Why are traders playing Open Play?

[Dogoncrook]

Where did I write this?

As a trader, I would first try to escape, then fight to the bitter end (and get my ship blown up). After paying my insurance (and loosing the value of my cargo), I would like to be able to teach the pirate a lesson by putting a bounty on his head.

For now, pirating is not very risky (compared to the damage the trader takes), so there should be something to get equal.

Do you really think that a bounty of <10K for shooting down a trader is fair compensation for the loss the trader takes?

Sorry I should have been more clear it isn't directed at you. I'm saying the problem in General isn't solvable to that type of players satisfaction so trying to appease them is a lost cause.

Edit: I'll add I agree the game needs some tweaking but at the end of the day, in open you are gonna get robbed and maybe even killed for fun if you choose to play around other people. That will never change, and people will never stop complaining about it.

 

[Ancipital]

In the last ten minutes in Yembo, 4 type six transports have Alt-F4'ed on me. Why are you even playing in Open Play? This ticks me off so much, go play on solo if you can't take piracy.

It's because we have tiny hands and trouble growing moustaches, unlike you dauntless, honourable and intimidatingly virile PvPers

 

[ICO_hr]

I'm saying it can't be done.

DayZ did it with 1 or 2 programers. So, for some reason FD cant? Really?

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

I want to play a single player game. I backed this game on the basis that I could. If it had been clearly an MMO from that point I never would've gotten involved.

Solo is as close to a single player game as we can now get.

Playing the game I paid for in the way I wanted to play it from the minute I put my hand in my pocket is hardly cheating.

And NPCs are harder in open mode?


If not, what's the difference? Just play solo and stop crying about players.

I'm not saying that anyone else has to feel the same way that I do. But to me, playing in solo feels like cheating, so I will not do it.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I'm saying it can't be done.

Depends what you mean by 'it'. Making a ship carry on seamlessly when the client that was controlling it has been killed is going to be somewhere between very difficult and can't be done. Spotting that it has probably happened, is perfectly doable, I believe. That is less than perfect for the CMDR who lost his kill, but the logger would get punished, and presumably think twice about doing it again.

 

[Masta Squidge]

DayZ did it with 1 or 2 programers. So, for some reason FD cant? Really?

DayZ is a mod built upon an established game with a ton of people working on that, and supporting said mod with them. They didn't do it alone.

 

[TannakaObi]

The argument that solo is easy mode, but I don't want to be pirated by players is one of the most things I have read here.

Currently the only difference in combat between solo and online is the chance to be pirated by a player.

 

[Vandaahl]

Is it just the way FD does it because I've seen other games do this to prevent the loggin' during attacks?

Its the nature of a P2P network. EVE uses a client-server configuration. All players know about each others existence because the server tells it to everyone. In this setup, you have much more control over the clients. In a P2P config, there is no central server, its a client only party, there is no control. So when I pull my power plug, I vanish in thin air.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

DayZ did it with 1 or 2 programers. So, for some reason FD cant? Really?

Dayz uses a client - server configuration. The amount of programmers doesn't mean anything.

 

[Masta Squidge]

The argument that solo is easy mode, but I don't want to be pirated by players is one of the most things I have read here.

Currently the only difference in combat between solo and online is the chance to be pirated by a player.

This is what I have been saying.

Oh, and high res screen shots are available.


There is literally zero reason to NOT play solo if you don't like piracy.

 

[Quineloe]

DayZ did it with 1 or 2 programers. So, for some reason FD cant? Really?

DayZ is using client/server architecture.

Why do we have to repeat this over and over? It can't be compared.


Here, read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Client–server_model

 

[Vandaahl]

Depends what you mean by 'it'. Making a ship carry on seamlessly when the client that was controlling it has been killed is going to be somewhere between very difficult and can't be done.

This is what I meant by 'it'

I'm even wondering if FD is allowed to log player behavior, and use it against them. But I'll stop there since I don't know much about the subject.

 

[Dogoncrook]

Its the nature of a P2P network. EVE uses a client-server configuration. All players know about each others existence because the server tells it to everyone. In this setup, you have much more control over the clients. In a P2P config, there is no central server, its a client only party, there is no control. So when I pull my power plug, I vanish in thin air.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Dayz uses a client - server configuration. The amount of programmers doesn't mean anything.

It's doable. Tracking players would work with a report system. Fd needs to put recources here or it will amount to nothing but there isn't any sort of technical hurdle to ban these players.

 

[Negative Entropy]

I'm not saying that anyone else has to feel the same way that I do. But to me, playing in solo feels like cheating, so I will not do it.

no. playing in solo is NOT cheating. Solo is just a different game.

ALT-F4 is cheating.

systematically logging off in combat or when interdicted is borderline cheating.

systematically running away from stronger ships is perfectly valid, (and usually pretty easy to do)

 

[Oddity]

I'm saying it can't be done.

Just what I tried (and apparently miserably failed ^.^) to point at here: ED simulates on the our pcs and synchronises via P2P.
Since that Logoffski and all the other cheating crap hardly to counter. And the former is just the iceberg's tip. -.-

 

[ICO_hr]

DayZ is a mod built upon an established game with a ton of people working on that, and supporting said mod with them. They didn't do it alone.

I'm sure you know this established game called Arma 2 has one of the most bugged and badly writen networking where everything was hadled by the client just like ED. So 1-2 programmers re-wrote the entire engine for the sole reaso Alt+F4 and cheating to be prevented.For DayZ SA they move everything to the servers and your PC is used to render the graphics more or less.

Most of the work was done by one dude as far as i know. After that they expanded the team because noboby will wait 5-10 years to be ready.

 

[Derath]

I'm sure you know this established game called Arma 2 has one of the most bugged and badly writen networking where everything was hadled by the client just like ED. So 1-2 programmers re-wrote the entire engine so Alt+F4 and cheating to be prevented.For DayZ SA they move everything to the servers and your PC is used to render the graphics more or less.

p2p =/= client to server, your comparison isn't a comparison

 

[Koen]

It's doable. Tracking players would work with a report system. Fd needs to put recources here or it will amount to nothing but there isn't any sort of technical hurdle to ban these players.

In p2p, a hacker (or a kiddie using that hacker's scripts) could configure his firewall so that it looks that the other side combat logged and generate false positive reports.

If a server would be used to track players all of the time, it would re-introduce the cost FDEV avoided by going p2p.

 

[Vandaahl]

It's doable.

In the end, sure, of course. But its a costs - benefits thingy, so it's not going to happen I'm afraid.

 

[Masta Squidge]

I'm sure you know this established game called Arma 2 has one of the most bugged and badly writen networking where everything was hadled by the client just like ED. So 1-2 programmers re-wrote the entire engine so Alt+F4 and cheating to be prevented.For DayZ SA they move everything to the servers and your PC is used to render the graphics more or less.

Yeah, I am completely aware. I am also aware that they had the support of the developers because its an "official" mod.

And they certainly didn't rewrite 'the entire engine'. It doesn't work that way. If you think they rewrote "the entire engine" entirely on their own, you have been sorely misled.

And I am painfully aware of how client-server interactions occur, and the inherent security of them vs P2P - seeing as I have an education in the subject.

Absolute best case we can hope for here would be a full shift to server based architecture. Since that wont happen, you could accomplish a rough security checking by simply reporting key data about player interactions to a server and requesting authentication, while leaving the rest up to the players.

With P2P, it's only a matter of time before people start giving themselves infinite health and damage, and money to go with it.

Oh... wait.

 

[ICO_hr]

p2p =/= client to server, your comparison isn't a comparison

Arma 2 and DayZ MOD are p2p.

Well, they re-wrote everything except the graphics engine which is what they're doing right now.

 

[Dogoncrook]

In p2p, a hacker (or a kiddie using that hacker's scripts) could configure his firewall so that it looks that the other side combat logged and generate false positive reports.

If a server would be used to track players all of the time, it would re-introduce the cost FDEV avoided by going p2p.

Their firewall cannot block your connection to fd server, and if they are they are well beyond cheating and are gonna be dealing with the relevant authorities.