A simple fix [semi fix] to combat logging!

[Derath]

Can we not do the "You can't do anything against stronger Commanders so you have to club noobs", because down that path lies the "ignore" button, and usually, you post a lot that I like to read.

Many of the people who complain about combat logging aren't there to club noobs, they won't be in the starter systems and they aren't interested in ships below a certain size. That aside if your perception of a stronger commander is one higher up in the combat hierarchy then yes you can't do anything to them - now with 2.1 that might actually change and is genuinely an exciting premise but as it currently stands a ship has to both be faster than and masslock your target if you want to have any chance of forcing an interaction, be that as a psycho or a pirate.

If you want to ignore me for something that is just a combination of gameplay elements not related to the players then go ahead , it won't change its validity.

I don't really understand the cowardice = bullying, living to fight another day = bad piece, If your referring to clubbing people in worse ships again I can assure you people in better ships combat log, there just hasn't been a reason for interactions like that since they lowered repair costs to be considerably below feasible cargo returns, it is cheaper by far to take 20% hull damage in an anaconda than it is to drop 50t of gold.

Edit: I wouldn't ever promote griefing or ideas associated with it anyway, if I had it my way they would just ban people who grief in the starter zones whether psychos are legitimate gameplay or not, they'd get the picture fairly fast and find something new to do. I'd hate this game If i started now and i got trashed by some FDL while i was cruising in my sidey.

 

[Dave1235]

/serious hat on.
I agree fd should have included a pve open mode from the start. It wouldn't stop pvpers combat logging(only private groups can solve that imo)if they are losing but it would remove a lot of people that like meeting others but not fighting with them from the equation.

 

[tawittle]

The best thing to do IMO would be first of all to add incentive to playing in open by adding extra PP rewards. Raise the amount of merits per kill in open, or reduce the number in solo/private.

Then change the 15 second timer to a 60 second timer if you are being attacked by players. That way you force players to have to pull the plug to combat log, instead of just using the UI (this will make combat logging harder, and also make it seem less legitimate)

we don't need a huge change and we don't need FD to punish combat loggers, we just need FD to do SOMETHING. ANYTHING.

 

[Nim Rodel]

Lol that will really annoy the people that dont understand the difference between combat logging and a graceful exit as stated by Sandro

Could you please provide a link to Sandro's most recent remarks on the "graceful" exit? I'm genuinely curious what his actual stance on it is.

Flies out exploring in Open. Gets 5000Ly out and realises I'm in the wrong mode for High-Res screenshots.
Flies back.
Flies 15,000Ly out in solo.
Gets a fuel rat signal.
Can't switch to rescue client.

Would work in the bubble but there's too many repercussions of this to implement it in general imho.

Well put; I hadn't considered the effect it would have on people outside the bubble. But I still believe that the ease of mode-switching makes it incredibly (see:too) easy to exploit.

And I don't believe that the slightly broken nature of instancing/match-making or the possibility of hacking/router-fu are valid arguments for nothing being done about CL.

Nim

 

[Dave1235]

The best thing to do IMO would be first of all to add incentive to playing in open by adding extra PP rewards. Raise the amount of merits per kill in open, or reduce the number in solo/private.

Then change the 15 second timer to a 60 second timer if you are being attacked by players. That way you force players to have to pull the plug to combat log, instead of just using the UI (this will make combat logging harder, and also make it seem less legitimate)

we don't need a huge change and we don't need FD to punish combat loggers, we just need FD to do SOMETHING. ANYTHING.

Why on earth should they incentivse open. If its empty thats because people dont want to play there.
Plus all the dev time will be wasted. Anyone bothered enough by pp can simply switch off upnp or block connection to any ip addresses that are not fd servers to collect their bonus in open without ever seeing anyone.
If fd want to keep open maybe they should make it pve only, its been pvp since pre launch and now people need incentives to use it. Fd should flip open to pve only for a year or so and see if it stays as empty. If so remove it if not just admit it should have been pve only from the start. Pvp can be done in private groups just like pve has had to
I dont remember the advertising saying play in open pvp mode or be a second class citizen. Doubt I would have bought it if it did.
Looks like dbobes rare and meaningful arrived at last. I bet he never thought the players would make it happen for him.

 

[Loetmichel]

I dont remember the advertising saying play in open pvp mode or be a second class citizen. Doubt I would have bought it if it did.
Looks like dbobes rare and meaningful arrived at last. I bet he never thought the players would make it happen for him.

MUHAHA!

The thought of David looking at open and stating "Oh, the players chose to ignore the gankers by switching to Mobius or solo... That kind of makes my Vision of "rare and meaningful player combat" come true! Sorry for the few legit Pirates tho!" made my day

[edit] also: +rep

 

[Dave1235]

Could you please provide a link to Sandro's most recent remarks on the "graceful" exit? I'm genuinely curious what his actual stance on it is.

Well put; I hadn't considered the effect it would have on people outside the bubble. But I still believe that the ease of mode-switching makes it incredibly (see:too) easy to exploit.

And I don't believe that the slightly broken nature of instancing/match-making or the possibility of hacking/router-fu are valid arguments for nothing being done about CL.

Nim

The router fu was to explain why its a waste of time to incentivise open nothing to do with ignoring cl ing.

Sorry not near a pc but iirc Robert Maynard requoted the post recently so you should be in his recent posts list.
Cant remember which thread it was in or I would point you in the right direction

 

[Dave1235]

Could you please provide a link to Sandro's most recent remarks on the "graceful" exit? I'm genuinely curious what his actual stance on it is.

Well put; I hadn't considered the effect it would have on people outside the bubble. But I still believe that the ease of mode-switching makes it incredibly (see:too) easy to exploit.

And I don't believe that the slightly broken nature of instancing/match-making or the possibility of hacking/router-fu are valid arguments for nothing being done about CL.

Nim

Eta page 6 of this thread (mobile format) 22nd january. Robert quotes one of Sandro's posts clarifying alt f4 etc is what they consider to be cl ing and an exploit

 

[Nim Rodel]

Eta page 6 of this thread (mobile format) 22nd january. Robert quotes one of Sandro's posts clarifying alt f4 etc is what they consider to be cl ing and an exploit

Thanks for the response guys, but I was already aware of that post; I've cited it before. It doesn't actually say anything about the "graceful" log-off. You could say that because they define CL, nothing else qualifies as CL, but that's just arguing nomenclature.

There are people who feel that 15 seconds for a combat log-off is too short. It feels like a get-out-of-free-jail card to me. People have told me specifically that they have used it in PVE because they didn't feel like paying a rebuy to NPCs. I'm not okay with that.

Nim

 

[Robert Maynard]

Thanks for the response guys, but I was already aware of that post; I've cited it before. It doesn't actually say anything about the "graceful" log-off. You could say that because they define CL, nothing else qualifies as CL, but that's just arguing nomenclature.

There are people who feel that 15 seconds for a combat log-off is too short. It feels like a get-out-of-free-jail card to me. People have told me specifically that they have used it in PVE because they didn't feel like paying a rebuy to NPCs. I'm not okay with that.

Nim

By clearly defining what *is* contained in his definition of Combat Logging, Sandro excludes leaving the game using the exit. The fact that this exit, which is normally instant, has a 15-second delay when "in danger" implies that Frontier have considered that instant exit is not what they want when the ship is "in danger" - so they have put a 15-second delay on exit in that situation.

The very fact that Frontier have included an in-game method of leaving the game when the ship is "in danger" means that it is acceptable to Frontier - otherwise they would not have included it in the first place.

The fact that the 15-second delay has never been extended in all this time would suggest that Frontier have seen no compelling case to do so.

 

[Nim Rodel]

By clearly defining what *is* contained in his definition of Combat Logging, Sandro excludes leaving the game using the exit. The fact that this exit, which is normally instant, has a 15-second delay when "in danger" implies that Frontier have considered that instant exit is not what they want when the ship is "in danger" - so they have put a 15-second delay on exit in that situation.

The very fact that Frontier have included an in-game method of leaving the game when the ship is "in danger" means that it is acceptable to Frontier - otherwise they would not have included it in the first place.

The fact that the 15-second delay has never been extended in all this time would suggest that Frontier have seen no compelling case to do so.

That is one possible interpretation. Another would be that FD knows that it is a problem but does not consider it to be a high priority at the moment; because that's how software development works.

Cheesing your way out of combat is something that most every other Online Game I've played has taken very seriously. But if you believe that FD readily accepts that kind of behavior, who am I to judge.

Nim

 

[slothman320]

Simple fix: as soon as you enter combat a hold is put on your account stating you are in a combat state. The second you disconnect it calls it a lose and you blow up. Simple as that. EVE does this. Most MMOs do this. It's stupid simple.

 

[El Dragoon!]

only greifers hate combat loggers, i see a good medium here

 

[GluttonyFang]

only greifers hate combat loggers, i see a good medium here

Legitimate pirate doesn't seem to be too keen about combat loggers either.

 

[Mr_Foxhound]

If a player is having a baby and has to rush to the hospital, that's valid and statistically insignificant long term. Also, disconnects caused by bad ISP's or server issues. If a player has a continuous record of logging off during combat then that info can be (and according to Frontier in the past, is) logged. Once a threshold is reached, say I don't know, fifty times, then they can be recognized as serial abusers and punished.

The issue is what to do then? Shadow ban them? Remove money from their account? Send them to the galactic edge? The so called "weak" Frontier response you refer to is because of this question. What do you do with someone who routinely combat logs? I'm all ears and I'm sure Frontier would love to know what the community thinks should happen in these cases.

Ban them completely

 

[Fendalton]

Saw someone complaining in the Beta Forums that he couldn't log off because he was in combat, and the message said 'You are in danger and can't log out'

Obviously this doesn't stop people who pull the plug / Alt F4 however.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But if you believe that FD readily accepts that kind of behavior, who am I to judge.

Pointing out that something is acceptable (i.e. Frontier specifically created an option to leave the game while "in danger") is not the same as suggesting that Frontier readily accept it. I expect that it's an attempt on Frontier's behalf to balance the wants of players who like destroying other players with those of those who need to leave the game at short notice and also yet another "it's been that way for a long time it's possibly / probably too difficult to change" feature.

Interesting comment above regarding leaving the game in Beta 2.1 though....

 

[Rinzler o7o7o7]

The list Nitek is referring to is the stickied post in www.reddit.com/r/EliteCombatLoggers, a subreddit which I moderate. We're up to 222 recorded combat loggers at the time of writing this, with several of them being repeat offenders.

 

[Siobhan]

Simple fix: as soon as you enter combat a hold is put on your account stating you are in a combat state. The second you disconnect it calls it a lose and you blow up. Simple as that. EVE does this. Most MMOs do this. It's stupid simple.

Or maybe, as soon as someone instigates a combat with another CMDR, the game asks if he/she is OK with this. If they say OK then combat proceeds. If not, they go on their way.

Simple.

 

[Rinzler o7o7o7]

Or maybe, as soon as someone instigates a combat with another CMDR, the game asks if he/she is OK with this. If they say OK then combat proceeds. If not, they go on their way.

Simple.

How is piracy meant to work in this scenario then?