Players losing it all and quitting - sure, their fault but not good for the game.

CrazyH0rse

CrazyH0rse
Hi folks,

Over and over again we see players in the facebook group and here coming on to say that for whatever reason they we operating without the rebuy funds, something happened and whammo... back to square one. Most seem to quit thereafter.

Now it's very easy to take the lofy moral ground and say that it's their fault for taking the risk they did. But the long and short of it is, it's not good for the game. This game is designed for humans and we have to consider how they are, not how they should be.

You could just ignore this issue and be high minded about it, but I believe the game will suffer.

Amazingly, I have even seen posts where people claim not to have known they could lose everything, although I find that hard to comprehend. People can be caught out too... for example a new module is bought and the calculations fail to take the increase in rebuy cost into account and the player is shy of the rebuy cost without realising it.

Personally, I never fly without the rebuy cost. I don't even risk my trading capital (mostly, have risked it a few times). You just need one-glitch when docking... a bump in the slit... whatever... and it's all over.

Are there plans to do anything about it? I'm not suggesting we dumb the game down, but perhaps there are simple things that could be done without removing the risk management aspect of things.

For example, you could have a system of accounts and you could move credits between them... for example, to put your rebuy cost aside.

Or, a simple message when your funds would drop below the rebuy cost after a transaction.

Or, your insurance excess is zero but you pay a premium. Or let the player decide the risk by having a premium that is related to the insurance excess.

Thoughts?
 

martinwright6

M
I don't think adding clarity to a very important aspect of the game would be dumbing it down. A message is shown when you've bought an item that needs to be adding to a Firegroup, so why not if you've bought an item that means you don't have enough to cover the Rebuy cost?
 

Tas Devil

Tas Devil
The game won't be ruined because a few dozen players rage quit because they didn't set aside insurance money.

The community is big enough that even if 3,000 players do so it would only lose under 1% of the player base.

The game will be either be a success for many other reasons or a total failure down the road for many other different reasons still.

From an income point of view this is not a subscription based game, so people quitting after buying the product do not even impact the bottom line.

Arguably they have contributed equally to the bottom line and success of the game as players who stick around yet place 0 stress on the servers so by quitting the impact they have is to marginally improve the game experience for others...
 

Alpha November

Alpha November
CrazyH0rse said:
Hi folks,

Over and over again we see players in the facebook group and here coming on to say that for whatever reason they we operating without the rebuy funds, something happened and whammo... back to square one. Most seem to quit thereafter.

Now it's very easy to take the lofy moral ground and say that it's their fault for taking the risk they did. But the long and short of it is, it's not good for the game. This game is designed for humans and we have to consider how they are, not how they should be.

You could just ignore this issue and be high minded about it, but I believe the game will suffer.

Amazingly, I have even seen posts where people claim not to have known they could lose everything, although I find that hard to comprehend. People can be caught out too... for example a new module is bought and the calculations fail to take the increase in rebuy cost into account and the player is shy of the rebuy cost without realising it.

Personally, I never fly without the rebuy cost. I don't even risk my trading capital (mostly, have risked it a few times). You just need one-glitch when docking... a bump in the slit... whatever... and it's all over.

Are there plans to do anything about it? I'm not suggesting we dumb the game down, but perhaps there are simple things that could be done without removing the risk management aspect of things.

For example, you could have a system of accounts and you could move credits between them... for example, to put your rebuy cost aside.

Or, a simple message when your funds would drop below the rebuy cost after a transaction.

Or, your insurance excess is zero but you pay a premium. Or let the player decide the risk by having a premium that is related to the insurance excess.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

What about a message from your insurer when you attempt to launch saying that if you do it you're not insured? I've purchased all my ships early and gone without insurance to make a better profit (even my anaconda though I told myself I'd play it safe on that one), as long as you've been warned I'm not sure there is much else to be done (short of just offering a bigger loan amount up to whatever value is required to get the player back in the ship they lost).
 

Hethwill_Khan

Hethwill_Khan
Why trust a mechanic to "put money aside" when you can do it yourself by making sure you have enough balance ?

It is beyond me.

Having a message could help the "less interested" but I completely disagree with added mechanics, like premium excess pay, to cover the lack of common sense.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Alpha November said:
What about a message from your insurer when you attempt to launch saying that if you do it you're not insured? I've purchased all my ships early and gone without insurance to make a better profit (even my anaconda though I told myself I'd play it safe on that one), as long as you've been warned I'm not sure there is much else to be done (short of just offering a bigger loan amount up to whatever value is required to get the player back in the ship they lost).
Click to expand...

While it may be annoying for some, a warning message before any transaction that would lower one's credit balance below the insurance excess might help prevent some players losing their shirt....
 

Skip Intro

Skip Intro
The system works fine as it is for the vast majority of the player base.

No matter what extra things you put in place, people with circumvent / ignore them in the way they're ignoring the current systems i.e. I'll just buy a couple more tons of Unobtainium to max my profit / I'll just upgrade the cargo bays and lose the shields and weapons on my tanker etc., etc.

I have said it before as a joke, but I'm coming around to asking for it to be made official - if you leave the station without enough credits to cover your re-buy costs the station opens fire and blows you up, as otherwise it's just prolonging the agony.
 

CrazyH0rse

CrazyH0rse
Clawhammer said:
Iam happy that this happens, so much games out today that are too easy. It is refreshing to play a game were you get hit in ur face if you do something wrong. Need more games with consequenzes.
Click to expand...

While I see your point of view and I agree with the general idea that it should be possible to loose everything due to your own stupidity... I still feel this one is a little harsh. I think I would be ok with it if you could be 100% sure that all players were aware they were taking the risk in the first place.

Even if players quitting doesn't impact the bottom line directly, it does hurt the game. It creates bad feeling. I think there are simple things that could be done which keep the risk but also make sure the player is aware of that risk
 

Mohrgan

Mohrgan
First, you have to make the leap and actually believe that they quit. I'm not convinced. They take a day or two cooling off period, and their back in it. It's a reaction based on a belief that they can extort changes from the Dev's. I wouldn't worry about it at all.
:
The cost of having your ship blow up is supposed to be traumatic. It's a basic design of the game. There will be a few people that can't take it, but that's ok. E: D says:' The galaxy doesn't care'.
 

SKudder

S
As I mentioned in the "solo vs. open" thread: Why not just decrease death penalty dramatically? Where is the fun with being forced to start over with a sidewinder, regardless whose fault it was? Is this really "dangerous"?

Give us very low insurance costs and the following will happen in my opinion:

- more player in open mode because loosing ship and cargo would be just a bit annoying and not loss of many hours of game time
- PvP people get more opponents
- no need for combat logging

Why not?
 
Last edited:

Nutter

Nutter
I suggested a warning before launch if Balance was less than insurance - Simples

That said, it's a lesson learned and in the heat of the moment they post a thread - "Rage Quit - I lost everything" - BTW What is FaceBook?

Anyway after a good nights sleep, they return wiser, they check the right panel, smile and launch.

It's how us Humans learn... Well most Humans anyway ;)
 

MrPrise

M
ED is not a casual game not even a standard game what we get all the time with auto-healing and so on recently. It's difficulty is refreshing and yes, the insurance is part of it, because it is your decision to ignore it. Not knowing about it is also your fault. Do you know the game Dark Soul? It is a very difficult game and players love it because of it. It is not for everyone (not even for me, LOL), just like ED. If people quit because the game does not hold their hands, the game is not for them. They should consider the failure(s) part of the learning curve and learn the lesson from it. If they give up at the first failure, they need to look after another easier game...
It is a pity but games are too easy these days. I remember playing the Dark Forces which does not even have a save functionality between levels, so if you made a mistake eg you were slower then a stromtrooper and he killed you you had to start the map again. But once you finished it without a mistake, you felt yourself a real jedi ;-)
 

LordBad

L
In Elite Dangerous you can control with precision the risks you take with so many mechanics to allow you to play literally risk free. It really should be called Elite: Completely harmless. If it was any easier it would play itself and your suggesting we should now make it even more risk averse because despite it being something my 6 year old plays (and dominates) your suggesting we should make it simpler? Who are these whiners, god, its like a daycare on this forum sometimes. Grow a pair!
 

Hooplah

Hooplah
It's a Multi-Player problem. If this game was offline then there would be game saves. A player could then reload their last saved game and only lose a little versus a lot. One could also have multiple game saves with a different ship/career for each. With the online multi-player edition game saves and many more aspects of the Elite games will never be realized. Just fire up an old copy of Frontier: First Encounters (FE2) to see all that is missing.
 

CrazyH0rse

CrazyH0rse
Skip Intro said:
The system works fine as it is for the vast majority of the player base.

No matter what extra things you put in place, people with circumvent / ignore them in the way they're ignoring the current systems i.e. I'll just buy a couple more tons of Unobtainium to max my profit / I'll just upgrade the cargo bays and lose the shields and weapons on my tanker etc., etc.
Click to expand...

People are complex. This catch-all statement brushes over the complexity of the human mind. I once saw a documentary about placebos. The size, colour and shape of a placebo actually influence the placebo effect. The smallest things have a disproportional psychological impact. There is no harm into taking this into consideration if it would make for a better game.

Skip Intro said:
I have said it before as a joke, but I'm coming around to asking for it to be made official - if you leave the station without enough credits to cover your re-buy costs the station opens fire and blows you up, as otherwise it's just prolonging the agony.
Click to expand...

Lol... maybe if they do it twice in a row :) If I had some sympathy for someone doing it once either as a calculated risk or by accident, doing it habitually does in fact mean they will lose eventually - and so yes, their agony should be shortened! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom