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

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.

Really no idea where you got the idea that this was ever resolved to anyone's satisfaction. ????

Interesting. How can you tell which 140 drives are exploited and which 140 drives are normally rolled?

Are my -59% heat rails and +46% distributor legit or exploited?

If I started shooting you with my 2x cannon 2x PA FAS with all matching projectile speeds and thermal load reductions, would you call me an exploiter or not?
 
The cheats kept the rank, money and kills they gained with their exploited modules. Only the tool for cheating was removed.

And there are some out here, including myself who have seen hard evidence to support the opinion that FDev DID NOT GET THEM ALL!

As for the punitive action that "should" have been taken against these well proven cheaters...

Aside from a full on ban, which would never happen... Anything short of a complete progress WIPE of the offender's account would be a slap on the wrist in the eyes of the majority of the ED Community.

The offenders did not have their accounts wiped of all progress.
 
Interesting. How can you tell which 140 drives are exploited and which 140 drives are normally rolled?

Are my -59% heat rails and +46% distributor legit or exploited?

If I started shooting you with my 2x cannon 2x PA FAS with all matching projectile speeds and thermal load reductions, would you call me an exploiter or not?

I would argue he'd log if he determines he cant win a fight in the first few minutes. Most of GG's posts are filled with toxic hyperbole and misinformation presented as facts.
 
The reports in question are not fake. Each encounter featured an interdiction and a taskkill from the same player.


Sure, but FDev has made it clear that they are not capable of 'zero tolerance'. There has to be solid evidence that there is clogging going on. 1 forced disconnect/month is not enough to prove there is a problem.

Redesign the experiment to find out what the limit is, repeat it a few times, then lets look at the complaint. All this shows is that FDev is doing what it said it would do....not run the risk of false positives.

Oh to add to the experiment, check the clogging of pve players by disconnecting during NPC fights, since this is also stated that it is cheating...then compare the two numbers and show that they are inherently biased.
 
Last edited:
Sure, but FDev has made it clear that they are not capable of 'zero tolerance'. There has to be solid evidence that there is clogging going on. 1 forced disconnect is not enough to prove there is a problem.

Redesign the experiment to find out what the limit is, repeat it a few times, then lets look at the complaint. All this shows is that FDev is doing what it said it would do....not run the risk of false positives.

Zero tolerance is quite do-able, but the repercussion doesn't have to be punitive.
 
Last edited:
Each encounter was a faked combat log to facilitate faking a support ticket, from a group with a history of faking reports of combat logging.

Each encounter was a real combat log from an unknown and newly bought account to facilitate support tickets that Frontier asked us to send (they said to report any further incidents with additional tickets), from a group with a history of uncovering this inaction policy from frontier once before (they said they'd be taking action in the future).

If you have not done so, I would highly recommend reading the Reddit post from the first logging investigation we did.
 
i don't care for combat logging either way, but it's good to see people don't take frontier's words at face value
 

ryan_m

Banned
Why, this is working as intended! Once a month logging is indiscernible from internet issues in this game.

They weren't actually once a month, btw, that's just the average over time. First 3 were within a month, with the 2nd and 3rd logs taking place minutes apart. Logs 4 & 5 took place 5 days apart.
 
They have stated they are looking at a 'history', not a once a month disconnect. All these guys have shown is that you can clog once a month with impunity...nothing new to see, moving on.

As part of the proposed Karma system, trends over time can be captured & more severed repercussions applied with more accuracy, yes. The proposal I linked to doesn't rely on that, it can be applied automatically to every ungraceful disconnect.
 
Interesting. How can you tell which 140 drives are exploited and which 140 drives are normally rolled?

Are my -59% heat rails and +46% distributor legit or exploited?

If I started shooting you with my 2x cannon 2x PA FAS with all matching projectile speeds and thermal load reductions, would you call me an exploiter or not?

You are aware what you just did, right ?
You claimed the benefit of the doubt, the very same benefit a good portion of PvPers are more than willing to throw overboard when it comes to combat loggers.
FD can't prove an intentional combat log, no matter the amount of "evidence" and documentation thrown at them....and yes, that is a sad situation for PvPers.
It's one of the shortcomings of the game, and i'm afraid one that PvPers have to live with, just as the rest of us live with other shortcomings.
 
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.

Pretty much this ^^

I've just accepted that "Shadow banned" just means that FD will allow you to continue to play in Open.

Seems pretty clear that this is and has been their policy response to CL.

Time to just accept it as such and move on...
 
Back
Top Bottom