PvP An Investigation Into Frontier's Actions on Combat Logging, Part 2

[jasonbarron]

Everything i have written is true, FD can investigate me again if they want but we all know how will it end.

There's that jaunty step right there. "We all know how it well end."

 

[Phoenix_Dfire]

Which as described above is Ad Hominem.

There is some very well taken and drawn up evidence in OP.

It might be, but it is dismissed because of where it come from.

 

[Riverside]

You don't get it. If there is even the smallest bit of character issues that exist, the entire thing is invalid. If Jesus Christ himself posted this, there would be a post saying "oh but you guys remember when his dad killed all those people? I'm glad FDev isn't enforcing the rules."

People will always argue the point, it's a forum

But those counterarguments can be eliminated or overcome. People have accused me of being a 'filthy ganker' I have overcome these arguments pretty easily, because I don't have a reputation for ganking, and I don't have recent threads about my group (I'm not in a group) being Zarek Null's new sidekicks. For example.

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

You don't get it. If there is even the smallest bit of character issues that exist, the entire thing is invalid. If Jesus Christ himself posted this, there would be a post saying "oh but you guys remember when his dad killed all those people? I'm glad FDev isn't enforcing the rules."

While I understand the point you're making (oddly enough), I have to say that is the most bizarre analogy I've read in a very long time.

 

[Arguendo]

Arguendo, I can't deny that you've raised some valid points during this thread, and then...

...you sweepingly insulted all who enjoy playing Elite as a single-player game.

Most unfortunate.

I am sorry you read it that way. It was never intended as such, so I apologise for formulating it that way. I was trying very hard to avoid confusing solo mode with an offline single player, but I guess I failed. Again, my apologies.

 

[StiTch]

It might be, but it is dismissed because of where it come from.

Literally admitting you cannot debate a topic because of the poster.

Nothing that can be said from here man.

 

[Riverside]

It's presented perfectly well with some very solid evidence - and nay, it's not our place, right, nor responsibility to do FD's moderation for them. It's up to them to enforce their own rules, and if they fail to, the best we can do is call them out on it.

No, it really isn't.

When I started reading the OP in this thread I assumed it would be multiple clogs per day, attempting to establish that FDev do not take any action under even extreme circumstances (I would be disappointed, but not surprised if this was the case). Then if a datapoint is established beyond which FDev do take notice, try again less frequently to determine the point where FDev ignore it. That would have been interesting to learn. This is just a cynical attempt to make FDev look bad by pointing out a known issue in as salty a way as possible imo.

 

[StiTch]

No, it really isn't.

So in your opinion the frequency of cheating outlined within OP is acceptable?

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

I am sorry you read it that way. It was never intended as such, so I apologise for formulating it that way. I was trying very hard to avoid confusing solo mode with an offline single player, but I guess I failed. Again, my apologies.

It was the inference that Solo mode must be played as some sort of "God mode" that I took issue with. But never mind. That's a discussion for Hotel California. Cheers anyway.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

No, it really isn't.

It's a good point.

When dealing with CLs, you'd figure FD would go after the most frequent offenders first. Playing with the frequency to determine the 'safe zone' is a little iffy in my opinion since it would reveal the threshold where one would be able to CL without punishment.

 

[ryan_m]

So in your opinion the frequency of cheating outlined within OP is acceptable?

Remember, it's only SOME cheating that matters here. You did the 5-1 exploit? I wish you would have gotten banned! You abuse a 4-year old exploit that FDev confirmed is an exploit years ago? Ahh, no worries! That's totally fine. Hey, can you believe those guys that used that other exploit?!?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Uhm ... Riverside only talks about action taken by Frontier, not whether it's acceptable or not.

 

[Riverside]

So in your opinion the frequency of cheating outlined within OP is acceptable?

I haven't offered an opinion, I've offered a solution that allows a zero tolerance approach.

 

[ryan_m]

When I started reading the OP in this thread I assumed it would be multiple clogs per day, attempting to establish that FDev do not take any action under even extreme circumstances

All that would do is produce responses like this:

"Wow, who combat logs 20 times in a week? Of course they ignored it, it's so obvious that it's just SDC testing them. You should have spaced them out more."

The bottom line is that you can abuse a known exploit in Elite multiple times with video evidence sent directly to FDev themselves and nothing will be done. Not even a warning letter.

 

[Arguendo]

It was the inference that Solo mode must be played as some sort of "God mode" that I took issue with. But never mind. That's a discussion for Hotel California. Cheers anyway.

I understand what you meant and why you took it that way, but that was never my intended inferrence. The "God Mode" was a reference to how some people, well within their rights, play Single Player Offline Games on their own computers. The use of "mode" was never a reference to the three different modes in ED, but I can see how it could be construed as such.

Again, I apologise for how I worded it.

 

[Riverside]

Remember, it's only SOME cheating that matters here. You did the 5-1 exploit? I wish you would have gotten banned! You abuse a 4-year old exploit that FDev confirmed is an exploit years ago? Ahh, no worries! That's totally fine. Hey, can you believe those guys that used that other exploit?!?

You understand how PR works, right?

 

[StiTch]

When dealing with CLs, you'd figure FD would go after the most frequent offenders first. Playing with the frequency to determine the 'safe zone' is a little iffy in my opinion since it would reveal the threshold where one would be able to CL without punishment.

This would be valid were FD to collaborate with SDC to dig out CLing, but FD were not privvy to the thresholds SDC chose to test against other than the reports they received.

They were told it would be looked into and multiple CLogs resulted in zero action against it. Debate the exterior details if you will, but that is the simple essence of this.

 

[Riverside]

All that would do is produce responses like this:

"Wow, who combat logs 20 times in a week? Of course they ignored it, it's so obvious that it's just SDC testing them. You should have spaced them out more."

The bottom line is that you can abuse a known exploit in Elite multiple times with video evidence sent directly to FDev themselves and nothing will be done. Not even a warning letter.

But you didn't establish that. You still haven't, you just wasted 5 months and established neither datapoint (the point where they take notice, and the point where they take reasonable preventative or punitive action). You just complain that the action they do take isn't enough (which was known in March, apparently).

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

I understand what you meant and why you took it that way, but that was never my intended inferrence. The "God Mode" was a reference to how some people, well within their rights, play Solo Offline Games on their own computers. The use of "mode" was never a reference to the three different modes in ED, but I can see how it could be construed as such.

Again, I apologise for how I worded it.

I see what you mean there now. No worries. Perhaps my bad for leaping to undue conclusions. Cheers again.

 

[Arguendo]

I see what you mean there now. No worries. Perhaps my bad for leaping to undue conclusions. Cheers again.

Glad we cleared that up! Cheers!