Might I ask, how many of those proposals have actually made it into the game?
Might be worth reflecting on.
A Simple Solution to Combat Logging
- Thread starter Daniel Klimchuk
- Start date
Might be worth reflecting on.
Again, the same question:
Not "how many times has this been discussed, or can you link to this post?"
Not "how many times has this been discussed, or can you link to this post?"
IndigoWyrd, I am posting in a topic I feel is important, answering questions and overcoming objections. You seem to have run out of questions & objections for now.
The only reason this thread is being bumped is because you keep commenting in it, yet your stance appears to be that it is a non-issue. Provided any proposal doesn't impact your own game (if you have a poor internet connection for example) it seems you are happy already.
It isn't a non-issue for me, I once described this as probably the single most important topic about cheating (shortly after the 5 for 1 engineering exploit was exposed by FDev). I wrote earlier today that Frontier have stated that they implemented a solution already.
Are you just trolling now?
Nope, I just asked a question which you refuse to answer. You are correct though, this does not impact my game play, because I am not concerned with the blowing up of other players, the movement of imaginary lines on the map, the (non)balance of imaginary power without any discernible difference. I have an excellent connection, do not suffer the routine disconnections that seem so popular among other users, and it would change nothing for me if something, anything or nothing were ever done about this non-problem.
And yes, I consider it a non-problem, because it has yet to be demonstrated that there is any actual impact on the game as a result of either winning or being denied a "win" in PvP combat. Perhaps there is, for the Power Players who occupy the entirety of their time blowing up other players - perhaps there is not. We'd have to see internal data to make that kind of determination. Even still, at the end of the day, none of it actually matters. No state change is permanent, nothing we do amounts to anything more than low-tide sand-castles. The tides themselves cannot be changed by anything we can do, and 12 hours later, those castles of sand are only memories.
I had already 'answered' before you asked:
I have followed this topic pretty closely for years. I didn't start this thread, I didn't resurrect my old proposal thread, you did. To state how unimportant you thought it was.
My motivation is stated in the OP of that thread. It hasn't changed. That you don't think it's a big deal is fine, lots of people don't think it's a big deal. But they just ignore the topics that don't interest them, they don't troll & act disruptive in them to try to get people to give up wanting a game to have rules that are enforced (if they can be).
Your motivation seems to be to try to stop the discussion. Weirdly by perpetuating it.
I can't see anyone actually hanging around they'd just keep an eye out.
It seems a little desperate to take a voluntary ban just to avoid the possibility of some pew pew and try to frame it as a win. Wouldn't it be easier to stay out of open in the first place if that's how people feel about it ?.
Anyway the self imposed ban is the whole idea of Cosmic's solution. So doing that would be a win for the legit players same as if they just popped them onto block as they wouldn't have to bother with them in game which is the basis of the clogging issue.
Still will never be an issue for me as a PG player, because I cannot abide Open latency.
No, you didn't. The answer I seek must be in numeric format. Posting a link to something you've previously written, that does not appear to be implemented at all is not an answer. If I asked you what your favorite food was and you told me "blue", it would be equally as productive an answer.
I don't care what your motivations are. This is irrelevant to what I'm trying to discuss. I don't want people to stop wanting what they want, that's just silly. I do encourage people to consider when an idea, no matter how grand they're convinced it might be, could very well be unrealistic and to listen to others who proposed modifications to those "perfect" ideas that might make them both more feasible and warrant actual consideration. So far, the best thing I've heard from you here is "to have rules that are enforced." because that is ultimately the crux of this issue - a lack of visible enforcement. There's one particular player group, the name of which eludes me, largely because their importance is only to themselves, who have staged and recorded their own members breaking various rules, while prancing about in their undergarments going "see, no one is enforcing this."
My motivation is merely to move this in a productive direction, even if that means using a cattle prod and salt water to get it going that way. Running around in circular logic isn't going to accomplish anything.
More to the point, what are the chances of you getting the exact same instance again with the same antagonist in it? Hell we have trouble getting in the same instance when we take all possible precautions to ensure we do, and this proposal is going to make the entire instancing system suddenly work.
Oh boy ……..
Wouldve made my life easier if this had been a problem this weekend. Or, ever. Running cargo to a station under blockade, my pursuers instanced with me just fine each time I low waked within a system, or high waked back-in, for that matter.
It certainly can be an issue for extreme instancing situations like DW2 gatherings or buckyball, but instancing issues do not negate a CLogging solution like the OP, for that it's just fine.
Logging-out, blocking, then relogging. I assume its been mentioned, but it's still a more productive line of argument if youre looking for something to ridicule the idea. (Youre welcome, im feeling charitable, you seem to need the help. Keep at it, sport. Some of the mud might stick eventually.)
It will do nothing for the one that clogs for the day. As in gets annoyed being interdicted and engaged in combat and goes sod it, i don't want to do this anymore.
But it will prove a great inconvenience for the one that clogs only to change mode to solo.
Still i'd rather not have even that.
Removing the timer from menu log would be just another way to remove the clogging altogether. The simpler way.
Also it will be an acknowledgment that forced pvp is a mistake in this game network architecture.
Some might want only the social aspect of open, but not the antagonistic aspect.
While other might find themselves in open by mistake - on pc is way too easy to misclick through continue and find yourself involuntarily in open.
That's the idea, they ban themselves for a bit and the legit players don't waste time on them. In that instance the non-clogger has won the game.
Yep. It'll push them towards the top option.
Moving the confirmation to the start is needed, in case the phone rings or whatever but the actual timing of the countdown is less important.
There is no such thing as forced PVP in ED, never has been its always been an entirely opt in thing the network architecture has less impact on that than the modes.
Cloggers are just plain old bad at the game and use it to cheat their way out of exploding. If they'd ever bothered to git-gud at high wake they'd know its quicker and easier than logging out and back or even restarting the game which they'd have to do if they task-killed.
Which is one of the reasons I think clogging solutions (even cosmic's) are a waste of time, take away their opportunity to cheat and they'll eventually learn to escape legitimately so it won't actually give the PVP'ers what they want.