Update Reverted insurance changes in Gamma 2.06

Dejay

Dejay
Project52 said:
Unfortunately a moderator nixed the thread in the middle of a discussion about this:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=76035&page=36
What was proposed was reversing the changes (which they did) so that people who paid real money for the perk didn't feel conned and cheated, but also provide a way for everybody else to get the perk too. That way it is still a perk for the backers, without giving an unfair advantage and returning to a level playing field.

I would still like to see a developer response to this.
Click to expand...

That is a great idea!

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Saiidin said:
Wow, I can't give rep to project52 or PM him. Anyone else notice this?
Click to expand...

Yes I just noticed this as well haha. Maybe because this is some kind of frankensteinian thread that was merged, and if you reply to the wrong post it gets tagged as an archived post? No idea. He probably just been a bad boy.
 
Last edited:

Shepard

Shepard
Thank you FD. That was a right decision. I, as one of the early KS backers really appreciate this turnaround. Now please add an option for other players if possible to insure their modules.
 

Atinus

A
Project52 said:
What was proposed was reversing the changes (which they did) so that people who paid real money for the perk didn't feel conned and cheated, but also provide a way for everybody else to get the perk too. That way it is still a perk for the backers, without giving an unfair advantage and returning to a level playing field.

I would still like to see a developer response to this.
Click to expand...

Not wanting any sort of unfair advantage for myself despite how much I spent to be a DDFer and to support many of the Elite official fiction books, I'd support that. In addition, I'd like to see repairs cost less than the ship insurance so we can remove the "fight to the death" perverse incentive the discount created.
 

Saiidin

S
Yeah, having repairs cost more than replacing the ship entirely is a bit silly.


It does happen in RL though, "repairable" cars often get declared totalled because it's cheaper for the insurance company to just buy you a new one. Especially after someone's gone and put a .50 BMG through your engine block and riddled the bodywork with other holes.
 

Atinus

A
Saiidin said:
It does happen in RL though, "repairable" cars often get declared totalled because it's cheaper for the insurance company to just buy you a new one. Especially after someone's gone and put a .50 BMG through your engine block and riddled the bodywork with other holes.
Click to expand...

But I think you'd agree it's the exception rather than the rule. Yes, eventually a car reaches its life's end and the repairs would cost more than than replacing it, but as stated, that's at the end of the car.
 

Rafe Zetter

Banned
Rafe Zetter
Conehead said:
I have to disagree. I also was prefessional sw developer and still working in that business. Such things happens under big pressure and high workload. I'm not sure if that was a dev mistake or a bad decision taken by anybody (what I think was the case, as it was written in the patch notes). But it doesn't matter.
SW developing is a very special busines and the pressure close to delivery date can make your right thoughts turn left. In fact I'm very much impressed that the team has done such a great performance that last days. So much changes and improvements in the last minutes and still handling all unplanned upcoming problems.

Big applause to them! I really wish them that it'll be a smooth go live!
Click to expand...

While I'm happy they have reverted the change - due to player pressure as it was indeed a deliberate change - this and other decisions about how the change info is released are not made by the SW people.

According to the flag incident FDev have a "professional PR TEAM OF EIGHT". I refuse to believe the previously assigned *mistakes made under duress* can be made by a group of 8 "professional" PR people.

Anyway - well done FDev for acting on the playerbases requests, it's heartening to see you guys are actually listening after all :)

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Saiidin said:
Yeah, having repairs cost more than replacing the ship entirely is a bit silly.


It does happen in RL though, "repairable" cars often get declared totalled because it's cheaper for the insurance company to just buy you a new one. Especially after someone's gone and put a .50 BMG through your engine block and riddled the bodywork with other holes.
Click to expand...

Bloody hell - where do YOU live? All I have to content with is potholes, admittedly large potholes sometimes, but a .50 cal round isn't a concern!


Edit - I wondered how those automerges happened !
 
Last edited:

SnugglySocks

S
I didn't even notice...... Must be because I am not constantly smashing my ship into the docking port ;)
or fighting expert level federal dropships
 

terminatahx

terminatahx
Too bad it took community outrage in order for them to finally keep a promise. I just can't help but imagine that if the negative opinions had been silenced, would this rollback had occurred.......?
 

Falxftw

F
terminatahx said:
Too bad it took community outrage in order for them to finally keep a promise. I just can't help but imagine that if the negative opinions had been silenced, would this rollback had occurred.......?
Click to expand...

I am under the impression that it would not have.

I also wasnt about to let it die without a fight.
 

Zplintz

Zplintz
noodle said:
Once again, I don't care about this personally. It's not a big deal to me. But some people purchased beta on the basis of this marketing promise, and it's pretty rude and unpleasant to dismiss their legitimate concerns as "frothing at the mouth". It doesn't do much to make this community seem like a welcoming place.
Click to expand...

It was a simple error and quickly fixed. Maybe the point is that it is unnecessary (and unhelpful) to 'froth', claim foul play and call in the lawyers over broken promises quite so quickly?
 

Barns

Barns
Zplintz said:
It was a simple error and quickly fixed. Maybe the point is that it is unnecessary (and unhelpful) to 'froth', claim foul play and call in the lawyers over broken promises quite so quickly?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But equally a mild "oh what a shame, never mind, chin up eh" sort of response almost certainly wouldn't have produced the rollback desired. It was quite obviously a deliberate choice to implement it that way, FD must've had their reasons to make this change, and they would've be unwilling to go back on it unless given significant pushback. No grumbles and they would let the change stay. Complaining is a good thing if you feel aggrieved, it's no good just hoping things will get sorted magically.

I'm afraid I'm well past the "benefit of the doubt" with such PR things given the last couple of months. A year ago and FD were happy lambs so innocent and sweet, now I'm afraid I'll treat them the same as any other company I've bought from and will expect what was promised, when it's promised.
 

smunisto

S
So, I am sorry to come in-between the usual fanboy vs. realists debate, but I have a question regarding the Insurance.
It's quite simple:

How does it work exactly?
Do I pay 25% less for my ship when I rebuy it after it's been destroyed?
Are there any insurance policy options that I should check?

And what is this loan that is mentioned when you rebuy a ship? How do you repay it?
 

Darlken

D
Not sure if i missed this some where in this thread but, I should have the 25% insurance reduction cost but my ship HUD indicates insurance at 94% still. Is it not supposed to read 75% or am i missing something all together?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom