Combat logging, reasons why its happening and solution

[Straha Yeagar]

OR Here's a thought: What if PVP encounters means that there is no insurance rebuy you just teleport back to the last station when your ship is destroyed. Another compromise that might make PVP encounters more popular and enjoyable. You lose your cargo that's all. I'm fine with that. The only gotcha with that come to think of it is if an explorer is returning from SAG A.. Then well I don't know

Allow explorers to transmit their exploration data in real time from a range of say 500 or 1000LY from what ever station they want to sell it at.

 

[Quiquag]

I would rather have quality over quantity.

Then you will be the only player in open, because there is no quality options for truckers or players in low level ships.

As it stands right now, I already avoid open, because there is no compelling reason to join it. I'm all for PvP, but as the is right now if I'm in anything other than my kitted out FDL I'd be stupid to join open, because I risk getting ganked for no reason. And it's the "No Reason" part that is the problem.
If it's for power play? That makes sense.
if it's for my cargo? That makes sense.
If it's Fed vs. Empire? That STILL makes sense.

But there are NO in game mechanics to help prevent getting ganked for no reason, and no punishment for the guy that does it. It would be stupid for me to join open, because to do so is to be actively punished for doing so, as opposed to being rewarded with a coherant gameplay mechanic.

The game is unfinished, and until it is, I wish people would stop complaining about not being allowed to gank people. Because any time I see a combat log thread, that is how it reads. "I couldn't blow up a helpless T7 in my combat conda because he left! I didn't want his cargo, I just wanted him to suffer! WAH!".

 

[dubsdj]

OR Here's a thought: What if PVP encounters means that there is no insurance rebuy you just teleport back to the last station when your ship is destroyed. Another compromise that might make PVP encounters more popular and enjoyable. You lose your cargo that's all. I'm fine with that. The only gotcha with that come to think of it is if an explorer is returning from SAG A.. Then well I don't know

If FD can detect somehow that it is a PVP and not an NPC then this might be workable.

 

[obliterator]

Hello commanders,

the forum gets overheated whenever a thread regarding combat logging appears.

Real life happens, there are situations, when you simply must quit & go... Yes, it can happen even during combat situation. People got used to abuse it - combat log.

FD gave us a 15 seconds timer, which is now more than sufficient, because it takes a lot less time to blow up traders ship with modded weapons.



I have read the "CEIL" thread (https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/284757-Combat-logging-experiment-in-Cail-Results) and many voiced their understanding, why those poor defenseless traders combat logged out of the game.



Simple solution to this mess is this:
Deploying hardpoints is now way too fast. It should take 3x-5x times longer... It would allow the trader at least go through FSD cooldown without taking damage from the attacker.

If its "too harsh" to generalize that long time for hardpoint deployment, this could affect only the ship, which has initiated the interdiction (and add to the lore respectively - e.g. interdictor overheats the ships surface, so it is not safe to deploy hardpoints to prevent damage or something like this to make it believable and consistent)


I think that this would give traders a little more breathing space and a chance to escape psychopath roleplaying commanders... People might wanna try more to escape instead of loging off...



Please don`t burn me alive, but I would like to hear your opinions

Karlos

So your solution to combat logging is to make it impossible to die. Nice.

I'm fine with that since I'm a pirate, but I'm not sure how other PvPer feel about that, I can see a valid complaint against inconsequential destruction and death penalty, though.

Maybe instead of free insurance they could simply reduce the cost.

 

[dubsdj]

So your solution to combat logging is to make it impossible to die. Nice.

Already impossible to die you eject out of
your ship on destruction.

 

[Zambrick]

Chaff PODs and ECMs do not really work as they once used to. Most of the time when you get killed its because a FDL boosts up close to you in seconds after the interdiction and you are partially mass locked.

Next thing that occurs is you are hit with a heat beam that bypasses your shield and cooks everything important. Or my favorite a modified plasma accelerator that does the same thing but also knocks of 25% of your hull or more in one shot.

You have 2 choices in the trade vessels T-6 through T-9. You can sacrifice a huge portion of your cargo space for the largest shield you can carry. At best having 2 shield boosters one POD and one Chaff you end up with a little over 500 MJ of shield. So to offset that you have to take Higher quality Armor. The T9 jump range plummets. I would take an hour or longer just to jump 100 LYs.

Even if you have the best armor and shield it really doesnt matter. Weapons bypass shields and Hull is only ever targeted once engines or power plants have been disabled.

So the supposed best and largest dedicated trade vessel in the game cannot even hope to survive. Defensive weapons are a joke and as I said almost all of the countermeasures barely work. They only really work against NPCs.

With shield and armor combined a T9 will get around 1500 total toughness. At the cost of the ability to jump any meaningful distance and the cost of any way to escape an interdiction. So now you are big slow and dead in a fight. at best you might be able to get around 18 to 20ly which isnt bad. But you will have to hope for the best roll you can get at the Engineer.

 

[CMDR Kantos Kan]

Indeed, and if we balance everything toward counter ganksquad, we will make solo piracy or even group piracy impossible and more difficult (I appreciate challenge but I fear for the learning curve) respectively. We need to solve the root of the issue which is inconsequential ganking/clean ship destruction.

I think combat should be determined by skills and, to some extent, your ship load out (I don't expect a Sidewinder to take on a Corvette). It should't be based on who has the more packhounds with thermal cascade. That reminds me something from a few months ago... let's see, ah yes! I remember now. Shield Cell Banks. A few months ago, combats were down to who had the most SCBs. Now, it is who packs the most missiles with thermal cascade.

It seems to me that this doesn't make for challenging combats. You're overpowering your opponent and quickly destroy him or, if he's quick, he will high wake. There is almost no combat at all. Now, in my opinion, if I think I might have a chance in a combat, I'll try it. But as soon as I see signs of thermal heat buildup, I run. Isn't it what most pvp'ers would like, some challenge? But the way that things have been turned on their head with the engineers' mods is a slugfest or a run-for-your-life fest. It doesn't encourage good combats, IMHO...

 

[Quiquag]

I'm fine with that since I'm a pirate, but I'm not sure how other PvPer feel about that, I can see a valid complaint against inconsequential destruction and death penalty, though.

If your a pirate, that's different. The problem is as a trucker my assumption would be (no matter WHAT you say in chat) that if you are pulling me out of SC, I'm going to be shot at the moment I'm in your sights, and because the risk for me staying in game is great (read: loss of cargo + insurance) and your risk is quite literally zero (is there any risk to being a pirate at all? Security forces are a joke, and can easily be evaded or destroyed after you finish killing me) ... it would be stupid for me to hang around.

Now if the risk part changed for a player killing me, as in if a player ripped me out of SC and I assumed he wanted my cargo because he'd be STUPID to kill me...then yea, I'd stay in game and play along and call it a loss in profits. But that's not the case, and that's why I play in Mobius.

I think that's the core of it. We need mechanics to stop mindless player kills, so that the atmosphere in the game changes to where I can identify a mindless murderer vs a player pirate. Right now, my assumption is every player in a combat ship in open is the former. Past that we need system security to mean something.

 

[Zaggeron]

OR Here's a thought: What if PVP encounters means that there is no insurance rebuy you just teleport back to the last station when your ship is destroyed. Another compromise that might make PVP encounters more popular and enjoyable. You lose your cargo that's all. I'm fine with that. The only gotcha with that come to think of it is if an explorer is returning from SAG A.. Then well I don't know

I don't think you have to go that far. I bet some sort of time sink for a death instead of a rebuy is workable and if done right could be hugely immersive -- e.g. an after death salvage mission. Since you could still lose your cargo that might make for interesting decisions -- fight vs. flight vs. hand over some cargo. I'd go back to Open in an instant if there were some game mechanic involved in regaining your ship after death instead of just ponying up the cash

 

[CMDR Kantos Kan]

I don't think you have to go that far. I bet some sort of time sink for a death instead of a rebuy is workable and if done right could be hugely immersive -- e.g. an after death salvage mission. Since you could still lose your cargo that might make for interesting decisions -- fight vs. flight vs. hand over some cargo. I'd go back to Open in an instant if there were some game mechanic involved in regaining your ship after death instead of just ponying up the cash

That's an interesting idea. I've seen something similar in another game that I forget, WoW, perhaps, where if you can find your body, you can retrieve your equipment.

 

[Jypson]

That's an interesting idea. I've seen something similar in another game that I forget, WoW, perhaps, where if you can find your body, you can retrieve your equipment.

With Demon/Dark Souls, you get your "XP" back...if you don't die again first.

 

[GluttonyFang]

How does the ED game detect combat logging?
Sure, the software can detect disconnections like someone pulling the plug or some road worker slicing through a comms cable; but it cannot distinguish between the two events.
And how does the ED software suite detect when a player is in combat? What state or states of the ED software with respect to a player, can be used to determine what is or is not a state of combat?
Are we to consider 2 or more Commanders? Or what?
The only thing I can think of that has some tiny traction is this: is a ship taking hits on the shield or hull? By weaponry or by ramming? And who's doing the ramming? Friendly fire?
It's practically unsolvable.[knocked out]

FD came out and stated that they can distinguish via telemetry records, though I'm not a network expert.

 

[Quiquag]

I don't think you have to go that far. I bet some sort of time sink for a death instead of a rebuy is workable and if done right could be hugely immersive -- e.g. an after death salvage mission. Since you could still lose your cargo that might make for interesting decisions -- fight vs. flight vs. hand over some cargo. I'd go back to Open in an instant if there were some game mechanic involved in regaining your ship after death instead of just ponying up the cash

If paired with meaningful system security....yes.
Then if I die in an anarchy system...probably a write off. But if I die in a high security system, I can safely assume that the player killer would have been either destroyed or forced to flee the system.

 

[Zambrick]

They could try to break down armaments down by ship roll. You get specialized armor defense/offense and shields based off of the ship.

If you are in a multi roll ship you have to choose the type of armor you want. Combat armor will allow you to use all Hard points on the ship for weapons. Trade armor is lighter and stronger than combat armor but what it does is drop the ships hard points down to 2 small Hard points maximum. The rest of the hard points get converted Utility mounts.

Exploration armor will be the middle ground of combat and lightness.

The pure combat exploration or trade ships will only have access to that type of armor. That could do a little in order to balance the ship types.

 

[Zaggeron]

That's an interesting idea. I've seen something similar in another game that I forget, WoW, perhaps, where if you can find your body, you can retrieve your equipment.

Also Dark Souls to add a better class of game to the comparison =)

 

[Straha Yeagar]

If your a pirate, that's different. The problem is as a trucker my assumption would be (no matter WHAT you say in chat) that if you are pulling me out of SC, I'm going to be shot at the moment I'm in your sights, and because the risk for me staying in game is great (read: loss of cargo + insurance) and your risk is quite literally zero (is there any risk to being a pirate at all? Security forces are a joke, and can easily be evaded or destroyed after you finish killing me) ... it would be stupid for me to hang around.

Now if the risk part changed for a player killing me, as in if a player ripped me out of SC and I assumed he wanted my cargo because he'd be STUPID to kill me...then yea, I'd stay in game and play along and call it a loss in profits. But that's not the case, and that's why I play in Mobius.

A truly rapid, as in seconds of first shots fired, and overwhelming security response, as in a coupld of Anacondas, and about a dozen Vipers and Eagles, with security ships having all the top engineer mods...but, but, but...then what is stopping the cargo ship from totally ignoring the pirate...

So what would be a feasible risk to disuade the ganker, and separate them from a genuine, honorable pirate?

 

[GluttonyFang]

Then you will be the only player in open, because there is no quality options for truckers or players in low level ships.

As it stands right now, I already avoid open, because there is no compelling reason to join it. I'm all for PvP, but as the is right now if I'm in anything other than my kitted out FDL I'd be stupid to join open, because I risk getting ganked for no reason. And it's the "No Reason" part that is the problem.
If it's for power play? That makes sense.
if it's for my cargo? That makes sense.
If it's Fed vs. Empire? That STILL makes sense.

But there are NO in game mechanics to help prevent getting ganked for no reason, and no punishment for the guy that does it. It would be stupid for me to join open, because to do so is to be actively punished for doing so, as opposed to being rewarded with a coherant gameplay mechanic.

The game is unfinished, and until it is, I wish people would stop complaining about not being allowed to gank people. Because any time I see a combat log thread, that is how it reads. "I couldn't blow up a helpless T7 in my combat conda because he left! I didn't want his cargo, I just wanted him to suffer! WAH!".

What I mean by quality is that crime and punishment gets properly sorted out. Those that will CL no matter what gets kicked out of Open for good.

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

I think combat should be determined by skills and, to some extent, your ship load out (I don't expect a Sidewinder to take on a Corvette). It should't be based on who has the more packhounds with thermal cascade. That reminds me something from a few months ago... let's see, ah yes! I remember now. Shield Cell Banks. A few months ago, combats were down to who had the most SCBs. Now, it is who packs the most missiles with thermal cascade.

It seems to me that this doesn't make for challenging combats. You're overpowering your opponent and quickly destroy him or, if he's quick, he will high wake. There is almost no combat at all. Now, in my opinion, if I think I might have a chance in a combat, I'll try it. But as soon as I see signs of thermal heat buildup, I run. Isn't it what most pvp'ers would like, some challenge? But the way that things have been turned on their head with the engineers' mods is a slugfest or a run-for-your-life fest. It doesn't encourage good combats, IMHO...

Trust me, I hate thermal cascade and shock I never used either of them against any Cmdr (outside of beta testing) and have been pushing for nerf against them for a while now.

 

[Quiquag]

In a high security system that sounds about right.
In anarchy, there wouldn't be a response.
Then the pirate has to be careful too, and the trader can plot his route according to what he wishes.

 

[Martind Forlon]

Imo traders which want avoid CL (and want play in open) have VERY limited choice what ship they can use (if they care about ship decent defence).

 

[Zambrick]

If you can get afford a Tradaconda its the safest ship that offers the most options for defense. Most people cant afford those so they either quit the game or play in solo only.