Voxel Banking, Why the Theft?

I'm not going to read through this entire thread. But I do think this is a poorly thought out system.

You should not lose 30 % for dying. And you should not have to spend 40% to store your pixels....

If anything you should still lose less for dying. Just off the top of my head let's say a 20 % reduction in pixels for death. The cost to bank em should be about 10%

Then if you die, you'll be smacking yourself for not banking them....

Still it sounds dumb to me. so we're gonna have to take em out as we need em and then re-bank what we didn't use, losing another 40 percent?

Just make it a certain percent up to a flat rate of say 1000 pixels. Don't be ridiculous about it. Being great at the game and dying infrequently shouldn't hold a much more severe penalty then people who suck and die a lot....

 

Please, do the math.

The point of banking pixels is that you only bank them if you're not the greatest at staying alive. It costs 40% to bank them. Dying twice results in a 51% loss. If you die a lot, banking your pixels saves you money.

If you're a hardass and never die, then banking your pixels is pointless. Banking them would be throwing away money. But, if you DO die, you're going to lose quite a lot, since you're carrying everything with you.

That's the balance they're going for.

 

I did the math. Please use your head and don't be a condescending dick.

My point is even people who are great can die sometimes unexpectedly or what have you. So if Joe super gamer makes 10k in pixels but then suddenly dies he loses 3k? Nearly a third of his work. Presumably from days playing.

While Bob mcDiesalot only ever gets up to maybe a thousand pixels at a time if he's lucky. He could die over 10 times before losing the amount the other guy did in 1 single death. Hence a percentage UP TO a flat rate makes sense.

Don't talk to me about math, I know how to do. And also, don't talk to me about logic, (or tact) you seem to not know how to employ them.

 

You should be able to put money in chest.

You should drop all money upon death. 40% Is lost but you can pick it back up.

 

Yes that's how it works. Those are the risks you take. That's exactly how it's intended.

 

My main problem with the system as proposed is that greater risk should equal greater reward AND greater loss upon failure. That's what greater risk means.

Good enough to not die? Great! You get a better reward if you succeed at not dying. But taking a bigger risk should mean a bigger punishment - and a bigger loss than playing it safe. I feel the death penalty and the fee for creating voxels should be switched at the very least.

 

Am I the only one who gets all of his pixels from the refinery.... and leaves them in there until needed? That has been my form of banking thus far. And I'd like to see them try to take it away from me. Eliminating the refinery would only compound a balance issue, and unless they make the refinery dump the pixels onto the ground, I don't see a way for them to force me to take the pixels out.

Honestly, if I can't put pixels into a chest, then I shouldn't be finding them in chests either. One or the other, guys, I don't care either way as long as it's consistent. But please, by all means, take your time. I know you guys have a lot on your plate.

 

I think, if they were inclined and saw your post, they could make refinery spit those pixels out on the ground

 

If they did, I hope they would also take them out of random chests, too. I would not complain one bit.

 

Banking pixels before venturing into a new sector seems like the most obvious decision ever.

 

I must have missed the episode where the crew spent hours setting up their financial situation.

You know how in Star Trek, money isn't a main focus of the show? You know how in the back of your mind, you know what they do costs money, but you're not constantly reminded of that fact? That's because the writers of Star Trek realized that dealing with money is boring as hell and no one wants to deal with it. We have financial issues in real life to worry about without having to come into a SANDBOX EXPLORATION GAME and worry about how much money we have constantly. It's dull and it's boring and it takes away from the game experience.

Just let us stow it without loss and get on with our lives already. What are you really limiting when you rob people of disgusting amounts of pixels? Crafting? No, the pixel costs for crafting are marginal at best. What you're really taking away is 3D printing, and the ability of players to build in your SANDBOX TITLE. This whole "death penalty" thing is grossly misguided.

 

I'm just glad Tiy and the team aren't compromising their ideas during the beta (at least for now). The way he set up the bank system proves that. If you don't want to lose your money all the time either try to die less, or store it as voxels with the penalty, hehehe. =]

 

I posted in another thread about one of my concerns with this system, see below:-

 

Right now 90% of my deaths are from random stuff like mobs kicking me from a cliff or you fall from said cliff because of movement acceleration and not from bosses or dungeons. And i don't know how current banking system going to help me to save money.

 

I fail to see the need for a death penalty or a banking penalty.

If you die you still have the inconvenience of having to waste time returning to where you were, and will probably have to fight through enemies that respawned. That's already plenty enough disincentive, and adding an extra penalty is lumping on further inconvenience for no legitimate reason. This is an adventure game, not an MMO grindfest or a super hardcore 1980s NES game (there's a reason they stopped making games with such harsh death penalties).

With the banking penalty, a 40% banking tax is basically (as others have pointed out) just a 40% nerf on the pixel drop rate disguised as a gameplay mechanic, unless you are in the extreme minority of people who feel that they are too 1337 to need such things (and who will almost certainly come to regret that decision). If you want to nerf the pixel drop, please go ahead -- many people have already pointed out that you end up with far too many as it is, thus negating the point of the death penalty in the first place -- but do it straight up rather than in this roundabout fashion.

 

They don't. They spend their time trying not to be KILLED! The pixel loss is how the game represents the desire to NOT DIE!

Dracon kept complaining that he has to be gambling his money "all the time". That is not true. You are only gambling money when you are doing something dangerous. So dangerous you could get killed!

When you are on a planet where the enemies are weaker than you? Not dangerous. Not gambling. Because you're safe. Safe from DYING!

When you are on your well defended home base? Not dangerous.

When you are exploring a high threat, unknown planet! Yes. You're gambling! With your LIFE! Your senses should be on edge. Yes, you might be thinking "oh no, if I die, I'll lose 1,300 pixels!" but that is really just the game's way of enabling the thought "I don't wanna die!" <--- THIS IS HOW YOU SHOULD FEEL! ALL THE TIME! Because dying is bad! It's bad! It's a thing you should want to avoid. Always. BECAUSE IT'S DYING! A situation that can get you killed, is supposed to be a risky situation. Because it can get you killed!!

 

Wait! That IS a death penalty. The loss of time getting back to where you were. It's just the same as pixel loss, because that's a loss of (farming) time, too. Time that the modern gamer does not have. How about we take out HP bars and death altogether? THEN there would be no death penalty. That would be the ideal, right?

 

You are making a trade-off. Essentially, it is taking a straight-up loss early on, against the possibility of a much greater loss later on. If your skills and equipment are good, then it makes sense to not bank your pixels. Essentially, that's investing in your own ability to survive. On the other hand, before taking a risky action, where you might reasonably die two times or more, banking your pixels means that you will only lose a fixed amount, no matter how many deaths occur.

The intent of the cost is to make it so that it's not an obvious choice. If banking were done at no loss, or even at less of a loss than death, it would always be the best choice, no question. By making it more than the cost of a single death, however, you have to assess the risk of death in the near future. Or to be more accurate, you have to judge how often you are likely to die between when you store your pixels and the next time you are likely to use them.

Essentially, what it boils down to is that banking is not something you are intended to do often. Rather, it is something you would do when you are at "downtime" periods in the game. Before summoning a boss, before moving to another sector...you bank your pixels at times when you have nothing currently to spend them on, and either won't need them for a while, or must do something particularly dangerous in order to advance further. It isn't something you would generally be doing just between trips between your base and wherever you're exploring.

 

If you die, you have to run all the way back to where you were (if you can manage to find it again) in order to continue to progress, and will likely have to face respawned enemies. The pixel loss is just an added extra inconvenience which is entirely unnecessary, causing you to potentially waste hours of pixel gathering time for a simple and often unavoidable mistake. As others have said, Starbound is not an MMO and does not need artificial means of extending gameplay time.

 

whatever happened to people being able to CHOOSE to have a penalty or not when they create a character?

well im sure that will be added into the game at some point either by the devs or through mods.