and or in PvE and will have a decent cash reserves to survive the loss of a ship without hindrances.

What can suffer a bit can be Faction Warfare and people that approach PvP on the basis "no problem, if I lose the ship I can buy another with the insurance payout". And those aren't carebear in the meaning generally used in EVE.

The problem of removing insurance are 2:
- a lot of furious PvPers that lament the increase cost of their playthings;
- the crash of the mineral market.

Removing insurance payout would require a complete rethinking of mining (to keep it profitable), drone loot and rats (mission or not) loot. Just to remember it, 0.0 belt rat loot, if gathered, give 50-100% more minerals per hour that mission running.









Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2009.12.20 08:22:00 - [7]
 

Hm. Have fun with the blowing-people-up thing, there.

Wet Ferret
Posted - 2009.12.20 08:29:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Wet Ferret on 20/12/2009 08:29:16
I've lost hundreds of millions of ISK over the years in expired insurance contracts (I'm very risk adverse), though I think it was about a year ago that I just stopping insuring anything. Oddly enough, this whole "insurance inflation" thing OP mentions is primarily caused by PvP. And removing it certainly wouldn't have any significant effect on anyone except for regular PvPers.

So dude.. would it really be a good thing for you?

Trustworthy Joe
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.12.20 08:53:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
Hm. Have fun with the blowing-people-up thing, there.


SWEET PRINCE, YOU HAVE RETURNED HOME

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente
Sigma Special Tactics Group
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:02:00 - [10]
 

I can partly agree with the OP.

I think insurance should be removed from ganking and for any ships lost during commission of a crime.

For the rest, let insurance be based on the pilots history. Lose more ships, pay higher insurance. This will punish poor playing (equipping fail fits as I am guilty of). You want to insure that expensive ship? You should be a good pilot.

And perhaps eventually, some people who really don't get it, should at some point become un-insurable.

Wen Jaibao
Aperture Harmonics
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:13:00 - [11]
 

Sweet, more info plox on how to do this and I'll make sure to suicide some geddons on people whenever I'm in hisec. Laughing

Artassaut
Minmatar
Shadow Striders
Property Management Solutions
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:17:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Trustworthy Joe
Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
Hm. Have fun with the blowing-people-up thing, there.


SWEET PRINCE, YOU HAVE RETURNED HOME

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

HOLY CRAP.

REDIRECT ALL TOPIC POSTING TO THE FACELESS.

Callista Sincera
Amarr
Hedion University
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:24:00 - [13]
 

Good idea. But CCP will most likely just do what they intended to do a year ago: remove insurance from concord incidents. Anyway, have fun :-)

SupaKudoRio
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:24:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: SupaKudoRio on 20/12/2009 09:30:39
May I suggest starting this run of suicidal ganking by popping a few faction BS in mission hubs? YARRRR!!

Quote:
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

o_o I'm going to have nightmares involving that (lack of) face (edit: again)...

Swiftgaze
Elysium Trading Company
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:31:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Swiftgaze on 20/12/2009 09:32:39
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
It's a huge ISK faucet, and when exploited on an industrial scale it's capable of dumping literally hundreds of billions of raw ISK into the game every month. This is a bad thing.


Someone enlighten me.

How much money can you actually make with this whole insurance thing? How many players does it take to make hundreds of billions of ISK per month?

I somehow bet its not worth the time, could that be?

EDIT: Oh, but, Bellum, if youre looking for more suicide gankers, Id prolly be up for it in the future. If youre still looking for a crew, that is. :)

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:46:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Swiftgaze
Edited by: Swiftgaze on 20/12/2009 09:32:39
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
It's a huge ISK faucet, and when exploited on an industrial scale it's capable of dumping literally hundreds of billions of raw ISK into the game every month. This is a bad thing.


Someone enlighten me.

How much money can you actually make with this whole insurance thing? How many players does it take to make hundreds of billions of ISK per month?

I somehow bet its not worth the time, could that be?

EDIT: Oh, but, Bellum, if youre looking for more suicide gankers, Id prolly be up for it in the future. If youre still looking for a crew, that is. :)


It takes one character and some dedication and you can see 100b / mo.

And as for additions to the bunch, we'll be suiciding ships around the clock from here on out. Just stop on by and join the fun.

Serpents smile
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:48:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
Hm. Have fun with the blowing-people-up thing, there.


w00t! he's back! :P


Intigo
Amarr
Genos Occidere
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.12.20 09:55:00 - [18]
 

Bellum posting more terrible threads and trying to create drama. Yawn.


fazeley
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:04:00 - [19]
 

Removal of insurance, what a fantastic idea, I mean people in Eve aren't risk averse enough already are they?

God, people are dumb.


Abrazzar
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:12:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
It takes one character and some dedication and you can see 100b / mo.

LOL! You need to come up with some proof for that. This number looks like it came straight out of your ass. Laughing

TimMc
Brutal Deliverance
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:19:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: fazeley
Removal of insurance, what a fantastic idea, I mean people in Eve aren't risk averse enough already are they?

God, people are dumb.




Pretty much my feelings on the idea. Bellum please stop posting your horrible ideas.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:32:00 - [22]
 

As a rather more dull-but-practical alternative, please support my insurance reform proposal.

In short, base insurance on 90-95% of the normalised aggregate mineral sale price over the preceeding day (or week, if it's computationally expesive to calculate this, although I don't see why it should be). Buy/sell orders dont count, only actual mineral sales. So if the total mineral cost of a Raven is 100 million ISK, then the insurance value will be 95 million (with the premium also being modified on a pro-rata basis).

In theory, someone could manipulate this system, but they'd have to spend fantastic amounts of ISK to do so, and their manipulations would be public and susceptible to interference.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:34:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Abrazzar
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
It takes one character and some dedication and you can see 100b / mo.

LOL! You need to come up with some proof for that. This number looks like it came straight out of your ass. Laughing


My corpmates are currently researching 18 Abaddon BPOs up. Each Abaddon can be self destructed for a profit of 12-15m each, not including the massive profits from Amarr specific salvage, which is more valuable than most.

In order to make 1b/day you need about 66 Abaddons destroyed in a 24h period. We can do much more than that. In order to achieve 100b ISK per month, you need to destroy 200 Abaddons per day.

Using Concord to destroy ships is much faster than self destructing them, so you're limited by the dock/undock timers. With perfect time conservation, that's 200 minutes or a little over three hours to destroy 200 ships in one day. Even doubling that figure, you're looking at 6 hours, assuming only one person is destructing the ships.

Materials are provided by buy orders and courier contracts, plus dedicated contracts from mining corps.

It's very easy to achieve 100b per month exploiting the insurance system. Anyone who can't do the simple math for themselves is either an idiot, lazy or both.

Yarton Killmore
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:40:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Yarton Killmore on 20/12/2009 10:44:32
my word.... what a dumb ass suggestion...

so let me get this right...

1. you remove insurance from the game
2. casual mission runners start to get scared about loosing ships they have work for and move away from the game...
3. modules on the market go up in price as it is not being seeded by mission runners
4. minerals go up in price because industrialists leave... they get sick of being suicide ganked every day and move to another game...
5. PVP'ers can no longer afford ships unless they build them them selfs, but they have to now get in a miner to do it and get ganked... (this is where the biting the hand that feeds them really comes in)
6. ???:?

oh so maby an extreme outlook but the jist of it is the system is fine... apart from the payout for criminals..

Edit: insurance should not be paid to suicide gankers (or red flashy in highsec), also self destructs should not include a payout.... System Fixed! Yay

The insurance no loss thing is the best thing that has happend for PVP, because now people who couldent afford to loose ships can, with the current system my alts in faction war are not worried about plowing in a BS/BCS as i only loose a small amount, ergo more fun for all you PVP'ers.

YOU ARE ONLY DISTROYING YOUR SELFS!!!!!
:p

Illwill Bill
Svea Crusaders
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:40:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Illwill Bill on 20/12/2009 10:40:57
I get the feeling that Jita 4-4 is going to become VERY interesting. Very Happy

EDIT: Dude, your face!Shocked

Selrid Miamarr
Amarr
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:41:00 - [26]
 

Why would this force CCP to do one thing? Unless you assume that you can suicide gank or kill enough people to cause a large number of players to potentially leave the game, it would be business as usual for EVE, and players would "adapt or die" as the cliche says.

CCP is not stupid. Despite the so-called sandbox and lawless nature of EVE, they have done a very good job of making it impossible to inflict any real change to inconvienience people enough to quit en masse. That's why we can't blow up jumpgates or trade hubs.

If you wish to kill people and encourage others to do so, just state it. No need to dress it up as a crusade which will fail to achieve the objective.

Omal Oma
Shadowed Command
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2009.12.20 10:59:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Omal Oma on 20/12/2009 11:00:11

Possible solution?:

When you crash your car in RL, you become a liability to the insurance company.

Possibly a standing with the insurance company so that if you blow up a lot of ships and cost them a lot of money, your fees go up. Eventually, your insurance (say... 10 blowups in < 2 weeks) would drive your rates so high that the cost versus reward would lessen greatly. They also don't like insuring you for so long...

The only way this would lessen is time.

I would also like a way for a corp to start an insurance agency. The ability to insure fittings would be amazing.


Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.12.20 11:02:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Yarton Killmore
Edited by: Yarton Killmore on 20/12/2009 10:44:32
my word.... what a dumb ass suggestion...

so let me get this right...

1. you remove insurance from the game
2. casual mission runners start to get scared about loosing ships they have work for and move away from the game...
3. modules on the market go up in price as it is not being seeded by mission runners
4. minerals go up in price because industrialists leave... they get sick of being suicide ganked every day and move to another game...
5. PVP'ers can no longer afford ships unless they build them them selfs, but they have to now get in a miner to do it and get ganked... (this is where the biting the hand that feeds them really comes in)
6. ???:?

oh so maby an extreme outlook but the jist of it is the system is fine... apart from the payout for criminals..

Edit: insurance should not be paid to suicide gankers (or red flashy in highsec), also self destructs should not include a payout.... System Fixed! Yay

The insurance no loss thing is the best thing that has happend for PVP, because now people who couldent afford to loose ships can, with the current system my alts in faction war are not worried about plowing in a BS/BCS as i only loose a small amount, ergo more fun for all you PVP'ers.

YOU ARE ONLY DISTROYING YOUR SELFS!!!!!
:p


lrn2economics before you make a fool of yourself.

Although I dont agree with removing insurance completely, I can tell you what the first effect would be: Mineral prices would drop through the floor. Insurance is primarily a huge subsidy to miners. T1 module prices would also tank in value. The sale price of T1 ships would fall, probably by about 40-50%

However, the relative cost of T1 ships vs T2 ship would rise hugely, so T2 ship prices would almost certainly rise due to increased demand.

RaTTuS
BIG
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2009.12.20 11:08:00 - [29]
 


Lexx Khadar
Minmatar
HellForge.
Lucky Starbase Syndicate
Posted - 2009.12.20 11:12:00 - [30]
 

Best of luck OP. personally I agree the insurance system really does need a rework. Such as insurance being void if you get involved with concord. Plus if it could be made more dynamic payout based on the cost you bought the ship ( or average mineral worth based off a perfectly researched BPO ) for or an average sales price across all empire regions for that ship in a month. Maybe you could add a sort of no claims bonus of 5% per month discount on all ship insurance up to 20% capped to also reward careful flyers whilst not penalizing people who are guaranteed to regularly lose ships ( 0.0, war etc ).

This would also make insuring t2 ships more sensible whilst not artificially holding the mineral market in place whilst also negating/removing insurance fraud and also making suicide gankers who want to do so still be able to but at a higher isk cost.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

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