I do hope Season 2 helps Piracy - Today's experience just confirms to me it doesn't work very well...

[NeilF]

They could also simply start sending condescending mails to confirmed combat loggers.

The client can detect (surely) if the game exited during a "conflict scenario"?

eg: There's flag stored on your machine, "I'm in a conflict scenario/situation at the moment" (ie: if you exit now, you'd get a 15 second countdown). If when you start ED, that flag is still set, the game knows it closed/crashed at such a moment. It can then give a warning, build up a picture of how much/often it's happening, and ultimately take some action. eg: Longer and longer bans from OPEN?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes, the cost of such solution is that arbiters are additional, light-weight clients in the instance.
The gain is, the arbiter-client code could take over the CLed ships (including PvE scenario).

Presumably these "arbiter clients" would be running as part of the game client on users' computers - and would increase the data throughput for each player whose PC was chosen to run an arbiter client for another instance.

If three arbiters per instance were required, that would mean that the minimum number of P2P connections for a multi-player instance would be 10 instead of 1 - increasing the likelihood of connection issues adversely affecting the game experience of those in the instance.

If one of the arbiter-clients were to require to take on the role of the disconnected player's ship then it would require more than just a periodic heartbeat packet to perform the role.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The client can detect (surely) if the game exited during a "conflict scenario"?

eg: There's flag stored on your machine, "I'm in a conflict scenario/situation at the moment" (ie: if you exit now, you'd get a 15 second countdown). If when you start ED, that flag is still set, the game knows it closed/crashed at such a moment. It can then give a warning, build up a picture of how much/often it's happening, and ultimately take some action. eg: Longer and longer bans from OPEN?

If any such flags were stored on the machine then all that the player would need to do is uninstall / reinstall (or otherwise "cleanse" their installation) - or log back in on another PC.

 

[Derath]

Check the EULA yourself then, there is a lot of "Frontier may" in there. They simply decided that handing out punishments left and right would make it worse for everybody.

they might have simply decided they couldn't be bothered, its infinitely more plausible than it makes it worse for everyone. Its not even like they had to ban anybody they could just pretend they were doing something about it and it would lower the rate it happens at lol.

 

[Comrade Error]

If any such flags were stored on the machine then all that the player would need to do is uninstall / reinstall (or otherwise "cleanse" their installation) - or log back in on another PC.

They could be stored as a number on the acount itself. Almost like a stat lol.

 

[Robert Maynard]

They could be stored as a number on the acount itself. Almost like a stat lol.

I would expect that disconnections are already stored in some way - possibly also those when "in danger". The point that I think NeilF was making is that the server does not necessarily "know" that the particular player is "in danger" when the connection is lost (but the client does).

 

[Boomer Kay]

Check the EULA yourself then, there is a lot of "Frontier may" in there. They simply decided that handing out punishments left and right would make it worse for everybody.

I noticed.
There is punishments and there is rule enforcements.
They even have some more options than other MMO companies, with their P2P architecture. The so called "shadow ban" .. after an official, written statement, that they found rules have been broken. Some people just seem to need that.

 

[Vorthax]

Presumably these "arbiter clients" would be running as part of the game client on users' computers - and would increase the data throughput for each player whose PC was chosen to run an arbiter client for another instance.

If three arbiters per instance were required, that would mean that the minimum number of P2P connections for a multi-player instance would be 10 instead of 1 - increasing the likelihood of connection issues adversely affecting the game experience of those in the instance.

If one of the arbiter-clients were to require to take on the role of the disconnected player's ship then it would require more than just a periodic heartbeat packet to perform the role.

Yes, those "arbiter-clients" would be running on users' computers. Communication needed:
- client connects to an instance or the arbiter list has changed - data from central server
- client is selected as an arbiter by central server
- one of clients identifies a connection problem and asks all arbiters to check, every arbiter sends an echo request to all clients (UDP?)
- arbiter takes over control over a CLed ship

- all clients -> arbiter, location/state updates

they might have simply decided they couldn't be bothered, its infinitely more plausible than it makes it worse for everyone. Its not even like they had to ban anybody they could just pretend they were doing something about it and it would lower the rate it happens at lol.

They did reiterate the rules, for both CLing and player harrasment. If they start banning people, not only CLers will suffer.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Yes, those "arbiter-clients" would be running on users' computers. Communication needed:
- client connects to an instance or the arbiter list has changed - data from central server
- client is selected as an arbiter by central server
- one of clients identifies a connection problem and asks all arbiters to check, every arbiter sends an echo request to all clients (UDP?)
- arbiter takes over control over a CLed ship

- all clients -> arbiter, location/state updates

It breaks down when there's only 2 of you in an instance.

No matter how you splice and dice it, P2P simply isn't up to the task of holding CL'd ships in space - no arbiter (on a remote machine) can be trusted; anything on a remote machine should be classed as untrustworthy anyway which is why you should use P2S in the first place - less attack vectors possible.

 

[Vorthax]

It does not, see post #290.

 

[anikaiful]

It does not, see post #290.

Trusting a Client is in general a Bad Thing(TM).

 

[NeilF]

100 tonnes is the limit.

Even with 4 collection limpets, I have struggled to grab more than 80 before they expired.

Making them drop the whole amount if they fail to stop first request is a valid punishment.

Although we did make a T9 drop 300 in 100 amounts for 3 hungry condas and python once.

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

On a side note, I've never used limpets to collect that much cargo 80-100T... How long does it take? Is it painful?

 

[Comrade Error]

On a side note, I've never used limpets to collect that much cargo 80-100T... How long does it take? Is it painful?

No you just sit there. Once a T9 jettisoned all his cargo onto me and my friend by accident and then his game crashed lol.

 

[NeilF]

No you just sit there. Once a T9 jettisoned all his cargo onto me and my friend by accident and then his game crashed lol.

Understood... But 2mins of sitting there is very different to 10mins of sitting there...

And given if the victim is potentially having to wait for you do your first pickup before doing a second dump?

eg: You want him to drop 50T followed by another 50T?

 

[Boomer Kay]

No you just sit there. Once a T9 jettisoned all his cargo onto me and my friend by accident and then his game crashed lol.

I ran some tests yesterday. Jettisoned about 150 (?) limpets in a Res (had to simulate the accident ). They all stayed in the instance (as far as I could tell .. radar screen was literally litered with white dots like a cloud and it was lagging). Some exploded, because they hit the ship or something. Frickle little things. And at one point they did start to expire.

Running 3 collector limpets, I think it's about 1 pick-up per second, depending on the distance - should be close enough to speed it up, but far away enough in order to avoid damage or completely wack limpet pathing.
You can go and have a coffee .. or grog .. while they do their work - until they or the cargo expires.

I did something similar with Biowaste in front of a station and I think after the 40th or something, they startet auto exploding.

Hmm.. if they want to improve that mechanic, they could allow the "jettison all" hotkey to be configureable to a certain amount ..
(and rename it to "surrender to jolly roger pirate button, do NOT press trying to deploy your cargo scoop", but that's optional )

 

[Derath]

On a side note, I've never used limpets to collect that much cargo 80-100T... How long does it take? Is it painful?

a couple of minutes if you have three collectors and your sat above the cloud, also known as vastly quicker than trying to hoover it all up used to be.

I think even now with all the retired pirates if they had a stat for cargo scooped we'd still all be top by thousands -_- limpets are the best thing they added to the game so far lol.

 

[Comrade Error]

Understood... But 2mins of sitting there is very different to 10mins of sitting there...

And given if the victim is potentially having to wait for you do your first pickup before doing a second dump?

eg: You want him to drop 50T followed by another 50T?

My Pythons cargo hold is only 64. Could probably replace some HRPs with cargo racks for more profit in-fact I might do that but even then I don't think it will give me more than a 80t cargo hold. But yea might aswell take as much advantage of the ones that don't log as possible right?

Oh and to answer the question no I usualy ask everything above a T7 for 40 tons (as I take 20 limpets with me maybe a bit overkill aswell) and then pick it up but the ones that do comply do seem to be careful with leaving until they've been told to so if I ever take a friend in a T9 out pirating (that would make a lot of money too bad he wouldn't be able to share it with me eh?) I might tell them to stay around.

Piracy can very quickly become profitable under the right circumstances (person is flying a big ship they don't log you have plenty of cargo space and the canisters don't die)

 

[Boomer Kay]

@OP
If player pretending to be a psycho pirate decides to interdict you then cheat you that he wants cargo, only to shoot you afterwards... there is no game mechanics to prevent that behavior.
And if it happens accept it and dont combat log, or play in solo or private

This is where a meaningful "crime vs. punishment" mechanic can kick in.

If you fly a "jolly roger" and all you do is sink ships, and you gain 0 cargo, but give the "jolly roger" a bad reputation as a meaningless piece of (cool looking) cloth, because "all pirates are just mindless killers and they fly a flag that says I can live if I give them booty, but will die if I don't, but makes no difference at all", how happy will all those other pirates who respect the flag be? When every ship they bring up fights to their death, and even being untrained trade sailors, after the 4th, 5th, 10th ship, your crew will be diminuished to a point where you can't even operate your ship?
Acts of mindless slaughter should get you a bad reputation not only in the "good" part of the seas, but also limit your access to pirate harbors, if done under the guise of piracy ^^.

I don't know if we ever see such mechanics implemented. Probably not.
But if they ever do, they should make a huge marketing campaign around the update so the last T-7 pilot at the edge of the bubble goes "heh, why have I not been pirated yet by the famous Captain Obvious and his crew?" (<- requires multicrew ;P )

 

[Kristov]

Check the EULA yourself then, there is a lot of "Frontier may" in there. They simply decided that handing out punishments left and right would make it worse for everybody.

Actually, handing out punishments left and right would be better for everybody, not worse, that's a proven fact, many times over. Games with strict enforcement of the rules see no where near the amount of rule breaking, people don't do things when they KNOW they'll be punished for them very often, human nature at it's finest there. Lack of consequences, to hell with the rules. Consequences not only exist but are strictly enforced, people follow the rules very well. The BEST servers for PvP games were always the ones with the strictest rule enforcement, as anyone using hacks or exploits or griefing was removed soonest. I admin'd a number of game servers for a hosting company for a few years, we had very strict rule enforcement and we had some of the highest player numbers of all servers for the games we hosted(RtCW, BF1942, Q3, UT) and made a lot of money off them due to that(advertising).

Now, with THIS playerbase, it might present problems at first, we have way too many extremely entitled people who think that whatever they want is what they should get, rules don't apply to them. But it wouldn't take a month before that problem was self adjusted, they'd either shut up and play by the rules or be permbanned and not ever be a problem again.

People like to know the game they are playing online has rules that ARE actually enforced, otherwise, the game gets a reputation like Elite: Dangerous has, you can do whatever the hell you want, FD doesn't do a damn thing, use hacks, griefer, combat log, no worries! FD needs to stop being so damn modern British and start being more Imperial British, you step out of line, you get the lash. We'll see less of the problems within a month, I'll lay real money on that, I've seen it work every single time it's been done.

 

[Comrade Error]

This is where a meaningful "crime vs. punishment" mechanic can kick in.

If you fly a "jolly roger" and all you do is sink ships, and you gain 0 cargo, but give the "jolly roger" a bad reputation as a meaningless piece of (cool looking) cloth, because "all pirates are just mindless killers and they fly a flag that says I can live if I give them booty, but will die if I don't, but makes no difference at all", how happy will all those other pirates who respect the flag be? When every ship they bring up fights to their death, and even being untrained trade sailors, after the 4th, 5th, 10th ship, your crew will be diminuished to a point where you can't even operate your ship?
Acts of mindless slaughter should get you a bad reputation not only in the "good" part of the seas, but also limit your access to pirate harbors, if done under the guise of piracy ^^.

I don't know if we ever see such mechanics implemented. Probably not.
But if they ever do, they should make a huge marketing campaign around the update so the last T-7 pilot at the edge of the bubble goes "heh, why have I not been pirated yet by the famous Captain Obvious and his crew?" (<- requires multicrew ;P )

Question about that crime system. As it is now traders more often than not and even more often than that log. But lets say I interdicted a ship which for whatever reason is impossible or near impossible to get cargo out of (ECM point defence and all that) and they refuse to coorporate. Will I get a bunch of bad rep because I find a bunch of very difficult costumers?