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

[Arguendo]

FDev say they have one, the OP tested it & it didn't register as bad enough to notice. A more aggressive test would establish the point at which they take notice (if indeed they do), and then the second point at which they take action. The OP's test was background noise IMO.

OTOH is the knowledge on how much Clogging is too much something you would want to release to the wider community? Would that help the cause, or hinder it? I think it would hinder it.

Again, I don't fault FDev for not taking action on this single item. Maybe 5 clogs is not enough, or they saw throught the ruse, or whatever. There are however other serial cloggers out there who keep clogging and keep playing the game, which does not indicate that FDev takes any action.

So again, instead of deflecting, answer this simple question: What action can you confirm that FDev has taken against any combatlogger in the game since March last year?

 

[Stigbob]

FDev say they have one, the OP tested it & it didn't register as bad enough to notice. A more aggressive test would establish the point at which they take notice (if indeed they do), and then the second point at which they take action. The OP's test was background noise IMO.

OTOH is the knowledge on how much Clogging is too much something you would want to release to the wider community? Would that help the cause, or hinder it? I think it would hinder it.

They'll need to conceal the threshold I should think, too many exploiters would take advantage of specifics.

 

[Riverside]

Again, I don't fault FDev for not taking action on this single item. Maybe 5 clogs is not enough, or they saw throught the ruse, or whatever. There are however other serial cloggers out there who keep clogging and keep playing the game, which does not indicate that FDev takes any action.

So again, instead of deflecting, answer this simple question: What action can you confirm that FDev has taken against any combatlogger in the game since March last year?

Why are you asking me? FDev aren't going to break confidentiality, anyone that is punished is unlikely to openly admit that (although I've seen at least one pic of an e-mail, probably on reddit), it's a black box, we are not supposed to know what action (if any) is taken, we are supposed to believe that action does get taken and we are allowed to think not enough is done.

Maybe your particular CLogger got shadowbanned for a week, and you just didn't notice. Maybe they are on their last warning, we don't know, it's between FDev & that player. You do your bit by reporting CLoggers, but you shouldn't expect a summary report from FDev, although a simple '5 Cloggers were given 3 day bans' might be interesting, non-confidential information.

I'm not deflecting from anything Arguendo, I don't have privy to any special information, but I can surmise & infer from what we do know.

 

[Arguendo]

They'll need to conceal the threshold I should think, too many exploiters would take advantage of specifics.

I don't think they should reveal any threshold, if they have one. From the outside it appears as if this threshold currently is ∞, and that doesn't cut it tbh.

 

[Riverside]

They'll need to conceal the threshold I should think, too many exploiters would take advantage of specifics.

tbh I imagine it comes up so infrequently it's probably handled on a case by case basis. Much like your blacklist of station gankers, 80% of the problem is probably cased by 20% of the candidate accounts. A new account appearing on the list would prompt a further look & any deliberate probing would hopefully quickly be established.

I don't think they should reveal any threshold, if they have one. From the outside it appears as if this threshold currently is ∞, and that doesn't cut it tbh.

So what do you think the threshold should be? I put my cards on the table earlier in the thread.

ETA link:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/397980-An-Investigation-Into-Frontier-s-Actions-on-Combat-Logging-Part-2?p=6271829&viewfull=1#post6271829

 

[Arguendo]

Why are you asking me?

Because:

It was established fairly early on that FDev do take action, and that some are simply not happy with the levels that have been applied

I'm not deflecting from anything Arguendo, I don't have privy to any special information, but I can surmise & infer from what we do know.

You said: It's clear FDev have taken action
I replied: What action have they taken?
You answer: They have a system
I come back with: A system is not action, so what action have they taken?
You then reply: The test done here didn't trigger, but they would take action if it had
My last attempt: Please tell me any action FDev have taken against cloggers recently!

Since you now come back with "surmise and infer", please tell me on what basis you "surmise and infer" that FDev have taken any action against combatloggers since March last year (and I'm pretty sure the one on reddit is the one from March I am referring to).

 

[Riverside]

Since you now come back with "surmise and infer", please tell me on what basis you "surmise and infer" that FDev have taken any action against combatloggers since March last year (and I'm pretty sure the one on reddit is the one from March I am referring to).

I've just gone back through this thread to find a link to one of my earlier posts & we have had this conversation before, Arguendo.

I'm not trying to catch you out.

 

[Arguendo]

So what do you think the threshold should be? I put my cards on the table earlier in the thread.

Hmm...never really thought of a threshold. Off the top of my head, 3 independent (not same reporter) within a month would lead to an investigation into the players account to see if there's a pattern. If the investigation finds either a)further taskkills in danger within the same month, or a continous pattern of more than 3 per month prior to the current period, an automatic e-mail warning is issued. The account is then placed on probation and monitored. If another taskkill in danger is registered during the next three months, they are shadowbanned for 1 month. When the shadowban has been served, the probation period is extended to 6 months and any further infractions will result in 3 month shadowban penalties.

That may seem a bit over the top, but if a pattern is registered in the initial investigation, I don't believe it's too harsh tbh. For people with shady connections, I'm sorry, but it's an online game with direct and indirect PvP. You really should have a stable connection before playing any such game.

I've just gone back through this thread to find a link to one of my earlier posts & we have had this conversation before, Arguendo.

I'm not trying to catch you out.

I don't think you're trying to catch me out. I am however trying to make you admit that you haven't seen or know of any action FDev have taken against any combatlogger since last March

 

[Riverside]

I don't think you're trying to catch me out. I am however trying to make you admit that you haven't seen or know of any action FDev have taken against any combatlogger since last March

I don't need to, it doesn't affect my gameplay. I have got a preferred solution though.

Hmm...never really thought of a threshold. Off the top of my head, 3 independent (not same reporter) within a month would lead to an investigation into the players account to see if there's a pattern. If the investigation finds either a)further taskkills in danger within the same month, or a continous pattern of more than 3 per month prior to the current period, an automatic e-mail warning is issued. The account is then placed on probation and monitored. If another taskkill in danger is registered during the next three months, they are shadowbanned for 1 month. When the shadowban has been served, the probation period is extended to 6 months and any further infractions will result in 3 month shadowban penalties.

That may seem a bit over the top, but if a pattern is registered in the initial investigation, I don't believe it's too harsh tbh. For people with shady connections, I'm sorry, but it's an online game with direct and indirect PvP. You really should have a stable connection before playing any such game.

I'd say that's pretty reasonable

 

[Arguendo]

I'd say that's pretty reasonable

I thought maybe the 6 month probation would appear too much, but I guess not. We'll see what those with "bugs everywhere that I need to taskkill from" think

 

[Riverside]

I thought maybe the 6 month probation would appear too much, but I guess not. We'll see what those with "bugs everywhere that I need to taskkill from" think

IME it's much easier to just choose a number, look at it & think 'that's not right' or whatever than to calculate one. Now we'll see if anyone else is interested in discussing it

Interestingly, the OP's test would not have triggered your thresholds.

 

[Arguendo]

Interestingly, the OP's test would not have triggered your thresholds.

True, all 5 would have had to have been within the same month, or they would've needed a 6th log where 1-3 were within 1 month prior to the 4th. It's close though

And everyone is using "5 logs in 5 months" as The Truth, while the real answer is "First 3 were within a month, with the 2nd and 3rd logs taking place minutes apart. Logs 4 & 5 took place 5 days apart."

But yeah, I would also have liked to have seen a bit more data over the 5 month total, even if "one log, is one too many."

 

[Martian Successor]

I sincerely hope Rinzler & Ryan_m take what you just said on board, maybe it will carry more weight in their minds to come from a respected PvPer rather than an unknown outsider like myself.

CLogging doesn't affect me, or the way I play. If it happens (and it probably does, I'm currently tooling around Colonia in a fully equipped Corvette & meeting a lot of diamondbacks & AspXs) I don't notice, if someone is capitalising on CLogging or mode switching to make money or influence the BGS I don't notice or care about that either. I just like flying my Corvette, it keeps me safe, it took me to Beagle Point (fully equipped to deal with any hostile encounter).

What does affect me is various sections of the community pushing & pulling on FDevs shirtsleeves, distracting them from producing content. I just want atmospheric landings & maybe to get out of my seat. Others want different things, and I want them to get those things as quickly as is practical, so they can move on to working on the thing I want.

So when I see a potential distraction from the big goal, I want it to be dealt with efficiently. Either quickly establish that it shouldn't be a priority (as I argued with the orrery view for example), or that it is worthwhile & find a solution as I did with CLogging/cheating.

The 'bickering' as I describe it in this thread is a tremendously inefficient way to come to a consensus on a course of action. So while it's great that some good has come out of this, a considerable amount of harm has been needlessly produced too, all in the name of raising awareness of a problem that the community overall and FDev in particular were already well aware of.

This effort would have been considerably better spent on 'raising awareness' of a potential solution rather than just that the problem still exists.

Thank you for the compliment but I'm nobody special in the community. I'm just another CMDR doing his own thing in the game. I can understand your view point. My own view on it is that FD will do what they feel is best whenever they feel is the right time. Nobody can force them down a certain path unless it's a matter the entire community gets behind, which happens occassionally but that's all part of developing ED. I want atmo planets and a nice pair of space legs too but I don't see the normal aspects of the devs supporting, maintaining and fixing a live game getting in the way.

These features will come when they come, FD have a large enough team and different departments that are constantly working on future content so they might as well address the health of their game while we all wait for the big content releases. Coincedentally that's what Beyond is going to be all about, fleshing out, fixing and strengthening the core of the game.

 

[Powderpanic]

Giving we are talking about how many times you should be allowed to cheat before it counts as cheat.

How many times can I run shield hacks in a PVP fight before that is considered an undesirable exploit?

 

[Riverside]

Giving we are talking about how many times you should be allowed to cheat before it counts as cheat.

How many times can I run shield hacks in a PVP fight before that is considered an undesirable exploit?

How many?

 

[Morbad]

It should only take one confirmed case of deliberately disconnecting for there to be consequences.

However, you can't detect a deliberate pattern from one disconnection, and it may be impractical to do a full investigation for a single report. So, there is probably going to need to be a threshold of some sort to avoid false positives.

 

[Riverside]

It should only take one confirmed case of deliberately disconnecting for there to be consequences.

However, you can't detect a deliberate pattern from one disconnection, and it may be impractical to do a full investigation for a single report. So, there is probably going to need to be a threshold of some sort to avoid false positives.

Bingo

 

[Powderpanic]

How many?

I'm asking the ones who seem to think that 5 bouts of cheating, not being enough to count as a single cheat.

 

[Riverside]

I'm asking the ones who seem to think that 5 bouts of cheating, not being enough to count as a single cheat.

I think you are asking too basic a question here, Morbad gets it.

Obviously cheating is not okay, but you have to detect it, and CLogging is hard to detect amongst the background noise of network problems, overheating GPUs, game crashes etc. With a shield hack intent is known, if you can spot it you can act on that (a pointed look, maybe a sternly raised eyebrow etc). But you can't do that with a single CLog, you need a pattern of behaviour before you can start to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the player is acting cynically.

So how many Powderpanic? At what point do you give a pointed look, at what point do you say 'enough is enough, I think you are cheating' & shoot them in the face?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'm asking the ones who seem to think that 5 bouts of cheating, not being enough to count as a single cheat.

The difference between the two is, the module is there for the rest of the game, the CL is an incident.

And the issue is not an ethical one but a practical one.