Combat logging is out of hand, and I'm about to quit because of it

Wyke

W
Actually, I think that Eve deals with combat logging very well. As soon as you engage, or are engaged by another player, you get a five minute timer before your ship is logged out, even if the player does so deliberately or due to other reasons.

"BUT WHAT IF MY INTERNET CONNECTION FAILS!"

You know, that is what loads and loads of people screamed in Eve. But it certainly does seem to have vastly reduced the frequency of ships logging off when a fight goes against them. For some reason, which maybe a computer/internet techie type can explain to me, by putting that five minute timer on folks seems to have firmed up their internet connection wonderfully.

OK, I am being trite, and I am sure that a very small number of do players loose ships now and then through no fault of their own, but it happens.

Mind you, you never hear of Explorers complaining because they have started fuel scooping and they have been dropped (Probably the second most hazardous task in Elite after PvP/PvE. So is it really an issue, or a tiny issue being blown out of proportion as an excuse not to have this problem solved?
 
Last edited:

Hagglefoot

H
Parmo said:
On what evidence do you come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...

I'm not even going to respond to this because you are completely ignoring the point of this thread. Take that as you will.

GunslingerSullivan said:
I think the OP needs to calm down a bit. Its only a hand full of people that combat logout. Most of us are up for the challenge. ITS ONLY A GAME and this is not a game breaker.
Click to expand...

I deal with this issue at least 3 times a day.
 

Hagglefoot

H
As for allowing logoff...

How about only when you are at a station or there are no other player connections to your client for over a set amount of time?
 

Ancipital

Ancipital
Hagglefoot said:
out this? Do you feel Frontier is listening?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do, thanks for asking. I find all these "I'm going to quit over $BEEF unless someone gives me some attention" threads even more annoying than combat logging. They're almost as bad as the "HAI GUISE I GOT A GREAT IDEA WE CUD SEPARATE THE MODEZ" threads. I would far rather that you quit than made threads like this.
 

Hagglefoot

H
Ancipital said:
Yes, I do, thanks for asking. I find all these "I'm going to quit over $BEEF unless someone gives me some attention" threads even more annoying than combat logging. They're almost as bad as the "HAI GUISE I GOT A GREAT IDEA WE CUD SEPARATE THE MODEZ" threads. I would far rather that you quit than made threads like this.
Click to expand...

I'm sure all of us who make "threads like this" appreciate you contributing nothing to the community and only posting to flame.
 

Cosmos

C
edgar said:
I agree it is highly frustrating and we need action to be taken on this.

Reporting Combat Loggers in-game is also extremely cumbersome: you need to have noted down the CMDR's name to report them: this is a problem as I do not habitually take a note of every name I encounter on the off chance they end up logging.. The reporting system is not fit for purpose for flagging up incidents of Combat Logging.

I hadn't noticed that the Dev's thread about this subject had been unstickied.. This is extremely worrying.
Click to expand...

We could do with a combat log for the game which would help here. I dunno if its planned for the work they are doing on the APIs.
 

Jorlin

Jorlin
Hagglefoot said:
As for allowing logoff...

How about only when you are at a station or there are no other player connections to your client for over a set amount of time?
Click to expand...

Logging off is not the problem.
Killing the game process / cutting connection is.
I could do this easily even by voiceattack.
No need to pull the plug. Disabling network card or temporarily killing the default route on your pc can be done by a voice command or a programmable key.
 

Ratas

Ratas
Hagglefoot said:
As for allowing logoff...

How about only when you are at a station or there are no other player connections to your client for over a set amount of time?
Click to expand...


But if you disconnect anyway, then what? You can not stop people disconnecting when the decide to do so, only make it worse solution than staying around.

Also need to take account direct IP connections, where savvy opponent sees who you are, DoS you and it is you who pays the bill. And more commonly, how hard you'd wish to punish actual unwilling disconnects then?
 

Cosmos

C
Ancipital said:
Yes, I do, thanks for asking. I find all these "I'm going to quit over $BEEF unless someone gives me some attention" threads even more annoying than combat logging. They're almost as bad as the "HAI GUISE I GOT A GREAT IDEA WE CUD SEPARATE THE MODEZ" threads. I would far rather that you quit than made threads like this.
Click to expand...

I'd far rather Frontier fix the problem than have more people stop playing. I don't think 'I'm quitting' is a useful way to express oneself but I can understand the frustration. Everyone of my friends who I speak to about the game is complaining about combat logging.
 

Greyhawk

Greyhawk
how about:

  1. Logout timer. 20 seconds to logout, change the logout screen to a screen in your cockpit. If you suddenly D/C the game keeps your ship live for the same 20 seconds. Other players in the same battle see (CMDR joe blogs has disconnected).
  2. Interdiction Immunity. If you have been interdicted and escaped or won the battle you cannot be ID'd again for 5 minutes unless you want to toggle the ID immunity off. Only works if ID is toggled ON prior to any interdictions.
  3. Less death consequences.
 

Hagglefoot

H
Cosmos said:
I'd far rather Frontier fix the problem than have more people stop playing. I don't think 'I'm quitting' is a useful way to express oneself but I can understand the frustration. Everyone of my friends who I speak to about the game is complaining about combat logging.
Click to expand...

If people don't take action what incentive does Frontier have to fix the game? They have made it obvious it's not a priority, and a loss in income might be enough to get them to notice it. At this rate, by the time the first person expansion comes out no one will be around to see it.

Not to mention the people who come along and say "if you don't like it then quit". There is just no winning sometimes, lol.
 
Last edited:

Extreme_One

E
I keep coming back to see "what every other decent P2P game does"

None of the solutions proposed in this thread so far appear to fulfil the above and nor do they address the problem without penalising genuine accidental 'loggers'
 
Last edited:

Tuub t Tute

T
I'm not a programmer, unless you count 10 PRINT "I r l337"; 20 GOTO 10...
If the mass-lock mechanic exists, so some check is done over proximity to another vessel, relative postitions, etc and the game exerts influence depending on that: is it possible to utilise this area of coding to say "well, if there is another ship in the vicinity (regardless of mass-lock permutations), then invoke script "persistent client" meaning that any interruption from the client to the instance or matchmaking malarkey causes the "flakey" ship to fly on it's last heading and control inputs until either connection is re-established, or an arbitrary timer expires?

Apologies for run-on sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom