Should Support Occasionally Say No To Reimbursement?

[Theodrid]

Well done on missing the point entirely.

I've said my piece. I'll now leave this thread alone, as there's really no point in me posting anything else.

Your point was 'Frontier should be responsible for a commander screwing up - on many levels and not said commander' - my point was I disagree so please explain to me what point has been missed?

 

[Ian Skippy]

Why worry about what happens between two other parties? We can't go around being in-game moral police. Our individual Gamer Ethics are for us, not to be imposed on others. In the end, if FD think a reimbursement is warrented, let it happen. Anything else is just pressing our views on other players, and the Dev's.

Thats a bit of a cheesy attitude to be honest. In the same way one might argue that noone is allowed to have an opinion on whether or not FD should condone cheating. Its between two other parties, we shouldnt be moral police, we are pressing our view on FD etc. It is nonsensical in my opinion.

Why? When I play board games with my family, if someone is new to the game and they make a mistake (because they haven't thought things through, not because they don't know the rules), then quite often we'll let them take their move again. They learn more from that than being knocked out at that point and having to sit out for the rest of the game and not join in. Of course, if they make the same mistake a second time, then they don't get that option.

Why do people want other people to be punished? We play games to have fun, yes?

1) Beginners dont lose cutters. Beginners lose sidewinders, which are free.
2) When you lose a ship, you dont have to sit at the sit out the rest of the game, you can continue right away. And if you have nothing, they even give you a new ship for free.

Punishing? [haha]

 

[ArchEmperor]

Something happened. Customer was disappointed. There is no reason to not reimburse what so ever.

 

[Ninj]

This is clear discrimination against fools and stupid people.

Discrimination I can finally approve of!

 

[Noctover]

See i just dont get it. Stuff like this reinforces my idea that this is a game for non-gamers.

 

[Ian Skippy]

See i just dont get it. Stuff like this reinforces my idea that this is a game for non-gamers.

When people play games, they are gamers.

 

[Noctover]

When people play games, they are gamers.

But there are also games which appeal to people who generally arnt gamers. Its like someone who occasionally likes to take photos isn't a photographer.

 

[Cmdr Travers]

Should Support Occasionally Say No To Reimbursement?

They do. They've said no to me before.

 

[V'larr]

Have you ever seen a rage quit thread blaming Support NOT giving them what they wanted?

Have you ever seen a single thread where Support said no to a ticket? I haven't.

So you're not happy unless Support's being complained about and thus embarked on a quest to prove why people can't have nice things?

Come off it, mate....

This is a silly thread. They're doing a hell of a damn good job, best I've seen from *any* company - wish my local phone service (also a company named Frontier, incidentally) had anything near their level of competency. I've been a month now without phone service and now have a temporary number that isn't my original number, they screwed up their first visit, there's been no communication between the techs they've sent out and the support center and ugh...I wish Elite's Frontier would take over Frontier Communications, lemme tell you.

 

[Jack Schitt]

See, for me this one should be 'not gonna help ever', I've never had to ask for reimbursement and to be honest it would take a pretty catastrophic bug on FD's side for me to even contemplate doing so. Getting reimbursed when you a) have enough game experience to own/fly a Cutter, b) were dingbat enough to fly without rebuy and c) apparently unable to fly a Cutter just seems wrong in my opinion.

I agree with this, but it's a tentative agreement. For almost any other game it would be an unqualified agreement.

The problem with ED is that there still isn't sufficient warning as to the risks of flying without insurance. Yes, it's mentioned in the manual that hardly anyone reads. Yes, the rebuy cost is there on the right hand MFD and the Outfitting screens, but it's largely irrelevant until you've been destroyed for the first time and come to understand its significance.

The first time you see the insurance screen it all begins falling into place but even then there are a couple of problems. Firstly it is possible to earn a staggering amount of money and rank without ever encountering a serious threat, so it's more than feasible for someone to grind their way to a Cutter having never lost a single ship. Secondly, the very presence of the bank loan that covers rebuy shortfalls can be confusing; players may not realise it's capped at all.

So while the argument that a Cutter pilot should have enough experience to know the risk/reward situation is largely true, it's by no means a certainty. Support refusing to help in this situation could be seen, in some extreme cases, as punishing the player for a lack of information in the game.

The answer, as raised by me and others countless times, is simple. A full-screen warning about lack of insurance that has to be acknowledged and dismissed before launch would remove any ambiguity or misunderstanding and put the responsibility firmly on the player. Then there would be no grey area when it came to Support requests. Why something like this still isn't in the game is bizarre to me.

Spoiler

(I really ought to update this with an ED-style avatar)

 

[smegunit]

You don't even know if they do get reimbursed, you only know that they may have sumbitted a ticket and the rest is your imaginary reasons as to why people should not be reimbursed.

So DOES Fdev actually reimbuirse tickets for the reasons stated in the OP?
I don't think so. So how is this discussion relevant?

Should we have a comittee on how FDEV serve their coffee as well?

 

[MottiKhan]

You don't even know if they do get reimbursed, you only know that they may have sumbitted a ticket and the rest is your imaginary reasons as to why people should not be reimbursed.

So DOES Fdev actually reimbuirse tickets for the reasons stated in the OP?
I don't think so. So how is this discussion relevant?

Should we have a comittee on how FDEV serve their coffee as well?

With cream, no sugar. No drip coffee. It must be pressure brewed. Otherwise, it's wrong and must be opposed!

FD needs to communicate this to us. It's vital.

 

[babelfisch]

Not sure if it has already been answered, but why does anyone care?

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

Not sure if it has already been answered, but why does anyone care?

same reason you have been obliged to ask that question here

 

[babelfisch]

same reason you have been obliged to ask that question here

I tried to ignore the thread for the last two days, but after seeing that it's still not dead I just couldn't resist. So why do I care about why people care? I don't know, maybe I just want to understand what's wrong with them

 

[Iskariot]

We've all seen threads where people have had ship losses due to various reasons. The general reaction is "put in a ticket and get reimbursed," which most people do.

HOWEVER, if the game truly is Elite: Dangerous (emphasis mine) shouldn't Support be a little less, well supportive. If the loss is due to a game bug then yes, I agree with granting a ticket. However, if:

- you accidentally boost inside a station and ram into the back wall in your shieldless T-7 loaded with Imperial Slaves
- you leave your ship to grab some dinner. While away, your ship runs out of gas and takes you to the rebuy screen
- you have six+ million in bounties in a RES, shoot a SecShip by accident and get mauled
- you rig up a new combat Cobra, drop into a USS, deploy weapons against two NPC Vultures and your shields/systems power down leaving you helpless while under fire.

Then why should Support reimburse you? In the above cases, pilot error is the cause of the loss (PS. those are real world threads I've seen since being on the board.) If you have the rebuy covered, no worries. If you don't, then shouldn't you get kicked back to a Sidewinder? I'm certain you won't do the same thing again.

I know why Frontier has that loose policy, it's great PR and it does feel great when you get your stuff back, but that removes any suspense / tension and no one is held responsible for their actions (or idiocy.)

Anyway, I thought I'd ask the question.

I agree, concerning all the examples you give, that FDEV should not reimburse (I don't know if they do).
I have done stupid things too and lost my ship because of it. I have never considered asking FDEV to reimburse me for my own failure.
I did not even ask for it after I lost 2 FDL in one hour after the new AI got implemented.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I tried to ignore the thread for the last to days, but after seeing that it's still not dead I just couldn't resist. So why do I care about why people care? I don't know, maybe I just want to understand what's wrong with them

Some people enjoy worrying about what other people get up to.
In another time they'd be the people peering out through the net curtains to see what their neighbors are doing, the gossiping to other busy-bodies about it.

 

[Devari]

See, for me this one should be 'not gonna help ever', I've never had to ask for reimbursement and to be honest it would take a pretty catastrophic bug on FD's side for me to even contemplate doing so. Getting reimbursed when you a) have enough game experience to own/fly a Cutter, b) were dingbat enough to fly without rebuy and c) apparently unable to fly a Cutter just seems wrong in my opinion.

I actually agree with this in principle in most games, but I don't mind when Support shows some leniency with players in Elite given the very steep learning curve. With the arbitrary and confusing system for bounties (which isn't actually explained anywhere, you just have to learn by getting bounties), the frequent griefing of new players and the longstanding cheating that went on with most of the "PVP" player groups using the Engineering exploit for 1-2 years, there are many ways to encounter a case of "pilot error" that isn't always "fair" to the pilot for various reason.

Now, if Elite were a game with a highly-consistent, readily-understood and well-documented set of game rules making ship destruction readily foreseeable in almost all cases? Then a very strict reimbursement policy might make sense, but that's not the game we have, so I understand why support makes exceptions in some cases. In the vast majority of cases however I've seen them investigate situations quite thoroughly and overall very few reimbursements fall under the category of "sympathy" reimbursements, they are usually well-deserved reimbursements to make good on ship loss from game bugs or exploits.

 

[Devari]

Not sure if it has already been answered, but why does anyone care?

It's quite simple why players care, it's a case of wanting everyone being treated "fairly" with the same rules. Players will fall on either side of that argument depending on their gaming experiences but it's really not a difficult concept to understand.

 

[babelfisch]

It's quite simple why players care, it's a case of wanting everyone being treated "fairly" with the same rules. Players will fall on either side of that argument depending on their gaming experiences but it's really not a difficult concept to understand.

I think another concept which is not difficult to understand is that people are taking this game way to serious. It also explains all the idiotic discussions we have on this forum.