Ship insurance -so that people fight

[-KM-]

The more i read on the forums (and I read a lot), the more I play the game, the more i get convinced we need ship insurance for a balanced cost.

 

The post in open world section -why people don't fight is spot on. We have to ask ourselves. Do we want NA to be a PVE game with PVP elements or a PvP game with PvE elements.

 

As it stands not it is the first of the two for one simple reason... the economy. Most people will follow the money in MMO. That is do what gives most gold and if they do not need gold, xp.

 

If you look at the prices now.. this is from the top of my head but a rough estimate and I use the Trinc as an example. I think the new price for a trinc is around 60k. Loosing one durability will therefore cost around 12k. Selling a captured trinc will net you about 6k. The damage you deal will net you a comparable very low gold income. Have a net profit from playing PvE with those numbers is very much possible. However by playing PvP it is not. Only if you choose to only engage in very unfair PvP match ups it is possible to have a ratio of 2 captured enemy player trincs for every time you go down yourself. Most of the time people will go down rather than getting cought as well netting even less gold. It is quite simple.

 

If the net cost for replacing one dura is higher than the gold gain for sinking a ship in PvP the community as a whole will loose money playing PvP (even if a few individuals might not) forcing players to "farm" PvE to afford PvP.

 

My suggestion is ship insurance. The cost of that insurgence could be roughly equal to the gold gain from damage to a player owned ship equal to the damage needed to sink the insured ship. That way at least net gold income from PvP would for the community as a whole not be negative.

 

Psychology wise a player is also less afraid to loose the ship if that only means he have to pay some 4k gold or so to replace the insurance than if he loose one durability that in the long run means he will have to "trash" the ship.

 

What about resources then, the need to replace ships? Well first of all we do not have that yet in game. Second. It would make more sense if repair kits were bought in port than magically appearing in each battle. The repair kits and repairs of ship in harbor could cost both gold and resources. That and of course building new ships/ modules. 

 

The gold from damage against AI should be significantly lower than damage against real players. To buy an insurance for the ship playing VS AI it should roughly be the current numbers. That is capture 2 ships to replace the cost of loosing one dura.. or sink 4 or 5 maybe.

 

At the current state of ingame economy it is just way to profitable to play PVE compared to the almost certain net loss of playing PvP.

 

regards

KM

Edited June 16, 2015 by -KM-

[Konali89]

First lets see, How things will go when it goes open for the rest of the pre-order players. Then you will have a much more representative view on the whole pve/pvp thing.

[-KM-]

First lets see, How things will go when it goes open for the rest of the pre-order players. Then you will have a much more representative view on the whole pve/pvp thing.

 

No need to have more players to do math. If the gold cost of getting sunk by another player is higher than the gold gain of sinking another player than the net gain from PVP is negative and thus people will have to "farm" bot s to afford to play PvP. Every enemy player ship i sink or capture means the loss of 1 dura for someone. For example: My net gold gain from sinking or capturing +2k. Gold loss for the player i captured it from -4k for replacing lost durability. Net loss for the community from PvP -2k. Simple as that. It does not matter if there is 2 people in the game or 100000000. Meaning that in order to play PvP you HAVE TO play a lot of PvE in between or only engage in PvP where you are close to 100% sure you will win (ganking), of course the people getting ganked will loose, and loose more than you gain (and thus the net loss will still be negative from PvP)

Edited June 16, 2015 by -KM-

[Konali89]

So maybe, when you fight PVP, you will get double the gold. To still stimulate pvp and such. Offcourse an insurance sounds nice, but does it stimulate pvp'ing?

[tankgame]

Hi KM interesting thoughts my friend  but can i remind everyone this is a pay for game through steam when it comes out not a free to play game like others where you have to buy gold and premium time that costs a lot of money. For thoes who have plenty money could get to T 10 in no time. So i suggest proper balancing of the gold credited to you would buy you the equivilante ship if you lost it 5 times out of 5 ie. if you have a brigg costing 13000 gold lets say and you just prefere normal battles in pve or pvp then you should be able to afford that one back without droping back to a lynx. As far as ranking advancement is concerned this depends how well you do to how much xp you earn at the moment it is too low, but it was too high, that ment players could advance too fast and soon be sailing a santisima with a full crew.I suggest even balanceing so as not to put the new players off the game, navel action has to get this right to attract new players by the mass to make money and lots of it, the game is sound i like it a lot, but i am also alpha testing 2 other games that will be coming out shortly, this game in my mind is far better. So please devs make the right decisions. Ps please dont forget the map.

[Jack Freedom]

The more I play the more I see a need for ship insurance as well. Instead of the magical replacements we get now. When you lose a ship you should feel that you actually lost that ship. The positives are that you do get some money back from the insurance depending on which type of insurance you purchased for your vessel. This money can then be used to purchase the vessel again or try a different one. This will force players to be less aggressive with the ships they currently have imo.

[Principe]

I agree as well. 

 

In this case, it's more of a realism versus convenience but the problem at the moment is that these two factors are always clashing within one another and it sort of makes a complicated scenario every time a suggestion comes up.

 

In UWO -- once again, I keep bringing it up but its a good comparison -- we never lose ship, unless you sell it or trade it.  We had insurance system for the ship as well but it was very weak, it would merely take away at most 10k gold everyday and well I can easily get 1m a day in the game and others can make much much more so I propose a really heavy insurance as to not belittle it. 

 

Definitely, I don't want a precious ship to sink or get stolen easily as I probably put so much into it -- adding the fact that ship-building will be available later on. 

 

Though, I can imagine many users here disagreeing with this honestly, goodluck.

Edited June 24, 2015 by Principe

[Jack Freedom]

I agree as well. 

 

In this case, it's more of a realism versus convenience but the problem at the moment is that these two factors are always clashing within one another and it sort of makes a complicated scenario every time a suggestion comes up.

 

In UWO -- once again, I keep bringing it up but its a good comparison -- we never lose ship, unless you sell it or trade it. We had insurance system for the ship as well but it was very weak, it would merely take away at most 10k gold everyday and well I can easily get 1m a day in the game and others can make much much more so I propose a really heavy insurance as to not belittle it. 

 

Definitely, I don't want a precious ship to sink or get stolen easily as I probably put so much into it -- adding the fact that ship-building will be available later on. 

 

Though, I can imagine many users here disagreeing with this honestly, goodluck.

 

well the insurance would be proportional to the cost of the ship. Basically Eve online insurance.

[Balsafer]

Would promote more pvp if players can get a money back, but for those that I know will say that this feature will get rid the thrill of the risk factor in the game. 

[Jack Freedom]

Would promote more pvp if players can get a money back, but for those that I know will say that this feature will get rid the thrill of the risk factor in the game. 

 

What? having ship insurance will only increase that risk factor since you actually only have one ship and no magic durabilities!

Edited June 24, 2015 by Jack Freedom

[ParaBellum]

I agree that NA needs an insurance program. The reason is simple: you want to encourage players to participate in PvP. And you don't want to make that experience unnecessary punishing.

 

The current durability system to me seems far less desirable than offering a simple option to insure a ship.

[kang]

You still need a way to remove ships from the game so that crafting has a point but I would definitely prefer a gold sink (ala insurance) as opposed to having to go shopping every time you burn through your durabilities which is both a gold sink and a time sink.