Insurance - The fun killer

[Snarfbuckle]

While the idea of insurance is good i find the implementation lacking.

We need money sinks but right now our sinks are either all or nothing.

- Running costs are pathetics
- Insurance for ships are crippling events

Why not lower insurance costs to something more reasonable and boost the running costs of ships a LOT.

 

[Tarman]

This doesn't sound all that bad, really; running costs have been a pointless single-button-press for a long time. Other than paint there may as well not be an Advanced Maintenance screen. There's certainly room to deepen both the insurance and RC gameplay.

 

[trollson]

The insurance seems very cheap considering you only pay when you claim (try that with your car insurer!), and all those mystic mods appear in the new ship (how?!). However I do agree that there needs to be more ways to spend your credits - perhaps when we have Space Legs we can visit Space Bars and get Space Legless? In the meantime -- some way that players with loadsamoney can risk more in high-stakes enterprises (besides flying expensive ships with no cash in the bank).

 

[Ryoken]

The rebuy is already pretty cheap, in comparison to the total value of the ship. If you see the rebuy of your current ship as "crippling" then you might be better off in a smaller and/or less valuable ship.

Personally, if I ever drop below 3 rebuys on my current ship, I go back to a smaller ship to rebuild my credit cushion.

 

[Marklar_]

The insurance is cheap, if you can't afford a few rebuys then you can't afford the ship.

Also, credits are easy to get. It shouldn't take more than an hour or two to earn a rebuy on even the most expensive ships.

 

[Watcher]

Having more gameplay around running costs might be interesting, have to be careful not to make it crippling though.
Fuel used to be a lot more expensive for instance but lots of people complained about that and it was reduced. Repair used to be more expensive but that got toned down too (to be fair being cheaper to self destruct didn't make sense).
So doing this right without a lot of complaint would be hard.
I quite like some of the suggestions around having things like supplies for passenger cabins, perhaps you can optionally load up with better food or drink for instance for some sort of potential premium but more up front cost? And you still need to keep it supplied less your passengers complain or quit.

 

[Stealthie]

- Insurance for ships are crippling events

Good.

Losing a ship SHOULD be a significant setback.

The real issue is to make the consequences for destroying somebody else's ship just as significant for the person responsible - somehow.
The solution shouldn't be to make losing a ship trivial.

Let's face it, if they make losing a ship less significant, it's just going to encourage people to act like muppets.

 

[mossfoot]

Good.

Losing a ship SHOULD be a significant setback.

The real issue is to make the consequences for destroying somebody else's ship just as significant for the person responsible - somehow.
The solution shouldn't be to make losing a ship trivial.

Let's face it, if they make losing a ship less significant, it's just going to encourage people to act like muppets.

This.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Good.

Losing a ship SHOULD be a significant setback.

The real issue is to make the consequences for destroying somebody else's ship just as significant for the person responsible - somehow.
The solution shouldn't be to make losing a ship trivial.

Let's face it, if they make losing a ship less significant, it's just going to encourage people to act like muppets.

I barely notice any difference in running cost of a 50 tonne fighter and a 500 tonne multi-role ship. The only place i see a difference is the insurance and procurement cost.

If the loss of the ship was far less but also was tempered by having reasonable running costs the more expensive and large the ship the earnings would become more balanced and the insurance hit would felt far less it if was merely part of the monthly expediture.

Im not advocating for it to be cheap in general but to distribute costs over time with less insurance and higher cost to run the ship.

 

[Jukelo]

I don't think insurance costs should be reduced: losing a ship needs to stay a significant event. If anything it doesn't sting enough as it is.

I'm all in favor of upping the running costs by a factor of ten though.

 

[Stealthie]

I barely notice any difference in running cost of a 50 tonne fighter and a 500 tonne multi-role ship. The only place i see a difference is the insurance and procurement cost.

Try repairing the integrity of a T10 after you get back from Beagle Point.

Made me wince.

 

[Andovar]

Should insurance be reduced? No.
Should running costs be increased? Yes.

Try repairing the integrity of a T10 after you get back from Beagle Point.

Ship integrity is a strange beast. It's not entirely clear what it's effects are, and it's buried in a sub-menu so can be easily overlooked. The integrity thing alone could use a revamp.

But the running costs i'm referring to are the basics like normal repairs, refuel, and rearm.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Why not lower insurance costs to something more reasonable and boost the running costs of ships a LOT.

Both terrible suggestions.

 

[Fyrd Judge]

What they should be doing is increasing the insurance costs on ALL those that keep losing ships Regularly , like in real life, and those that lose no ships over a period of time should have reduced insurance costs, just as in real life.

Running ships costs wont ever work, my fuel is free (fuel scooper) i have limpets that fix my ship, i also have other means to fix ship for free that is called Auto Field-Maintenance Unit

 

[D.G.Cerberus]

What they should be doing is increasing the insurance costs on ALL those that keep losing ships Regularly , like in real life, and those that lose no ships over a period of time should have reduced insurance costs, just as in real life.

Hmph. Don't know about that. I have Max No Claims discount (My insurer tops out at 12 years but I have more than that) and yet my premium still goes up every year.
And each time I get the renewal letter I end up having to call them because if I went to them as a new customer with my record they give me a significantly cheaper rate. Muppets.

 

[Fyrd Judge]

Hmph. Don't know about that. I have Max No Claims discount (My insurer tops out at 12 years but I have more than that) and yet my premium still goes up every year.
And each time I get the renewal letter I end up having to call them because if I went to them as a new customer with my record they give me a significantly cheaper rate. Muppets.

Don't know what country your based in, but here in the UK having many years of no claims bonuses, have sent my cost £100 pounds down over many years and reduces every one elses different amounts. If your a young male adult though, that age group (the majority not all) have the most accidents, they tend to pay more always and because they don't have enough no claims bonuses.

 

[Marklar_]

The integrity thing alone could use a revamp.

It could use removal, can anyone think of a good reason for this to be in the game? If so, it could at least be a bit more visible and easy to get to, like the "normal" hull repair.

 

[Iskariot]

While the idea of insurance is good i find the implementation lacking.

We need money sinks but right now our sinks are either all or nothing.

- Running costs are pathetics
- Insurance for ships are crippling events

Why not lower insurance costs to something more reasonable and boost the running costs of ships a LOT.

The crippling effect of insurance depends on your ship and on your bank account.

The bigger problem is that it is quite difficult to earn enough money with truly big expensive ships to pay for a potential loss.
The only real option is trading hauling, perhaps exploration.
My point is that risking a maximized cutter while bounty hunting is not advisable, unless you are very good, or very careful.
And when you accidentally kill an innocent NPC there's hell to pay with the new bounty system.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

The crippling effect of insurance depends on your ship and on your bank account.

The bigger problem is that it is quite difficult to earn enough money with truly big expensive ships to pay for a potential loss.
The only real option is trading hauling, perhaps exploration.
My point is that risking a maximized cutter while bounty hunting is not advisable, unless you are very good, or very careful.
And when you accidentally kill an innocent NPC there's hell to pay with the new bounty system.

The problem is two fold.

1. The insurance cost on those beasts insane
2. Running and repair costs are like all ships...miniscule

I think we need more supply costs in general but lower insurance so that over time the cost is the same.

 

[D.G.Cerberus]

Don't know what country your based in, but here in the UK having many years of no claims bonuses, have sent my cost £100 pounds down over many years and reduces every one elses different amounts. If your a young male adult though, that age group (the majority not all) have the most accidents, they tend to pay more always and because they don't have enough no claims bonuses.

I'm IN the UK and in my late forties! I pay a comparative pittance for fully comp insurance on a Merc - I'm talking less than £250 per annum, however it doesn't stop it going up each year!