Its part FD's responsibility to enforce it but we as a community share the responsibility to voice our opposition against cheating. People considering buying and playing this game may well read these forums to get a feel of how it is. They may well be put off by many things but it would be tragic if they were put off because we have a community that accepts in game cheating at any level.
Combat Loggers... how many are there!!!! What kind of punishment do they receive and when?
- Thread starter TheoZ
- Start date
- Status
Its part FD's responsibility to enforce it but we as a community share the responsibility to voice our opposition against cheating. People considering buying and playing this game may well read these forums to get a feel of how it is. They may well be put off by many things but it would be tragic if they were put off because we have a community that accepts in game cheating at any level.
never been ganked. or grifed. lost 1 pvp fight to a fdl and was fun. never had any one combat log to me..
But that does not mean i cant see them as being issues, and both things annoy me..
the reason combat logging annoys me the most is it prevents people from being vigilantes against the griefers and gankers.
Which is a big reason why it annoys me when people use griefers as a reason why they dont see combat logging as an issue. where as i see combat loging as the issue that lets griefers be griefers.
ANY WAY, to address the issues:
I have said to stop gankers / grifers (well make it less fun for them to play that way) we need to enforce a few game mechanics one of the idea's was mine the rest i cherry picked as ones that would work, and not ruin the game.."
"
Bounty is payable by the criminal. on death or expiration.
bountys are faction based and power play power based.
(if you get a bounty in hudson controlled federal space, then you have that bounty in all federal and hudson space. or for instance federal li yong rui space would give you a bounty in all federal space all li yong rui space and as extention of that some empire space to due to it also being li yong rui controlled)
killing a soft target means you also have to pay the insurance (both partys pay the insurance, with the rate being paid at the victims set insurance rate.)
'a soft target is a cmdr who is not wanted. not a hostile power play faction, and has report crimes against me set to ON'
there should be a higher NPC police presence in High security sectors "minimum wings of 3 python or better"
there should be NO npc police in lawlesss areas.
local trade and missions in the safe area should be low profit.
Safe areas should offer high paying missions to unsafe areas
unsafe areas should also have higher NPC enemy counts (more pirates/terrorist npc's, again in wings again pythons would be a good call as they have the cargo and fuel to be out and about.)
Possibly add increasing criminal levels to a person, (delinquent, menace, criminal, notorious) and increasing ranks give you a higher police presence, you also only decrease 1 rank at a time, by not killing soft targets for a week, you can however progress through the ranks to notorious pretty quickly.
"
then for combat logging i really think it should go:
loose 1/2 of what you had left of your hull divided by Shields:
hull was 100% you combat crash, shields were at 3/3 rings you lose 1/3rd of 50% (rounded up) so you lose 17% hull and come back with 0 sheilds and 83% hull.
vs
hull was 50% shields were 0/3 rings thats 50% and you dont get anything from the shields which means you come back with 25% hull and 0 rings..
Then anything lower than say 16% hull and 0/3 shields = you come back to a re buy screen.
And that is based on a crash or a combat log, "really does not matter" as long as it was in combat. And it should be the same rules vs npc's too..
Implement all of those things PROPERLY.
and the game will be better for it.
(also whilst im at it)
fail on scan missions should go away.
and npc police should demand you drop the cargo or get a wanted status. (a bounty that they will kill you for but can be paid on docking) The same bounty should be applied if you boost away from a DECLARED scan "the npc says submit to a scan".
And the interdiction mini game needs to be fixed.. there are to many "I WIN" states for both winning and losing the mini game either being interdicted or doing the interdiction. it should be more of a skill rather than "ooh screen went wobbly for no reason so now i win" or "wth i was all the way in the blue and now i lost?"
Do all THAT, and then that's a pretty good foundation to work off.
--EDIT--
i so wish i had quoted who i was replying to before i started typing this thing out.
now its done i cant find who i was replying to at all...
any way there it is whoever you are, you will probably get that its in response to your post.
But that does not mean i cant see them as being issues, and both things annoy me..
the reason combat logging annoys me the most is it prevents people from being vigilantes against the griefers and gankers.
Which is a big reason why it annoys me when people use griefers as a reason why they dont see combat logging as an issue. where as i see combat loging as the issue that lets griefers be griefers.
ANY WAY, to address the issues:
I have said to stop gankers / grifers (well make it less fun for them to play that way) we need to enforce a few game mechanics one of the idea's was mine the rest i cherry picked as ones that would work, and not ruin the game.."
"
Bounty is payable by the criminal. on death or expiration.
bountys are faction based and power play power based.
(if you get a bounty in hudson controlled federal space, then you have that bounty in all federal and hudson space. or for instance federal li yong rui space would give you a bounty in all federal space all li yong rui space and as extention of that some empire space to due to it also being li yong rui controlled)
killing a soft target means you also have to pay the insurance (both partys pay the insurance, with the rate being paid at the victims set insurance rate.)
'a soft target is a cmdr who is not wanted. not a hostile power play faction, and has report crimes against me set to ON'
there should be a higher NPC police presence in High security sectors "minimum wings of 3 python or better"
there should be NO npc police in lawlesss areas.
local trade and missions in the safe area should be low profit.
Safe areas should offer high paying missions to unsafe areas
unsafe areas should also have higher NPC enemy counts (more pirates/terrorist npc's, again in wings again pythons would be a good call as they have the cargo and fuel to be out and about.)
Possibly add increasing criminal levels to a person, (delinquent, menace, criminal, notorious) and increasing ranks give you a higher police presence, you also only decrease 1 rank at a time, by not killing soft targets for a week, you can however progress through the ranks to notorious pretty quickly.
"
then for combat logging i really think it should go:
loose 1/2 of what you had left of your hull divided by Shields:
hull was 100% you combat crash, shields were at 3/3 rings you lose 1/3rd of 50% (rounded up) so you lose 17% hull and come back with 0 sheilds and 83% hull.
vs
hull was 50% shields were 0/3 rings thats 50% and you dont get anything from the shields which means you come back with 25% hull and 0 rings..
Then anything lower than say 16% hull and 0/3 shields = you come back to a re buy screen.
And that is based on a crash or a combat log, "really does not matter" as long as it was in combat. And it should be the same rules vs npc's too..
Implement all of those things PROPERLY.
and the game will be better for it.
(also whilst im at it)
fail on scan missions should go away.
and npc police should demand you drop the cargo or get a wanted status. (a bounty that they will kill you for but can be paid on docking) The same bounty should be applied if you boost away from a DECLARED scan "the npc says submit to a scan".
And the interdiction mini game needs to be fixed.. there are to many "I WIN" states for both winning and losing the mini game either being interdicted or doing the interdiction. it should be more of a skill rather than "ooh screen went wobbly for no reason so now i win" or "wth i was all the way in the blue and now i lost?"
Do all THAT, and then that's a pretty good foundation to work off.
--EDIT--
i so wish i had quoted who i was replying to before i started typing this thing out.
now its done i cant find who i was replying to at all...
any way there it is whoever you are, you will probably get that its in response to your post.
Last edited:
Just a sec, let me call a good lawyer. I'm sure we can make the jury believe a pineapple is a healthy fruit and it was just a sorry accident. It's all a matter of perspective.
That said - I refuse to go to anger management just because I ragequit video games from time to time when they start ing me off (which isn't really often, because the games that constantly annoy me I don't play anymore). And if someone calls me a cheater for that, well - I don't really care.
Last edited:
Just to clarify Frontiers stance on Combat logging.
And as this is Frontiers official forum for the game it seems pretty clear to me.
And remember to stay civil please.
Yet according to Sandro, it is an exploit:
"Default “Combat Logging”: Update
Hello Commanders!
This is a quick update to let you guys know what we’re looking at regarding the issue of “combat logging”.
For clarity’s sake, “combat logging” is when a Commander ungracefully exits the game (e.g. using ALT + F4 then shutting down the game process) to avoid defeat, destruction and damage.
Commanders might use this exploit the moment they are interdicted or the moment before they are about to be destroyed.
Although this is flagged primarily as a multiplayer concern, the issues (and solutions) apply equally to the single player game.
First things first: we do consider this an undesirable exploit. It’s not “part of the game”."
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1642728#post1642728
"exploiting" a game mechanic "exploit" to gain a favorable outcome that should not be achievable is cheating..
im not sure what your point is.
If I want to exit a computer game then I'll bloomin' well exit that computer game. My decision to 'stop playing now' is not subject to approval by self-appointed forum arbiters, and neither is it up for judgement by some sort of automated algorithm.
If FD really cared that much about forcing people to play the game the way that they want them to then perhaps FD shouldn't have opted for the P2P solution; it's nigh on impossible to reliably diagnose the cause, much less the reason, for an ungraceful disconnection.
FD will need to tread _very_ carefully on this one.
If FD really cared that much about forcing people to play the game the way that they want them to then perhaps FD shouldn't have opted for the P2P solution; it's nigh on impossible to reliably diagnose the cause, much less the reason, for an ungraceful disconnection.
FD will need to tread _very_ carefully on this one.
He has no point other that to make himself look foolish by the looks of it.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Nobody needs to tread carefully, if you need to exit then go to menu and log out. Why would you need to end the task if you need to log out, its inexcusable.
not really i hope they stomp all over it with big hob nail boots, and if the combat loggers leave in disgust then we will call that a victory.
maybe offer them a copy of the sims as a leaving gift.
Last edited:
I've been reported for combat logging after I quit my game, then had the game 'load' for so long I got interdicted, failed, and almost died before the program closed. Was against some penii named Kinmob. Awesome fun. My menus, before I upgraded my graphics card, all took 30+ seconds to open, even the escape menu. So I always ended the task, because it was a tedious trial to quit through the menu. Press escape, wait 30 seconds. Think you didn't press it properly, press it again, it registers 2 presses, so it opens and closes, then I get to wait another 30 seconds to try again. Even now with a new graphics card, it's quicker, and has fewer button pressed, to alt tab then right click and close.
You lose all controls while menus are loading by the way. God help me if I accidentally opened the system map facing something solid.
Last edited:
Hope that Frontier will come up with a simple clear rule - combat logging is not allowed. Once you logged out, your "ghost" ship is still in the game, but dont get any damage anymore. Now the ship should just stay as a ghost stip in the system and receive damage for an addtion of 60 seconds. Of course then the whining starts "but I had a network problem". But be honest, what is percentige of people who has a network issue in the middle of the fight, already lost their shields? Guess that this is not a high percentage. But the other 99% will change quickly their attitude.
wont happen because you cant keep the ship in game as a p2p instance.
A significant percentage? I just posted an example. Australia has notoriously bad internet. Why should we be punished just because others feel butthurt when they don't get to pull the wings off of flies?
damn those internet connections that always fail when in combat, but seemingly fine to play the game otherwise.
maybe some people who cant manage a stable connection would prefer to use one of the other modes where it wouldn't punish you for being in a 3rd world country (in terms of internet).. starting to wonder why they even added other modes to be honest.
Last edited:
Most multiplayer games benefit from excluding large (if anecdotal evidence is to be believed) groups of players. It's a little-known way of turning a healthy profit.
On a (slightly) more serious point: ED has a problem with its 'crime & punishment' system as a whole, not just conceptually but also on a practical level, and that approach is manifesting itself in behaviours such as 'combat logging'. It seems that the game was developed with an 'anything goes' mindset which is being tested, to breaking point, with the advent of various issues, with combat logging being but one.
Presently the risk rests almost entirely on the shoulders of the Seal (aka. the 'victim'). There are no material consequences for behaving like a Seal Clubber. Why is it then so surprising that some Seals, when faced with such conditions, chose an ungraceful exit from that no-win situation? One might argue that it was the Seal's fault for allowing themselves to get into that situation, which is a point with some merit; or at least it would be if ED had a sensible and practical, and most importantly, transparent, Crime & Punishment system because then the hapless Seal would be equipped with the knowledge of where, when, and how to venture into certain territories. Right now it's a crapshoot, regardless of where you are.
Combat logging should remain an undesirable action, granted. (Accepting that with a P2P solution you can't reliably diagnose ungraceful disconnections, or do a whole lot about it in terms of retaining some sort of termporary presence in-game.) But FD need to understand why people do it, carefully, and address the areas of their game that are so weak that it forces decent players to do the indecent thing. (Accepting that some players will always be penii no matter what.)
There is at least some evidence that FD are thinking about such things but it seems to have gone no further than canvassing general opinion on the notion of some sort of geared Seal Clubbing consequences. It's a start but I get the impression that some sort of cockeyed ban hammer is already in the forge, being crafted to hammer flat behaviours that FD don't yet seem to want to accept are being driven by a lopsided Crime & Punishment system.
Punishing combat loggers but doing nothing about why people do it is perhaps the most short-sighted and potentially damaging solution in the history of potentially damaging solutions - relatively speaking.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
P2P is at its most fragile when Humans meet in instances. You know, often in-- you guessed it, combat. *facepalm*
Last edited:
If I remember tomorrow I will post a photo of what the local wiring looks like
Some of us *do* live in the third world.
quite shocking that it never happend to me then.
and
Most multiplayer games benefit from excluding large (if anecdotal evidence is to be believed) groups of players. It's a little-known way of turning a healthy profit.
On a (slightly) more serious point: ED has a problem with its 'crime & punishment' system as a whole, not just conceptually but also on a practical level, and that approach is manifesting itself in behaviours such as 'combat logging'. It seems that the game was developed with an 'anything goes' mindset which is being tested, to breaking point, with the advent of various issues, with combat logging being but one.
Presently the risk rests almost entirely on the shoulders of the Seal (aka. the 'victim'). There are no material consequences for behaving like a Seal Clubber. Why is it then so surprising that some Seals, when faced with such conditions, chose an ungraceful exit from that no-win situation? One might argue that it was the Seal's fault for allowing themselves to get into that situation, which is a point with some merit; or at least it would be if ED had a sensible and practical, and most importantly, transparent, Crime & Punishment system because then the hapless Seal would be equipped with the knowledge of where, when, and how to venture into certain territories. Right now it's a crapshoot, regardless of where you are.
Combat logging should remain an undesirable action, granted. (Accepting that with a P2P solution you can't reliably diagnose ungraceful disconnections, or do a whole lot about it in terms of retaining some sort of termporary presence in-game.) But FD need to understand why people do it, carefully, and address the areas of their game that are so weak that it forces decent players to do the indecent thing. (Accepting that some players will always be penii no matter what.)
There is at least some evidence that FD are thinking about such things but it seems to have gone no further than canvassing general opinion on the notion of some sort of geared Seal Clubbing consequences. It's a start but I get the impression that some sort of cockeyed ban hammer is already in the forge, being crafted to hammer flat behaviours that FD don't yet seem to want to accept are being driven by a lopsided Crime & Punishment system.
Punishing combat loggers but doing nothing about why people do it is perhaps the most short-sighted and potentially damaging solution in the history of potentially damaging solutions - relatively speaking.
this quote should do fine as a reply to that part..
Last edited:
Why would combat logging against NPCs not be an exploit? Ah wait, I see - there's noone to report someone shrank their PvP peen.
- Status