Comments

EVE University graduate. Drama Llama. Covert operations pilot. Poetic Stanziel has been very active in the blogging community bringing views from seasoned high-sec pilots, we please to share his stories and views on current Eve Online events and invite you to read more stories from his Poetic Discourse blog.

Poetic Discourse: Insurance Payouts

A short post on ship insurance. A listed issue on the Vote Match system for CSM7 gave me to thoughts of insurance payouts.

An assumption first. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Secure Commerce Commission, a division of CONCORD, handles all ship insurance. That’s the corporation that sends me all my emails, when I buy insurance and when I receive payouts.

Now if that is indeed correct, then some simple, reality-based proposals (EVE is real, after all) can be derived from that fact.

– If you lose your ship in non-Empire space (i.e., nullsec or w-space) you do not receive an insurance payout.

– If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by CONCORD you do not receive an insurance payout.

– If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by faction police you do not receive an insurance payout.

– If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by sentry guns you do not receive an insurance payout.

– If your corporation or alliance is the current aggressor in a CONCORD sanctioned war you do not receive an insurance payout.

– If your corporation or alliance is currently involved in a mutually agreed upon CONCORD sanctioned war you do not receive an insurance payout.

– Capitals and super-capitals never receive insurance payouts. It is impossible to purchase insurance for these ships.

The hot-button suggestions would be the mutual war limitation (which would, unfortunately, put RvB at a disadvantage, but would potentially curb lame consensual wars.) The faction police and sentry gun limitation might cause gate/station hugging to increase as a phenomenon. Mostly curious about thoughts on those particular bullet points.

Members of the faction militias are unaffected, receiving insurance payouts as long as the specific points above are not violated.

As for the non-Empire limitation, since CONCORD has no presence outside of empire space, it would be difficult for them to investigate/verify claims in the first place. I also doubt CONCORD gives much of a shit what happens outside their jurisdiction.

The insurance system was implemented as a means of softening the blow of ship loss for newer players. If you are able to fly a capital, you’re not new, and you can afford to lose the ship (i.e., you’re well acquainted with the do not fly what you cannot afford to lose credo.)

Poetic Stanziel

[spoiler show=”Did we mess up?”]
We want to give you guys the best possible intel, to post as fast as we can confirm it, but Eve being :Eve: is quite confusing. If we messed up with our intel, please contact us directly [email protected], provide the proof of it and we’ll correct it immediately noting the change and bringing the correction on top of the article list.[/spoiler]

If you would like to send intel or contribute, feel free to use the form below:

[spoiler show=”Submit Intel Here”]

[/spoiler]

61 Comments

  1. 0.0 Pilot

    get out useless prick

    March 5, 2012 at 7:37 pm Reply
  2. Jon

    I am all for this change to the insurance, but would like to add in there self destructing not getting a payout either.

    March 5, 2012 at 7:37 pm Reply
    1. hurr

      This. How youve managed to overlook sd payouts is beyond me…

      March 5, 2012 at 7:55 pm Reply
    2. CareBearStares

      Frankly, Self Destructing should not payout insurance reguardless of the other controversial proposed items.

      March 5, 2012 at 11:22 pm Reply
  3. Space Jew

    TWOO WORDS FUCK YOU, GETTING AIDS IN THA ASS IIS BAD FORUR HEALTH.

    March 5, 2012 at 7:42 pm Reply
    1. Jon

      Grow up…

      March 5, 2012 at 7:43 pm Reply
      1. Space jew

        Ah no, now u go back to playing WOW in ur moms box

        March 5, 2012 at 11:04 pm Reply
  4. 0.0

    Null sec payouts for ratting/exploration are already low compared to the risk/reward of high sec. So why make it even harder on the pvper in null who enjoys shooting other players more often then he likes shooting at shitty rats that hardly payout anything, by making it so when he loses his ship he is out every last bit of what he payed. This will just encourage new players to stay couped up in high sec even longer. Taking insurance away from those at war (for the aggressor) sounds good, but taking it away from low/nullsec players is a terrible idea

    March 5, 2012 at 7:44 pm Reply
  5. sobad

    How about this instead, if the articles you post on EN24 are bad, you don't get paid for writing the article.

    March 5, 2012 at 7:45 pm Reply
  6. jake

    Too many people are completely risk adverse as it is.

    I'd rather see increased payouts for t1 hulls. Scaled on hull size so BS recieves a lower % while frigates is close to 100% (is it already this way?…I never remember to insure). Also bump up payout for t2 non-covert frigs, dictors and maybe hic and cs.

    I wouldn't mind no payouts in 0.0 as long as isk per hour was increased from mining, ratting etc out there and I would rather they nerfed local before doing that.

    March 5, 2012 at 7:46 pm Reply
    1. sup

      t2 frigs are already overinsured. They drop salvage of the hull value all the time

      March 5, 2012 at 10:58 pm Reply
    2. Zeroniss

      You can get 100% insurance, but it is based upon the price index of the current period (determined by average market worth of minerals) as opposed to the actual price you paid for it.

      So yes, in practice, you can get 100% of what CCP feels the minerals used to build your ship are currently worth.

      March 6, 2012 at 12:15 am Reply
      1. reimbursment boost

        Yeah, and this ammount is always lower then the price of ships on market. For example I lost a Tornado yesterday. The ship costs 52 mil in jita, together with fit and ammo about 100 mil. With platinum insurance I got back 37 mil. So definitely not enough to buy a new hull, let alone fit it out. This might not be a problem for the highsec bear, or bears in general. They don't go trough 5-10 or even more ships per month. But for a PVPer it's quite a problem, because you then need to grind some ISK somehow to get a new ship. Which means less time to PVP…

        March 6, 2012 at 11:06 am Reply
  7. Squas

    So your proposal is that unless you're ganked in high/low sec or are completely retarded and get blown up by NPCs in a mission, you don't get an insurance payout, PERIOD.

    Yes, lets cater to the high-sec bears even more. Your rules set Eve up to be space full of rifters and mission whores.

    Get back in the kitchen and make me a sammich!

    March 5, 2012 at 7:53 pm Reply
    1. Null Dweller

      What cracks me up is that he fails to mention SOV costs are paid to concord. If they have no presence in 0.0 why should we have to pay sov costs then??

      March 5, 2012 at 8:29 pm Reply
      1. anonymous

        For ship insurance, hurr durr.

        Well, you guys got it right. This is a horrible idea, especially the Nullsec part.

        When it comes to insurance you always have to see this as an ISK faucet and tread it as such. This is the single one way to turn mined resources into ISK. This is some thing that stabilizes ship and min prices on the market thus preventing price dumping.

        Interfering with this mechanics can't be such a good idea.

        Another point is, there will always be ways for insurance fraud. You can deliberately destroy your ship in PvE. Do you want concord to have evaluators for every insurance case?

        March 5, 2012 at 8:59 pm Reply
      2. Buggrit

        Probably THAT should go as well. And why not? Balance the costs, make losing a battle harder.

        March 5, 2012 at 11:02 pm Reply
      3. Thanks to everyone for the feedback.

        I wrote a follow-up post based on all the great and lively feedback offered on the ideas presented.
        http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.com/2012/03/insura

        March 6, 2012 at 6:41 am Reply
    2. Cynic

      I reject his reality and substitute my own.

      March 5, 2012 at 9:34 pm Reply
  8. anatlasgoon

    This is a terrible proposal.

    First off, EVE is not 'reality-based.' It's a game.

    Secondly, your proposal dictates that the only instances of insurance paying off are in low-sec (and not including death by gate guns) and by high-sec ganking or NPCs. This is absurd.

    Moreover, what part of getting back some percentage of your ship loss in ISK rustles your jimmies so much?

    March 5, 2012 at 8:04 pm Reply
    1. Johann

      Not real? But… but…. I was there!

      March 6, 2012 at 5:13 am Reply
  9. EvE_Player

    Do you even think about what you write before you write it? This basically says "I don't want anyone who isn't a hisec idiot who got himself ganked or killed in a mission to not get an insurance payout" :S

    March 5, 2012 at 8:04 pm Reply
    1. Voda

      You might wanna check ur double negatives batman

      March 5, 2012 at 10:57 pm Reply
  10. Mike

    If you take insurence away from null then the risk versus reward would have to change greatly.

    Not that it already doesn't need to be ajusted…

    March 5, 2012 at 8:06 pm Reply
  11. Der

    are you drunk

    March 5, 2012 at 8:12 pm Reply
  12. dudeguy

    Roleplayer seeks to destroy EVE. Tune in for more at 11.

    March 5, 2012 at 8:21 pm Reply
  13. I saw an article by Poetic and had to stop by for a quick hate read.

    "- If you lose your ship in non-Empire space (i.e., nullsec or w-space) you do not receive an insurance payout."

    NO

    "- If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by CONCORD you do not receive an insurance payout."

    YES

    – If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by faction police you do not receive an insurance payout.

    MAYBE

    – If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by sentry guns you do not receive an insurance payout.

    FUCK NO

    "- If your corporation or alliance is the current aggressor in a CONCORD sanctioned war you do not receive an insurance payout."

    WRITE THIS DOWN… NO

    "- If your corporation or alliance is currently involved in a mutually agreed upon CONCORD sanctioned war you do not receive an insurance payout."

    NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN

    – Capitals and super-capitals never receive insurance payouts. It is impossible to purchase insurance for these ships.

    THE KNIGHTS WHO SAY NO

    "Now if that is indeed correct, then some simple, reality-based proposals (EVE is real, after all) can be derived from that fact."

    and then later…

    "The insurance system was implemented as a means of softening the blow of ship loss for newer players. If you are able to fly a capital, you’re not new, and you can afford to lose the ship "

    This is just silly.

    Your own assumption that eve is real gets thrown out the window by your later paragraph.

    This is like saying the elderly can't buy car insurance because the are old enough to drive properly.

    Then again I would get you a +1 just for making it through an entire article without mentioning E-UNI.

    March 5, 2012 at 8:31 pm Reply
  14. M1k3y

    – If you lose your ship in non-Empire space (i.e., nullsec or w-space) you do not receive an insurance payout.

    No, you pay sov taxes to CONCORD you get insurance from concord.

    – If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by CONCORD you do not receive an insurance payout.

    This is already implemented

    – If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by faction police you do not receive an insurance payout.

    I disagree… this is probably because I think standard boosters should be legal to transport in highsec.

    – If the loss of your ship results in damage having been dealt by sentry guns you do not receive an insurance payout.

    I'm not a pirate, I let the other guy GCC (99% of the time) so I like this but can see why the less scrupulous don't… some VARIATION of this would be interesting though, like if you destroy a ship that doesnt shoot back but eventually lose your ship then no insurance, whereas if the ship shot back you still got insurance.
    Either way blobs these days are big enough to come with 2-3 logi.

    – If your corporation or alliance is the current aggressor in a CONCORD sanctioned war you do not receive an insurance payout.

    No, griefers would have a field day, especially since they fly mostly T2/3 and faction ships.

    – If your corporation or alliance is currently involved in a mutually agreed upon CONCORD sanctioned war you do not receive an insurance payout.

    Still a no.

    – Capitals and super-capitals never receive insurance payouts. It is impossible to purchase insurance for these ships.

    Yes and no, suicide dreads are currently the best way to kill enemy supercapitals, and they would stop being viable if they can't be insured. Carriers though, they are pretty much guaranteed to die in any large scale fight.

    Also supercapitals can't currently be insured as far as I know (we don't currently have any titans so wouldnt know).

    March 5, 2012 at 9:31 pm Reply
  15. FIXED

    – If you lose your ship in EMPIRE space you do not receive an insurance payout.

    fixed

    March 5, 2012 at 10:11 pm Reply
  16. JohnDrees

    Hahah what kind of nonsense is this? Does evenews24 just allow anybody to post random crap? That or this has been an extreemly effective troll.

    March 5, 2012 at 10:46 pm Reply
    1. Zeroniss

      In a nutshell, yes, just about anyone can submit an opinion based piece on whatever in EVE. Particularly, the team of Bloggers get a lot of leeway on the content they post since a lot of it is reposting content on their own blogs with fancy cross-linking for readership hits, etc.

      The only point where something would get filtered or censored was where an opinion was being falsely being paraded as fact, or if there is a ridiculously explicit nature to the article. Poetic's argument, whatever its strengths or weaknesses, is his free expression of speech and it really doesn't need stifling.

      March 6, 2012 at 2:17 am Reply
  17. War Observer

    Most make sense, except removing payout from wormholes and 0.0. space, no good RP or game balance reason for that. But I would remove insurance payouts from criminals (those with sec status below -5).

    March 5, 2012 at 10:48 pm Reply
    1. "I would remove insurance payouts from criminals (those with sec status below -5)."

      I like that. 😉 Makes being a pirate even more hardcore.

      As for the rest of it … that's why I asked Riverini to cross-post. I wanted to see the reaction. All of the disagreements to the proposal make sense. Insurance, as is, mostly working as intended.

      Thanks for all the great feedback, folks.

      March 6, 2012 at 2:07 am Reply
  18. sup

    You pay concord to look the other way when you declare wars, so I'd say they're some pretty shady fellas who soesn't mind people blowing shit up

    March 5, 2012 at 10:56 pm Reply
  19. Spangleadesh

    I swear you couldnt make this shit up!

    Why doesnt he just make his own server and he can carebear in peace all over eve without the nasty bad guys blowing up his shiney maurader………………..

    Highsec missioning and all other non risk PVE should not be encouraged for anyhting but new players – Eve has never been safe and shouldnt be, players should be encouraged to move on in eve and find new things, not just farm for isk in bloody Motsu.
    Hell if anything highsec should be happy hour, when concord have a random shift change and you get a 5min window to shoot anything aslong as if oss a gate or station – Total random intervals and you get a 1min warning message in local – it would help nubs to pay attention to said unused channel for them.

    March 5, 2012 at 11:07 pm Reply
  20. I too would like to destroy the EVE economy.

    March 5, 2012 at 11:47 pm Reply
  21. SG Goonslap

    Insurance payouts should be handled based on the value of your ship, not just the hull. And not treating a T3 cruiser hull as a T1 cruiser hull. I've heard it suggested before that insurance could/should be a player business. Player Insurance Corps can give better deals for pilots who excercise caution and have a lower record of losses vs. high risk pilots such as pilots in Militia , PvP or Merc corps, or Null Sec corps currently at peace or in a state of war, and the list goes on. Much like insurance is handled in real life. By opening up this game feature to be handled by players the realm of options becomes much much greater. And, it would effectively end the arguments on this page.

    March 5, 2012 at 11:52 pm Reply
    1. Trapped

      Good Idea. Whats stopping you from doing it?

      This is EVE, you want to run insurance, do it, and start off by selling to noobs. Maybe you get a rep as reliable, and someone wants you to insure his carrier.

      Sadly, nature of EVE, its not likely to be a profitable venture, and will get scammed non-stop.

      Glad as a 0.0 dweller I haz SRF insurance 😀

      March 6, 2012 at 12:35 am Reply
      1. SG Goonslap

        Well for one there would need to be a game mechanic in place to support it. For example, placing insurance payout in escrow to prevent scamming, and so forth. A corp would need to register with Concord as an insurance entity in order for these contraints to take effect. Just think in terms of real life business, no insurance company is going to insure a 9 year old kid. There are laws and guidelines insurance companies use to determine who can be insured, what their rates are, high risk vs low risk etc. the same would be true for player insurance corporations. Of course the old Concord system would remain in place for those uninsurable pilots.

        March 6, 2012 at 8:29 am Reply
  22. Zeroniss

    "- Capitals and super-capitals never receive insurance payouts. It is impossible to purchase insurance for these ships."

    You may have stumbled onto something here, though considering your previously demonstrated lack of understanding about and experience with Capital ships, I would assume you stumbled upon this perfectly by accident.

    All ships in EVE carry a base insurance of 40%, including super capitals and titans. All ships that are able to DOCK at a station (or conversely be stored at a Corporate Hangar somewhere) are able to take advantage of up to 100% insurance based on the price index of the current period. This is basically just carriers, dreads, rorquals, and freighters/JF.

    However, sometimes through GM petition, you can end up with a supercapital or Titan docked at a station (e.g. submitting a 'stuck' petition and successfully being moved to a station as a result). In this method, pilots are able to take advantage of 100% insurance on Supers and Titans too.

    There needs to be a subtle recoding to prevent this exploit. And no, you deserve no credit for it.

    This piece is very poorly researched and even more poorly reasoned. I am disappoint, I have seen you write far better.

    March 6, 2012 at 12:11 am Reply
    1. Thanks for the feedback.

      And yeah, I don't have much experience with sov mechanics. It's not like the University has much of a course on it. Other than SILENTBRICK'S GUIDE TO ACTIVATING AN SBU … LET A RUSSIAN DO IT FOR YOU.

      March 6, 2012 at 2:10 am Reply
      1. RA VS GF

        oh damnit i accidentally up voted him riv can u fix that please XD

        March 6, 2012 at 2:42 pm Reply
    2. Gizan

      (or conversely be stored at a Corporate Hangar somewhere) supers can be stored in a capital corp hanger assembled, but cant be insured.

      March 6, 2012 at 7:57 am Reply
  23. sum guy

    simple remove insurance altogether. only pussies get insurance.

    March 6, 2012 at 12:31 am Reply
  24. The Observer

    You know, I'm surprised. Usually PS comes up with fairly decent ideas, but this is one of the most horrible ideas I've ever heard. As it stands now, the insurance system is WORKING AS INTENDED. No need to fix what ain't broke.

    March 6, 2012 at 12:40 am Reply
  25. Ashesofempires

    What problems does this solve? Stop or slow down pointless wars? Curb suicide ganking?

    Prevent people in null from whelping massive fleets of previously cheap ships?

    This would make people even more risk-averse than they are now. The economy is driven by people losing their ships. Insurance, despite how much it might pay out, does not give you the full value of your ship. Mods, ammo, and rigs drive the price up on a lot of ships to nearly equal the price of the hull.

    Concord's presence in 0.0 was reasoned out in a chronicle a long time ago, as a way to regulate what goes on in null space, so that it wasn't complete anarchy and chaos. I forget the backstory article it was in, but it's there.

    March 6, 2012 at 12:54 am Reply
  26. oupas

    "(EVE is real, after all)"

    Yeah..sure it's so real that i'm undocking from my house atm to self destruct in my car after reading that shit and lost 5min of my life.

    March 6, 2012 at 12:58 am Reply
    1. oupas

      So did i get insurance for my car in that condition ? (living in Europe low sec)

      March 6, 2012 at 12:59 am Reply
  27. Raaaaaaaage

    This is a seriously fucking awful idea. You want to make PvP any more scarce? Get a fucking clue.

    March 6, 2012 at 1:45 am Reply
  28. grad

    Dont u fools know…. soon CONCORD going to be handing out canadian dollars when Iceland switches to Canada currency
    CAD­ beats ISK

    March 6, 2012 at 3:13 am Reply
  29. skullair

    as some one in Faction warfare… nice amount of pvp happens in sites which means u get damage from the other faction's rat why should they not get concord payments?

    tomorrow i expect to hear some one els bitch about game mechanics

    March 6, 2012 at 3:43 am Reply
  30. its Pend Insurance Bank that pays out insurance not CONCORD

    March 6, 2012 at 7:02 am Reply
  31. rich mother F&$^&r

    what's insurance ?

    March 6, 2012 at 7:04 am Reply
  32. NullSecHoBo

    I love how your knowing crap all about insurance is .. wait for it … the Uni's fault! :)

    March 6, 2012 at 8:57 am Reply
  33. Hakkon

    No … No … and NO

    only thing that makes sense is the part of faction police ….

    March 6, 2012 at 9:49 am Reply
  34. Anhu

    Make it simpler: only industrials, freighters, and mining ships can be insured. Everything else is considered as potentially used in PVP or PVE. In real world, nobody would insure a tank, right?

    March 6, 2012 at 10:44 am Reply
    1. LOL

      Because no one has ever used a battle badger.Or the Battle orca. /me rolls eyes.

      March 6, 2012 at 5:07 pm Reply
  35. CnC

    It's very interesting to see so many interested parties in Nullsec payouts… yet at the same time, we as a general player base move further and further away from any meaningful pain occurring after the loss of a ship.

    Alliances in general use ship replacement schemes that are affordable because the insurance payouts often offset the loss totals (the exception being those controlling Tech moons offsetting non-insurable losses). Players wallets rarely run dry due to the numerous improvements in money making capability (incursions anyone?).

    Yet at the same time, there is overwhelming knee-jerk responses against removing the one mechanism that lets people suicide expendable ships into combat.

    I like what this proposal has to offer. It makes an attempt to re-introduce the days where destroying the ships of an opponent actually has an effect on their combat viability (wallets running dry, pilots bringing cheaper and cheaper ships, etc.). It's been a long time since Nullsec warfare carried that consequence (at least with the entities I've been flying with).

    March 6, 2012 at 4:37 pm Reply
    1. LOL

      People should start playing eve like its a game again and stop cryin over what amounts to be nothing.When i undock in a ship (insurance or not) i expect to lose it.As everyone else should.Thats how we used to doit in 2005.

      March 6, 2012 at 5:06 pm Reply
  36. fu!!!!

    ok im pretty sure he just suggested getting rid of one of the biggest isk sinks in the game……..

    March 6, 2012 at 9:47 pm Reply
  37. Nice post. I used to be checking constantly this weblog and I’m impressed! Extremely helpful information specifically the last phase :) I handle such info a lot. I used to be looking for this particular info for a long time. Thanks and good luck.

    February 12, 2019 at 5:14 am Reply

Leave a Reply