Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
OffBeaT
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 04:23:00 -
[151]
They brought in the insurance in becouse they where losing members becouse of too much loss. back then i would say most noobs lost more ships too concord and gates or ai then players. i know i lost way more ships too concord/gates in them days. them torps where brutal around gates back then.
soon gangs started up and the days of one on one cruiser fights where over. then most people didnt even get a fight for there losses and this gose on too this day. pluss the reason why more people where in cruisers back then is simple.. we where all noobs and you could get a lot of use out of a cruiser in thouse days. i dont think you would get the same use out of a cruiser today.
what is it about evryones hate of solo players anyway. like it dose anything too the game. you get things in this game becouse you put alot of time into it and worked hard for them, solo or not.. what gives killer players who realy have no regard for other players in the game but there own sense of fun. (ie) shoting anything that moves for the sake of it. so i dont agree with giving them the power too ruin players buy taking away player insurance.. these are just gate huggen headhunters i call them nothing more. they dont ask for ransoms and they dont care, its all about the killboards. pirates in the day where pirates but i cant say the same today. some pirates i read about still have the old ways but not many anymore. when i started this game in the day i hunted pirates in cruisers, i was hoping too be a big law man/bounty hunter, but back then you only hunted solo pirates or small 3 or 4 man clicks. today your looking at gangs of pirates 10 or alot more around gates. it just dont pay too go after them and with this stupit war act its even tuffer now. you cant even goto war with a pirate alliance.
i always wonted a vandetta clause put into the war act that gave bounty hunters the ability too hunt down these criminals anywhere in eve. just becouse i think some of these players just deserve it. they just deserve there day of justice.
if anything just for the reason that they have no empathy for others, Hang them High i say.
this is a bit off topic though so ill end it.
|
General Killah
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 04:44:00 -
[152]
I didn't read any replys or anything, just the main post. And I have to say everytime someone has said this I have disagreed very strongly.
WHY? Because I play this game to have FUN! I don't play this game to spend a week replacing my loss when I lose something. My fun is fighting, so why should I have to mine/agent run/npc for a week every time i lose a battleship. I want to have fun. If insurance didn't exist I would probably quit the game.
And your point of expensive modules is mute. If we didn't have insurance people would be even LESS likely to put rare moduels on their ships because they are afraid of losing even MORE that they already will with no insurance.
There's really no argument. ---------------------------------
(\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Karn Mithralia
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 05:02:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Bubba Fett ... T2 ships ARE noticably better than T1. And they pay almost nothing for insurance. People use them because they're more effective and when you lose one it hurts unless you're really rich. Most people who fly T2 ships tend to fit T2 gear because they want that extra bit of damage or survivability.
If you really want to hurt your enemies in a war, maybe you should be destroying their T2 ships and mining barges with their 20m strip miner2's instead of going after fully insured battleships. Maybe you should go after their POS. Those have NO insurance.
And if they're a small corp that can't afford T2 ships, strip miner2's or a POS, then the 20-30mil that it costs over the insurance payout to buy, insure and fit a BS probably hurts them anyways.
Insurance was brought in as a way to prevent a few bored gankers from wiping out months of someone elses work. It still hurts to lose a ship since insurance doesn't pay the full replacement cost, or the cost of the fittings, or the cost of new insurance. It just hurts a bit less.
From a relatively new player perspective Bubba has nailed it. IMO the orginal poster is making far too much out of a perspective based on having played the game a real long time. You will never get back the 'good old days'.
It isn't nowhere near as easy to make isk as many like to make out, and the insurance never covers your losses. As a combat pilot without massive financial support from an established corp, going broke is a very real issue.
I can see it would discourage BS gankers preying on low sec empire space, but they really ain't that much of an issue, and that one positive doesn't outway the negative of not being able to afford to fly anything beyond a T1 frigate. |
MrPops
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 05:19:00 -
[154]
It touches my heart when old players try to make things go back to the "good old days."
I do remember when selling hoarders in Heimatar was the hottest thing. I remember when J0rt was just a n00b from a yet to be known corp called M0o trying to harass people in a frigate. He was killed by a Stabber by one of our members. I also recall a lot of the people clamoring for payout back then were those pvper's, pirates, and war mongers with no production backbone to replace the many ships lost in those days. How ironic and how easily we forget.
Unfortunately for some, we can't relive the days when frigates rocked, when cruisers owned, and when BS's where so expensive and rare, corporations had to team to buy a single BP.
Lets keep looking forward people.
"The human species suffers from a dimensional limitation. They are not able to understand that matter and mind are just one aspect of something more fundamental. We must strive to expa |
Feta Solamnia
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 09:13:00 -
[155]
yay! At last someone has put this idea in more that one phrase
|
MIstress Saki
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 09:24:00 -
[156]
Fist I am for an overhaul of the insurance system with the objective to bring more balance into the game. I donÆt want to remove it completely.
The first main argument against I read is the statement that ôI (or most other) can only have fun in the game when I sit in BSö. This is something I donÆt understand? Maybe you can explain it to me. For itÆs the typical childish ôPowergamer complexö Flying cruisers and Frigs makes at least as much fun as BS.
The second main argument is the belief, that without insurance the griefers, gankers and mega corps will run amok and kill all the BS they can find. Every one with some minor economical understanding and some experience in history will see that if something has no value, it will be abused. Gankers etc. use most time very one-sided fittings, with no defence. Why, because if they are destroyed they will get they ôthrow away shipsö to 80% replaced. Why bother? The more ISK (or time) you might losing the more balanced ship fittings and/or more cost-effective ship will appear. This leads to more balanced fleets. And as a 80% carebear, which one has more money? The 24 h gate ganker or the 24 h Level 4 Mission runner? Even the billionaires will losing ship and sooner or later they will also become more cautious with there BS.
The third main argument is that Noob need a ôsafety netö. I agree here. I needed 2 month to figure out how to make much ISK and to fight.
My proposal is that the insurance system should be more dynamic with the prime effect to to be depended on how many ships a player lose in a certain period, in a certain region (sec-staus) and/or the amount of insurance should be lowerd. (Max. 50%-60% for a BS) Noobs (max 1-2 month) will be not affect by this. CCP had gain enough experiences to actually see the imbalances in the game(like instaBM)and try to implement good solutions to it. So they maybe they will do it also to the ôimbalancedö insurance system (When you look at whole game). But changes to insurance should only be made in conjunction with the announced change to combat and ships. Primary objective should be to create more balanced fleets beside ô90% BS and 10% Tacklerö combi.
|
Xerxes X
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 09:29:00 -
[157]
Proposed simple fix: Keep insurance, invalidate the claim if ship is destroyed by a player you are at war with.
Xerxes
|
Deadzone
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 09:59:00 -
[158]
Originally by: MIstress Saki Fist I am for an overhaul of the insurance system with the objective to bring more balance into the game. I donÆt want to remove it completely.
The first main argument against I read is the statement that ôI (or most other) can only have fun in the game when I sit in BSö. This is something I donÆt understand? Maybe you can explain it to me. For itÆs the typical childish ôPowergamer complexö Flying cruisers and Frigs makes at least as much fun as BS.
The second main argument is the belief, that without insurance the griefers, gankers and mega corps will run amok and kill all the BS they can find. Every one with some minor economical understanding and some experience in history will see that if something has no value, it will be abused. Gankers etc. use most time very one-sided fittings, with no defence. Why, because if they are destroyed they will get they ôthrow away shipsö to 80% replaced. Why bother? The more ISK (or time) you might losing the more balanced ship fittings and/or more cost-effective ship will appear. This leads to more balanced fleets. And as a 80% carebear, which one has more money? The 24 h gate ganker or the 24 h Level 4 Mission runner? Even the billionaires will losing ship and sooner or later they will also become more cautious with there BS.
The third main argument is that Noob need a ôsafety netö. I agree here. I needed 2 month to figure out how to make much ISK and to fight.
My proposal is that the insurance system should be more dynamic with the prime effect to to be depended on how many ships a player lose in a certain period, in a certain region (sec-staus) and/or the amount of insurance should be lowerd. (Max. 50%-60% for a BS) Noobs (max 1-2 month) will be not affect by this. CCP had gain enough experiences to actually see the imbalances in the game(like instaBM)and try to implement good solutions to it. So they maybe they will do it also to the ôimbalancedö insurance system (When you look at whole game). But changes to insurance should only be made in conjunction with the announced change to combat and ships. Primary objective should be to create more balanced fleets beside ô90% BS and 10% Tacklerö combi.
Excellent ideas MIstress. Follows a lot of the 'people with brains' thoughts here. Vice-Admiral
Executive Commanding Officer Military Command Hadead Drive Yards |
Nepereta
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 16:56:00 -
[159]
Perhaps Insurance should be like RL with no-claims bonuses? I think newbs need insurance even if no-one else does. It enables a get of jail card if people mess up.
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2005.06.28 17:38:00 -
[160]
Well i think if they are serious about making dreads rare they got to or make insurance for them 50 % payback max or rempve alltogether.Because otherwise sooner or later ( prolly later with its stats and reqs.) it will become common again
But im not sure if i approve removing insurance for all toher ships.Amybe but imho it got also positive sides.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |