Page 3 of 119 FirstFirst 123458 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1778

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: An Investigation Into Frontier's Actions on Combat Logging, Part 2

  1. #31
    Oh man, this post just angered some grandpas! They're going to get so mad when they see the letters "SDC" and an indictment of their own cheating playstyles, alongside an indictment of Fdev for effectively defending it and lying about it. Lmao omg the level of 1984 REEEEEEEEEEEE in this forum is about to skyrocket.

  2. #32


    Justification of cheating while bringing up the resolved engineers exploit issue to try to tarnish the OP with a strawman?

    Good work Frontier Forums alumni. Perhaps to conclude we can shunt this off quietly into a corner to die like we do with anything that rocks the status quo boat?

  3. #33
    Originally Posted by Julio Montega View Post (Source)
    Well FD did take an action by removing the modules,
    the least they could to to combat proven clogging is to impound
    a rebuy.

    Your points can just be reflected and directed towards people
    using clogging aswell.
    It is a two sided sword,
    careful what you ask for.

    I for one welcome an investigation in these topics,
    however i strongly dislike the abolishment of these discussion
    by turning them into a feces slinging fest.
    Stay factual and evaluate the test,
    constructive criticism is a boon, not a doom.
    I'm not "asking" for anything. I'm accepting that FD's choice in using a P2P architecture instead of a server-client model has consequences for the gameplay. Combat logging is one of those consequences. It can't be "fixed" at this point. FD has to use other methods to "incentivise" players from using it because they have no way to reliably identify or "punish" it.

    SDC doesn't even understand the limitation of the game that they're complaining about.

  4. #34
    Originally Posted by GG7 View Post (Source)
    Nope.

    Frontier NEVER OFFICIALLY came out and provided "any" details on what was done and which ships/players (if any) were actually removed from the game.

    I have encountered ships that were obviously running just such exploited upgrades long after FDev "supposedly" eliminated the problem. I also know of none of the "well known" participants in these exploits having their account banned or otherwise removed from the community.
    Why should Frontier do that in the first place?
    They would harm privacy and openly name and shame the person,
    it is understandable that these actions were not made publicly.

    Therefore i welcome the test here,
    putting oneself in the firing line to prove
    or disprove a course of action.

    ------------------------------------
    General:
    As i can see the thread is young
    but we already have reached a very
    kindergarden attitude again.
    Please dear mods do not close the thread,
    but do your job and get people into the line of discussion
    that is fruitful and beneficial.

  5. #35
    Originally Posted by Verax View Post (Source)
    Oh man, this post just angered some grandpas! They're going to get so mad when they see the letters "SDC" and an indictment of their own cheating playstyles, alongside an indictment of Fdev for effectively defending it and lying about it. Lmao omg the level of 1984 REEEEEEEEEEEE in this forum is about to skyrocket.

    I just want to see a proper experiment...and results. So now, everyone knows they can pull the plug once per month and not have to worry about getting caught! They need to up the ante with more accounts until they reach a level where they are guaranteed to get banned...and then, please publish that number!

  6. #36
    Originally Posted by Devari View Post (Source)
    So let me get this straight. PvP groups cheated for over a year with the Engineering exploit, griefed players with those illegally-obtained mods, and all that happened was that those specific mods were removed. The players who suffered losses from that griefing were never compensated in any way. Yet somehow these same PvP groups expect FD to "punish" players for combat logging when the game remains inherently unstable and actually "proving" that it was intentional rather than a game crash is not actually possible until the game stability issue are addressed.

    Sorry, but if you cheat then you lose all credibility in asking FD to "enforce" certain rules for you when you couldn't follow the game rules yourself.

    I think I have a meme for this.

    https://i.imgur.com/VG1PfEo.jpg
    Yes... Bet ED is so full of exploits its hard to know which one they will actually start to care about and when.

    The engineer issue was reported and ignored.. So many figured.. hey, its just like all the others ones and its fair game

    If you have EVER stacked missions by rolling modes, please leave your ivory tower and close the door on the way out.

    Using the above rolling and exploit that was 17 Draconis, I made over 5 billion by watching netflix and dumbfiring at skimmers..

    But.. I still have my money because... well... Thats ED for you

  7. #37
    Originally Posted by equex View Post (Source)
    bohoo seal clubbers club is upset
    FDEV will be upset when this story gets out making their game look bad...

  8. #38
    Originally Posted by Eent Tredison View Post (Source)
    Can't wait for white knights to defend cheating again.
    The irony of this post coming from an SDC member is gold, pure gold!

    I do have a question though. I’m admittedly not very up to snuff on PvP or CL’ing as I’m a peaceful Mobius player, but couldn’t the PvP players just block people confirmed as combat loggers so that they never come across them in Open again? Peaceful players block griefers and that seems to do a decent job of it, wouldn’t the same tactic in reverse do a decent job of ensuring that player killers would never again cross paths with the cheaters?

  9. #39
    Originally Posted by Goose4291 View Post (Source)
    https://media.giphy.com/media/YPIrsRqqO7oB2/giphy.gif

    Justification of cheating while bringing up the resolved engineers exploit issue to try to tarnish the OP with a strawman?

    Good work Frontier Forums alumni. Perhaps to conclude we can shunt this off quietly into a corner to die like we do with anything that rocks the status quo boat?
    If this thread was a study on human behaviour,
    we would see true to the old saying:
    "How a person reacts and writes,
    paints a clear image of himself."

  10. #40
    Originally Posted by Verax View Post (Source)
    Oh man, this post just angered some grandpas! They're going to get so mad when they see the letters "SDC" and an indictment of their own cheating playstyles, alongside an indictment of Fdev for effectively defending it and lying about it. Lmao omg the level of 1984 REEEEEEEEEEEE in this forum is about to skyrocket.
    The "Tumble Weeds" you see in your typical OPEN session is actually the community's response to PvP in Elite Dangerous. Most prefer not to bother even going there considering it's tarnished reputation for "continuing" to be an unaddressed haven for cheaters.

    This is why SOLO and Private Groups are far more popular.

  11. #41
    Originally Posted by Julio Montega View Post (Source)
    Why should Frontier do that in the first place?
    They would harm privacy and openly name and shame the person,
    it is understandable that these actions were not made publicly.

    Therefore i welcome the test here,
    putting oneself in the firing line to prove
    or disprove a course of action.

    ------------------------------------
    General:
    As i can see the thread is young
    but we already have reached a very
    kindergarden attitude again.
    Please dear mods do not close the thread,
    but do your job and get people into the line of discussion
    that is fruitful and beneficial.

    But Julio, this 'test' is the bare minimum of a test...5 logs in 5 months..really? That's just normal failure of connection for this game. Regardless of the tickets. Everyone knows there is not a 'zero tolerance' for this stuff, because the networking is just to spotty. Get 10-20 people and have ranges equivalent to logs/week and per day and see where the cutoff is...and find out if its consistent or not. This result is not surprising, because the devs already stated there has to be clear evidence...and these numbers are not statistically important!

  12. #42
    I don't see it as unreasonable to ask for more transparency from Fdev on this.

  13. #43
    So FDEV ignored some more faked reports of combat logging from SDC.

    Well done FDEV.

  14. #44
    Originally Posted by Roybe View Post (Source)
    But Julio, this 'test' is the bare minimum of a test...5 logs in 5 months..really? That's just normal failure of connection for this game. Regardless of the tickets. Everyone knows there is not a 'zero tolerance' for this stuff, because the networking is just to spotty. Get 10-20 people and have ranges equivalent to logs/week and per day and see where the cutoff is...and find out if its consistent or not. This result is not surprising, because they devs already state there has to be clear evidence...and these numbers are not statistically important!
    I do agree on the criticism of the method to test out the reaction,
    but i get the idea behind the pacing of the testers, too.

    I wonder if the test CMDR did continue to play the game
    after a clog, by joining in on solo or PG again.
    However, i too criticize, that to get better results
    more often clogging would be needed to fill a record,
    best suited at a trade-cg or such, to resemble interaction
    in vivid areas.

    I take this test as testing out the minimum factor
    for any reaction from FD.
    Testing out stuff, especially controversial topics as this one
    is a frustrating matter and experience.

  15. #45
    Originally Posted by Rockyrocket View Post (Source)
    I don't see it as unreasonable to ask for more transparency from Fdev on this.
    Bingo! That's really all people want - is this actually something that FDev cares about, or is it something that they just allow? Either pursue the actions you say you will, or just state the operational truth that it doesn't matter to you.

Page 3 of 119 FirstFirst 123458 ... LastLast