An idea that could fix logging?
- Thread starter besieger
- Start date
Unfortunately it is not workable. Here are the two main problems. Firstly you cannot detect who or if a person combat logged, so which one is to be penalised? Secondly if you and I were in combat I could easily break the connection in such a way that it looks like you combat logged, then report you. I could even take a video of it. Do that enough times and you get the warning because all the evidence is against you.
Your system does not address this in any way.
Sorry, nice idea but it will not work any better than the current non-system or the proposed karma one. Because...
You cannot determine who was the cause of a disconnect.
Yes you put this point forward earlier. It's a decent point but detecting a disconnect between players while maintaining a connection to the server isn't CLogging, it's hacking & wouldn't need to be captured. Functionally the blacklist achieves the same effect for the player once they change instances, and is both legal & easy enough to do with the new history tab. It's just not a problem this proposal is trying to solve.
You are effectively saying the proposal doesn't work because it doesn't prevent firewall rules being changed. I'd say it's not within FDev's remit to take control of a player's firewall.
I'd be happy to discuss any proposal you have.
Stay on target...
In your opinion, and experience with other players in a similar position to your own, do you think discouraging CLogging (without any additional deterrent to sealclubbing like the proposed karma system) would allow the playerbase to be more self-policing?
I'm not talking about you taking me out (as an experienced player who should know better & accept my fate), I'm talking about massive overkill where a G5 Cutter or FDL is prancing about in a CG system popping T-6s & Haulers. If your targets don't CLog, would you be less likely to pop them for lols? Would others in your position be more likely to police each other?
If not, the Karma system will eventually come along & will probably be the death of a certain playstyle. But if solving this issue alone would go a long way towards minimising the problem, the karma system might not need to be so draconian.
While I can't speak for all players, I believe it would reduce the amount of "noob-clubbing" we see going on, mainly because as you point out we could police it ourselves like the old days of elite where combat loggers where put into exile and banned from player groups because of the shame it brought to the group. now for players like me a most of SDC we would become less about killing players and more about providing emergent content, the fun that can be had with a player that does not combat log is insane... we complain about the lack of content but that instance right there is where an unlimited amount of content could be created for both sides.
Some example off the top of my head, some have been put into use and provided great fun for both sides.
- Reverse Gank(We blow up instead of them)
- Pretend to be the cops with voice comms performing ship inspections
- Taking cargo from a player
- Making a player drop cargo and scoop it back up before leaving
- Have the player take part in a quiz
- Take a screenshot with the player then they can leave
- My personal favorite, have the player pick one of two CMDRs, the two CMDRs then fight to the death. if the player picked the winner before the fight they live else they die.
There are loads more that could be listed but these spring to mind, the karma system will be abused. there is zero need for it. no automated system will fix PKing, the only way to curb it would be to get to the reason its done in the first place. actual players who intend to upset others are far fewer than people think, unfortunately PVP and Greifers are branded as one.
I beg to differ. Combat Logging is intentionally disconnecting without using the menu log out functionality and therefore any method used, such as pulling out the cable, turning off the power or changing the firewall rules, falls under that definition.
If your method cannot correctly deal with combat logging using any of these then it is only a partial solution to the problem.
Your proposed solution, as I understand it, is an attempt to prevent combat logging from having the desired effect. However, since you cannot detect a combat log, your solution falls down.
By the way, I don't have any proposals since I know that it is an impossibility using the current network architecture.
Last edited:
I take your point, I hope you understand I think it's an edge-case (because of the blacklist as I mentioned). I don't know much about the networking other than the basics, I just ran with the ideas of others.
Besieger may have a better idea of how likely this 'breaking the P2P connection whilst maintaining the server connection' is to happen.
Last edited:
I like the way you are thinking
I must say though, I think I might prefer a swift death to some of those...
Sorry, you cannot detect it under the current architecture.
Clearly CLogging can be detected, but intent cannot be established without longer term trends (which the karma system should be able to do). It cannot be prevented but it can be discouraged.
What happens if the other player declines to participate in any of those scenarios and begins to leave?
Besieger sets a trap, if you fall into the trap whatever happens is largely up to the person that set the trap, much like piracy. If you try to escape they will try to destroy your ship.
If you get a front row seat to a decent PvP battle in the knowledge that you are safe until it ends you are entertained which is a better position than just being popped & the attacker moving on to the next, and the next & so on so it's going in the right direction but still playing rough.
Besieger is playing cat & mouse. The wily mouse avoids getting caught and if caught, takes advantage of distraction to escape.
If it's too rough the karma system will eventually give cause to think twice before killing yet another ship, if there are flaws in the karma system it can be improved.
As Besieger said earlier, FDev have banned him before & he was able to get it re-instated through knowledge of how the game works. I would prefer to have this kind of player working to help improve the game for us all than try to anticipate their every move working against them.
Poachers make the best gamekeepers or somesuch
Besieger sets a trap, if you fall into the trap whatever happens is largely up to the person that set the trap, much like piracy. If you try to escape they will try to destroy your ship.
If you get a front row seat to a decent PvP battle in the knowledge that you are safe until it ends you are entertained which is a better position than just being popped & the attacker moving on to the next, and the next & so on so it's going in the right direction but still playing rough.
Besieger is playing cat & mouse. The wily mouse avoids getting caught and if caught, takes advantage of distraction to escape.
If it's too rough the karma system will eventually give cause to think twice before killing yet another ship, if there are flaws in the karma system it can be improved.
As Besieger said earlier, FDev have banned him before & he was able to get it re-instated through knowledge of how the game works. I would prefer to have this kind of player working to help improve the game for us all than try to anticipate their every move working against them.
Poachers make the best gamekeepers or somesuch
To clear you your part of "get it re-instated through knowledge of how the game works.". What happend was PowerPlay had just been release, Sandro in a live stream hoped it would encourage PVP in certain systems vs certain players, for example Feds vs Imps etc. a CG was on as there normally is and I noticed I could align myself with the faction of the system and station, this was a Fed CG, most players where Empire aligned for the blue haired chick's shields. this meant all other players where fair game, even in front of the station! and if they decided to attack me back, the station lit them up and killed them.
I was reported by a ungodly amount of players and was banned for hacking, to be specific hacking to prevent the station from shooting me. it took a few tickets to finally get my story across and heard though props to support for finally investigating it fully though I will say the "things" support asked me to do and submit where a little on the odd side, still I got my ban overturned.
Now as people read this their reaction I can imagine is "well thats just greifeing!!!!!!" well you would be wrong, as I stated above. this is what Sandro wanted, he wanted Feds to fight Imps... even better where the merits I received from killing these players, kill 5 players and cash in and repeat in case I am killed due to a miss fire hitting the station.
If the game was paying you for the effort, it is hard to argue you shouldn't be doing it. That being found, you got your stuffs back. It sounds fair. That's one down.
You used your understanding of the game mechanics to your advantage, which when distilled down to those few words is what every player tries to do.
I guess it's worth bearing in mind that a lot of players don't want to feel like they are a crane fly & you are pulling their legs off one by one, that sort of behaviour may well just increase CLogging again despite the karma hit (people just wouldn't play). In turn that would encourage a more severely restricting bad karma penalty & neither of us wants to go down that road.
If a player (or group/wing) is good enough they should be able to drive you out of a particular system, I imagine this is the kind of gameplay you would enjoy. If there are fewer CLogging sealclubbers in LHS3447 & Erevate there will be more players available to 'police' the 'baddies'.
So you create emergent play, you get the spontaneous PvP you want, it all looks less like trolling & more like fun so the current harsh distinction between PvP & PvE becomes blurred, everybody wins but sometimes still lose their ships
Solves nothing. Does not prevent or discourage in any way. Oh, still stuck in the same mode you already play in?
Can you expand on this? I don't get your meaning. Yes you get stuck in the mode you were in before for a unit of time.
The concern I have, is that it's essentially rewarding the player to log. It allows for trivial avoidance of outcomes. If the game did not place the players assets on rails waiting for a reconnect, and instead dropped the session then there's some risk to logging. Ergo there is some downward pressure on using this as a general response to really any situation.
To me it's not so much the disconnection; that can't be helped, it's that Frontier have ostensibly rewarded commanders who unexpectedly disconnect. Players combat log to AI, stations, you name it. When there is a trivial methodology to avoid consequences, people will use it. When the smuggling missions were at their height, people were CLing the damn station for crissake. Instant 10 KM transport, thanks m8 I'll be on my way. Scanned? CL. Cops start shooting? CL. Just there are just endless ways to abuse this.
If there was no hand-holding, and Frontier did not persist in trying to reconnect a disconnected session, as much as that might be a little annoying at times, it'd be a darn sight better than actually rewarding commanders for killing the game client. This is just encouraging abuse. And perhaps there would have been a little more pressure on resolving some of the causes, rather than leveraging a convenient out.
I don't hunt commanders. But I do expect there to be consequences to actions. I'm sure most any player would expect consequences to various actions. They may not be liked but they are an important dynamic. But, fundimentally, frontier has provided every player, in every mode, a get-out-of-jail free card. That's just not something to defend.
One can't really sit here and demand Frontier improve C&P and make consequences have more impact, whilst simultaneously defending CL. For one to work, the other must die. That's always been the case; perhaps why as much as people demand consequence, their actions bely no such thing.
It's the same reason people persist in complaining about collisions at stations whilst speeding. That's a harsh outcome. The same sorts of harsh outcomes being demanded as part of Karma; and yet it's pretty bloody obvious at this point commanders refuse to be held personally accountable to the same laws they expect everyone else to. CL will simply become even more of a plague as harsher consequences kick in.
Last edited:
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but what difference does it make if a ship remains visible to other players for several seconds after its owner loses connection? They can't destroy it either way.