Lol if that was sarcasm in text form It needed a sarcasm tag I really couldn't tell, my apologies!
Why are traders playing Open Play?
- Thread starter CMDR Hagglebeard
- Start date
Lol if that was sarcasm in text form It needed a sarcasm tag I really couldn't tell, my apologies!
Seems a big ask to store that data and analyse whether there is a trend to appease a small minority, when there are genuine bugs in the game that could be worked on.
Because it's not a zero sum option? The game has combat. The game has asymmetric expectaions in some cases, i.e. some players will not accept any chance of losing 'progress'. The game allows players to run / fight / log off to allow for the other player to have options, too - chase / fight / allow escape etc.
The game expects you to abide by the in-game logic and rules, not to allow one side to have an magic get out clause.
I agree.
Any exploits that are in the game after release are 100% usable by the player base. If those issues never get fixed by the dev team then it must been seen as a legit mechanic. Especially if they know about it and don't fix it.
No players must be "banned" if it's the dev's fault for not fixing it in the first place.
Combat logging is covered by this 100%.
As per the other gazillion threads on the subject: they can't. But it doesn't matter. The number of real world cases of a power cut in mid battle can probably be counted on the fingers of one foot. There is also the issue of very naught CMDRs doing a DoS on an opponent - again very hard to spot. However, FD have the logs, and they can go on tack records: see how often the player has done it. More than 2 or 3 times, then it is unlikely to be a genuine accident.
Bottom line: things can be done to catch these cheats. Now and then, very infrequently, a truly innocent might get caught by it.
you'd think that, but considering the number of incredibly minor changes they could make that would make some roles more enjoyable that they persist in ignoring I'm going to assume that they choose whether something is worth the time or not
I don't actually think it'd be too much work you'd just need the system to flag once somebody has X number of reports then send a mod to investigate, it'd be pretty obvious from the telemetry if they are cheating deliberately or not. That being said i'm still not convinced they do anything about it. I've always held suspicions of games that claim to punish people harshly.
I really could debate this but I honestly don't want to because I agree with you, it is part of the unspoken 'contract' between game and player. I just couldn't read this and not raise the argument though... it was niggling away at me
you'd think that, but considering the number of incredibly minor changes they could make that would make some roles more enjoyable that they persist in ignoring I'm going to assume that they choose whether something is worth the time or not
I don't actually think it'd be too much work you'd just need the system to flag once somebody has X number of reports then send a mod to investigate, it'd be pretty obvious from the telemetry if they are cheating deliberately or not. That being said i'm still not convinced they do anything about it. I've always held suspicions of games that claim to punish people harshly.
I think it would be more work than that and not worth the effort.
Look at the "Race To Elite" thread stickied at the top of this forum. There are definitely people who've posted screenshots of single Elite statuses and stated that they've attempted to claim the prize and are waiting for FD's validation process to run on their account.
Win???
What win???
There's no win in ED. Just survival. Some do it better than others. Some last longer before buying the farm than others.
ED: isn't about winning it's about defining a destination, planning the journey and achieving the goal.
I think the 'win' was the 'race to elite' competition. But I agree that players who have not made their first billion yet should give up the hope they can make it.