An investigation into Frontier's actions on Combat Logging

[Lateralus]

I find it interesting that so many players (particularly on this forum) get their feathers ruffled by threads criticising combat logging or FDev for not dealing with it. If you're PvE/solo only why get involved with the debate? ...unless you don't want it dealt with of course.

And also, if Fdev have been fibbing about their procedure for punishing these cheats, that is a major cause for concern. Glad this test was done, combat logging has become a blight on this game - now we have a clearer picture as to why.

 

[xdeath]

You know Frontier has a history of not delivering upon promises even when it involves money. It may not affect you now but it may well do in the future.

I know, that is what I just said.

White knighting for poor behaviour is something you should ask yourself about.

I really love when people resort to... well, I don't want to call it name calling, so instead I will call it "this behaviour"... when they can't make a good argument.
I'm not defending Combat Logging. I'm saying that is not what this thread is about.

I get a feeling from this post, Cosmos, that you have no real idea of what is going on in this thread and are just lashing out at anyone and everything. Jumping on the hate bandwagon without really understanding what it is for. What should we call that? Black Knighting?

 

[StuartGT]

I don't think there is a "fix", this is one of the problems.

OP (SDC?) wants Frontier to come out and say there is no fix, this way everyone can combat log!

That's surprisingly blinkered. Here's off the top of my head what FDev should do, in stages...

1. Do as originally stated and watch the videos of combat loggers, cheaters, exploiters, etc., so as to show your community that you listen
2. Do as originally stated and take action on the proven combat loggers, cheaters, exploiters, etc. using provided evidence and server logs/tracking
3. Announce the planning of solution to discourage the practice in future, monitoring of it etc, and punish those who do it repeatedly (yes, all these are possible if you've paid attention)
4. Implement said solution
5. Media announcement of said solution once deployed. PROFIT

 

[Cosmos]

I don't think were going to get some player replacement server to take over on exit if that's what you are thinking.



Gotta say I think that's entirely in your head.

I think you intentionally choose to paint much of what you see in a negative light.

Frontier have renaged upon enough over the years I've been involved here for this not just to be a figment of my imagination.

For example, several KS commitments have not been honoured, they sold alpha access years ago and then shafted those who paid for it.. I'm still waitng for the DDF god like powers, etc..

For instance when you say you can't take any comment from a volunteer moderator seriously.

If you think people are using their free time for this purely out of the goodness of their heart you have your head in the sand bud.

 

[Oddisee]

I have a couple of questions on this:

1) Firstly, can they be absolutely 100% sure that FD didn't view the video? Do all views get logged even if the viewer was using some kind of anonymity techniques?

2) Were the tests conducted and reported multiple times against the same account? To me, it's pretty obvious that FD are not going to take any action against any player for a single (or even several) reports of combat logging.

Fundamentally, video evidence or not, it's impossible to conclusively prove that someone combat logged in a single case, since they can just say their internet went down, and no telemetry or video evidence can prove otherwise unless FD have a camera in their house.

Seems to me, the only way FD can handle this (if at all) is to track all reports of combat logging, and then look at it further when the same commander is reported multiple or many times. They probably have a limit on which they only look into it if the same player is reported more than x times, and x is probably quite a high number like 10 or more.

So it may also be that your tests didn't trigger the number of required reports against a single account to warrant further action. Until it hits that trigger, there is no point reviewing video evidence. Granted, if the person admitted to combat logging in the chat, and that was shown in the video, that is bigger evidence, but I highly doubt that they would operate a single strike policy anyway - even if the person admitted it they probably wouldn't ban them until they did multiple offences.

Also, you don't say whether perhaps the person doing this in the first case didn't even realize it was against the game rules.

Edit: Personally, I don't like Combat Logging and I personally wouldn't have an issue with a system where if you combat log when you are in combat, you lose your ship. You would then be allowed a number of "get out of jail" cards per year where you can get your ship reinstated - this should cover you for when the disconnect was truly not your fault. Personally I would be ok with that, but then I have a good connection. If you have a really dodgy connection, probably you won't like that solution.

It's not about whether they logged or not, it's about FDev not even viewing the evidence to make that conclusion and then lying about it.

 

[Asp Explorer]

That's surprisingly blinkered. Here's off the top of my head, in stages...

1. Do as originally stated and watch the videos of combat loggers, cheaters, exploiters, etc., so as to show your community that you listen
2. Do as originally stated and take action on the proven combat loggers, cheaters, exploiters, etc. using provided evidence and server logs/tracking
3. Announce the planning of solution to discourage the practice in future, monitoring of it etc, and punish those who do it repeatedly (yes, all these are possible if you've paid attention)
4. Implement said solution
5. Media announcement of new solution. PROFIT

Not possible I'm afraid. FD have no way of knowing wether someones switch is developing a bad port, their neighbour is holding a microwave party, or a fibre landfall somewhere just had a boat crash into it.

Also - video evidence in Elite means absolutely nothing as far as proving combat logging - when the players taking the video can quite easily cut the connection to their victim and make it look like they combat logged when in fact, they are still connected and now either looking at the matchmaker error screen or stuck in a sound loop while they get re-routed.

 

[Lateralus]

Not possible I'm afraid. FD have no way of knowing wether someones switch is developing a bad port, their neighbour is holding a microwave party, or a fibre landfall somewhere just had a boat crash into it.

Patterns can be seen... if someone disappears at the crucial moment every time they are in trouble there is no doubt they are cheating. Also why would they claim to have a procedure if it was impossible to deal with?

 

[bitstorm]

That's surprisingly blinkered. Here's off the top of my head what FDev should do, in stages...

1. Do as originally stated and watch the videos of combat loggers, cheaters, exploiters, etc., so as to show your community that you listen
2. Do as originally stated and take action on the proven combat loggers, cheaters, exploiters, etc. using provided evidence and server logs/tracking
3. Announce the planning of solution to discourage the practice in future, monitoring of it etc, and punish those who do it repeatedly (yes, all these are possible if you've paid attention)
4. Implement said solution
5. Media announcement of said solution once deployed. PROFIT

Well we were talking about technical solutions.

But if were talking about what should be done, for me all the above is secondary, the scope of the issue is much wider.

The PvP playerbase is a small minority compared to the PvE playerbase, punishing (I'd assume) PvE players, while PvP players go unpunished due to no effective crime/punishement system means you're onto a loser and so is probably not the not the way ahead.

Some level of effective crime/punishment for killing players needs to be in place before you start with the hammer to force people to take losses in a situation they can do absolutely nothing about.

People log because they're of the mindset that why should they incur a large loss against a PvP player in a ship engineered to hell to kill them as fast as is humanly possible (or perhaps a full wing) that they stand no chance against, while that player gets away with it scott free, and has been at it for years with zero repercussions. It really does get tiresome after a while.

 

[SamSlade]

not buying any more FDev products

 

[Oddisee]

This this this.


How large do you think FDevs support team is? How many tickets do they get a day?
Back, when Sandro made that post, a little over a month into release, it was probably much more practical to deal with it.
Now, it is different.

They'd have more time to take care of actual tickets if people stopped putting in stupid tickets because they got "griefed" in open or lost their ship because "NPC's are too strong."

- - - Updated - - -

Well we were talking about technical solutions.

But if were talking about what should be done, for me all the above is secondary, the scope of the issue is much wider.

The PvP playerbase is a small minority compared to the PvE playerbase, punishing (I'd assume) PvE players, while PvP players go unpunished due to no effective crime/punishement system means you're you're onto a loser and is not the way ahead.

Some level of effective crime/punishment for killing players needs to be in place before you start with the hammer.

People log because they're of the mindset that why should they incur a large loss against a engineered to hell PvP player or wing that they stand no chance against, while that player gets away with it scott free, and has been at it for years with zero repercussions.

People log because they're bad at the game, it's that simple. Any decent player can high-wake/low-wake given the situation. Breaking the rules because you don't agree with game mechanics isn't how you deal with it.

 

[bitstorm]

If you think people are using their free time for this purely out of the goodness of their heart you have your head in the sand bud.

I have no idea what you're trying to imply with that.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Patterns can be seen... if someone disappears at the crucial moment every time they are in trouble there is no doubt they are cheating. Also why would they claim to have a procedure if it was impossible to deal with?

Patterns are not proof - and it's very easy to engineer up some dungware to get your machine to throw legitimate errors when conditions A and B are met.

 

[bitstorm]

People log because they're bad at the game, it's that simple. Any decent player can high-wake/low-wake given the situation. Breaking the rules because you don't agree with game mechanics isn't how you deal with it.

Ah the get good argument.

 

[xdeath]

Patterns can be seen... if someone disappears at the crucial moment every time they are in trouble there is no doubt they are cheating. Also why would they claim to have a procedure if it was impossible to deal with?

Two year old claim... almost.

From my understanding, that is harder to do with it being P2P.

 

[Gunnet]

Patterns can be seen... if someone disappears at the crucial moment every time they are in trouble there is no doubt they are cheating. Also why would they claim to have a procedure if it was impossible to deal with?

Patterns can also be generated. As has been said many times before, thanks to P2P networking either player can disconnect from the other without Frontier being able to tell which one did it. How would Frontier deal with certain groups making lists of players which they will always disconnect from in order to create the illusion of that player persistently combat logging?

 

[Asp Explorer]

Result, every time.

It is a bit strange isn't it. You would have thought that after all this time, something so insignificant and meaningless would have been utterly forgotten.

 

[Cupcake]

FD would not comment on any activity anyway. They would keep it under wraps just as they don;t allow 'naming & shaming' here on the forums.

At best your 'evidence' is one tiny notch above anecdotal. It suggests a response along the lines of 'Cool story, Brah'.

As to FD lying, that's crazy. FD said they are developing ways to monitor logging, not that they could tell when someone combat logged. You have a skewed perspective and it shows in your post.

You are providing opinion but are faced with facts, I am willing to bet that there is no smoke without fire.

 

[Monoceros]

not buying any more FDev products

Your loss...

 

[bitstorm]

It is a bit strange isn't it. You would have thought that after all this time, something so insignificant and meaningless would have been utterly forgotten.

Ah sure but just by coincidence in Galnet today : https://community.elitedangerous.com/galnet/uid/583436209657ba455a3c0b9d

Meanwhile, the following starports are on the brink of closure:

Dogmaa, Wolfberg

Only reason I mentioned it was the SDC "second in command" PR guy saying the majority of people on here are dumb.

I dunno maybe they are or maybe they aren't, but they are at least persistent it seems.

 

[Truesilver]

Props to the Op and repped for the work that has gone into approaching this in a systematic way.

I have reported scores of loggers via the in-game report function, often offering video 'if required'. Never had a follow-up request.

I think perhaps the one thing that the Op's investigation hasn't dealt with is what would have happened if, say, the same guy or alt account was reported three times over a couple of weeks?

Then we might have a better idea of whether FDev are employing a system based on the number of flags, eg flag 1, do nothing but note for future reference, flag x, do something.

Here I might be being generous of course, idk, but it would be interesting.

As it is I agree with the others that have said that FDev need to tell the player base what the position is. I'd like to know whether my in-game reports have a purpose.