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

Rather convenient that the majority of "disconnects" happen to players under attack though no?

Over on Xbox, you tend not to disconnect in normal space but rather you get a buzz crash or lose connection either trying to drop down or jump up.

You can get a pretty good idea why that happens by looking at the traffic and where the connection is choking. Use a PC running ICS to connect the Xbox and you can check the logs - mind you Windows does a complete rubbish job at routing. Or, if your router can do more than sit there and flash lights, have a look directly there :D
 
If FD start punishing all cheats equally I might just die of shock right there tbh.

They can't now, they've set the bar far to low for anyone to worry about it.

What goal posts am I moving? Try to be specific when you falsley accuse someone, it helps cut the bull poop. You're becoming a little abrasive here and I don't see a reason why.

?

Nothing to worry about then. Although I'd be concerned if FD's procedure really is to ignore all reports of clogging as long as the account named has filed support tickets for connection issues. It becomes like a get out of jail free card, which is no gouda.

They can easily verify a players genuinely bad connection by looking at how long you were connected to the update servers and how often it crapped out for patches.

They won't give out any specifics on thresholds, cheats would know how to game it.

Neither are FD entirely at the mercy of someone who might think they can do anything as long as it isn't explicitly stated in the legalise. Just look at what happened to the 5-1 cheats and with FD's foot stamp on stream sniping. The whole point of the legalise is to help FD out when they need it, not to act as cover for the cheekier customers.

They Darth Vadered the deal on offline and they don't specify connection speed or stability, poor connections are to be expected.

Aye. Or making their method of cheating end up costing them more than it's worth ala the 5-1'ers. CMDR Cosmicspacehead's proposal has the potential to do that.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ent-Proposal?p=5643210&viewfull=1#post5643210

Yep and the reason I agree with him is it's the only proposal that ever gets mentioned that doesn't involve unrealistic demands that FDEV punish players in my position.

Rather convenient that the majority of "disconnects" happen to players under attack though no?

Over on Xbox, you tend not to disconnect in normal space but rather you get a buzz crash or lose connection either trying to drop down or jump up.

Source ?.

Mine normally drops out opening menu's, entering or exiting instances and when new waves of NPC's spawn.
 
1) If you are in combat with another player your connection affects their game experience as well.

2) You have the choice to play whichever mode you like. Other players have that same choice to block or report you for your shoddy connection ...

Now there's an interesting point. It may well be selfish of me to affect others' game experience by playing with a dodgy connection in Open. Does that mean I should refrain from doing this one thing which affects others' game experience?

If the answer is "yes", should I also be expected to refrain from doing other things which affect their game experience? For example, attacking them when they're trading?

Shall we have our cake or eat it today? :)
 
Now there's an interesting point. It may well be selfish of me to affect others' game experience by playing with a dodgy connection in Open. Does that mean I should refrain from doing this one thing which affects others' game experience?

If the answer is "yes", should I also be expected to refrain from doing other things which affect their game experience? For example, attacking them when they're trading?

Shall we have our cake or eat it today? :)

To be honest I'd say the selfish standpoint is to demand someone forego game content on the basis that someday somewhere just maybe your connection might possibly affect them a little bit, or not [up].
 
Now there's an interesting point. It may well be selfish of me to affect others' game experience by playing with a dodgy connection in Open. Does that mean I should refrain from doing this one thing which affects others' game experience?

If the answer is "yes", should I also be expected to refrain from doing other things which affect their game experience? For example, attacking them when they're trading?

Shall we have our cake or eat it today? :)

This is the job of the match making server, not the player. It should not put you in an instance with someone you don't communicate with at an acceptable level.
 
Everyone regards clogging as a real issue, people just disagree about it's severity and the ease of identifying it.



You don't know your connections unstable until it fails a few times.



FDEV selling a game with offline mode in the past and no broadband stability or speed requirements then or now might have some bearing on that.



Same reason everyone logs into open, they like playing in that mode.

I see this line so many times as a reason why combat logging cannot be regarded as a real issue.

If you cannot keep a stable connection to Open, do not play in Open.

Why everyone feels the game rules should cater for ones bad internet status, is incredible.

In your case, if you did keep dropping in a PVP situation, purely because of "the net".

Why did you keep putting yourself in that situation?



Consequences

*Note All suggestions follow the simple rule of KISS, Keep it Simple Stupid


Problem: Combat logging.

FIX: Any ship, that fires on a 'target' or is fired upon is 'locked'

If the 'Internet' connection is lost the 'locked' ship that lost their connection ( combat logger) is blown up.

and the other Pilot is credited with a kill, any infringement by that remaining ship / player ( ie Griefing) at the start of the combat, is wiped.


* If your playing in Solo, and loose your internet connection during combat, there's No Consequence

..............

Crime and Punishment

Problem: Current fine system is irrelevant as the wealthy can pay, without burden.

FIX:
All fines are based on a % of your Wealth the frequency and seriousness of your crime

Players who continuously commit serious crimes 'murder' (Griefers) their % of fines tipples with each offense.

...............

Problem: Pirates versus Murderers (Griefers)

FIX: Any ship that fires on a 'unarmed ship' and that ship is destroyed, is a Murderer.

Pirates targeting ships must target Cargo hatches, FSD drives only.

if the targeted ship is then 'destroyed' the Pirates gets nothings, there's no cargo to collect.
and a 'bounty' is placed on the Pirate , the Ship the Pirate destroyed pays no re-buy cost and no cargo or data is lost.

....................


General Game Play:


Murderers: are restricted to Anarchy systems. Their fines are a higher % of their wealth and repeat offenders % to be fined are tippled after each offense.
In the Anarchy systems, Murderers do penance for their crime, ie specific missions to rid themselves of a Murder tag, these missions take weeks to complete.


Privates Servers
: are abolished, only two modes available Solo and Open, with the above in place.

SOLO Loose your connection in combat, No Consequence, your ship does not blow up

OPEN Loose connection during Combat, Yes Consequence, your ship does blow up
 
Now there's an interesting point. It may well be selfish of me to affect others' game experience by playing with a dodgy connection in Open. Does that mean I should refrain from doing this one thing which affects others' game experience?

If the answer is "yes", should I also be expected to refrain from doing other things which affect their game experience? For example, attacking them when they're trading?

Shall we have our cake or eat it today? :)
Nice one ;)

But no...

One is either cheating (in the case of c-logging) or affecting the game experience via out of game means (in the case of poopy internet), i.e. it's not intended to be a part of the game. Whereas attacking players is an intended gameplay feature. So sorry there buckaroo but there's no cake here to have and eat, only a hastilly constructed straw man.

Would you like to play again? :)
 
This is the job of the match making server, not the player. It should not put you in an instance with someone you don't communicate with at an acceptable level.

Indeed. As I said earlier, the rules could arguably be made more sensitive (requiring a better connection between the players) if there is currently perceived to be a significant issue, however it could quickly reach a point where very few players can be matched together.

I regularly play at unusual hours (for my timezone), it's pretty common for me to see severe rubber-banding. My connection is fine, their connection is fine, but we may be physically thousands of miles apart & communicating via satellite.
 
Everyone regards clogging as a real issue, people just disagree about it's severity and the ease of identifying it.



You don't know your connections unstable until it fails a few times.



FDEV selling a game with offline mode in the past and no broadband stability or speed requirements then or now might have some bearing on that.



Same reason everyone logs into open, they like playing in that mode.

I see this line so many times as a reason why combat logging cannot be regarded as a real issue.

If you cannot keep a stable connection to Open, do not play in Open.

Why everyone feels the game rules should cater for ones bad internet status, is incredible.

In your case, if you did keep dropping in a PVP situation, purely because of "the net".

Why did you keep putting yourself in that situation?

Nice one ;)

But no...

One is either cheating (in the case of c-logging) or affecting the game experience via out of game means (in the case of poopy internet), i.e. it's not intended to be a part of the game. Whereas attacking players is an intended gameplay feature. So sorry there buckaroo but there's no cake here to have and eat, only a hastilly constructed straw man.

Would you like to play again? :)



I'm wondering if the science of "Religious indoctrination affects the brain to critically think" is the reason there's so many threads about 'Cheating' Combat logging.

Given 'we' all know Combat logging is game breaking game play , and the reason OPEN is a no go area for many players, as there's NO Consequences for anything !

Ive seen this type of 'thinking' before. The crooks cheaters are given a free pass by the authorities, by doing nothing, while the rest of us want justice, thus been able to play fair and square.
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering if the science of "Religious indoctrination affects the brain to critically think" is the reason there's so many threads about 'Cheating' Combat logging.

Given 'we' all know Combat logging is game breaking game play , and the reason OPEN is a no go area for many players, as there's NO Consequences for anything !

Ive seen this type of 'thinking' before. The crooks cheaters are given a free pass by the authorities, by doing nothing, while the rest of us want justice, thus been able to play fair and square.

Take the example of the CLogging seal-clubber. If they can be discouraged from Clogging, they can be 'policed' out of the system by goodies. I believe the playerbase stands a better chance of self-policing if the main benefit of CLogging can be eliminated.
 
Consequences

*Note All suggestions follow the simple rule of KISS, Keep it Simple Stupid


Problem: Combat logging.

FIX: Any ship, that fires on a 'target' or is fired upon is 'locked'

If the 'Internet' connection is lost the 'locked' ship that lost their connection ( combat logger) is blown up.

and the other Pilot is credited with a kill, any infringement by that remaining ship / player ( ie Griefing) at the start of the combat, is wiped.


* If your playing in Solo, and loose your internet connection during combat, there's No Consequence

..............

Crime and Punishment

Problem: Current fine system is irrelevant as the wealthy can pay, without burden.

FIX:
All fines are based on a % of your Wealth the frequency and seriousness of your crime

Players who continuously commit serious crimes 'murder' (Griefers) their % of fines tipples with each offense.

...............

Problem: Pirates versus Murderers (Griefers)

FIX: Any ship that fires on a 'unarmed ship' and that ship is destroyed, is a Murderer.

Pirates targeting ships must target Cargo hatches, FSD drives only.

if the targeted ship is then 'destroyed' the Pirates gets nothings, there's no cargo to collect.
and a 'bounty' is placed on the Pirate , the Ship the Pirate destroyed pays no re-buy cost and no cargo or data is lost.

....................


General Game Play:


Murderers: are restricted to Anarchy systems. Their fines are a higher % of their wealth and repeat offenders % to be fined are tippled after each offense.
In the Anarchy systems, Murderers do penance for their crime, ie specific missions to rid themselves of a Murder tag, these missions take weeks to complete.


Privates Servers
: are abolished, only two modes available Solo and Open, with the above in place.

SOLO Loose your connection in combat, No Consequence, your ship does not blow up

OPEN Loose connection during Combat, Yes Consequence, your ship does blow up

I like these ideas. Would change the way the game could be played.
 
Consequences

*Note All suggestions follow the simple rule of KISS, Keep it Simple Stupid


Problem: Combat logging.

FIX: Any ship, that fires on a 'target' or is fired upon is 'locked'

If the 'Internet' connection is lost the 'locked' ship that lost their connection ( combat logger) is blown up.

and the other Pilot is credited with a kill, any infringement by that remaining ship / player ( ie Griefing) at the start of the combat, is wiped.


* If your playing in Solo, and loose your internet connection during combat, there's No Consequence

..............

Crime and Punishment

Problem: Current fine system is irrelevant as the wealthy can pay, without burden.

FIX:
All fines are based on a % of your Wealth the frequency and seriousness of your crime

Players who continuously commit serious crimes 'murder' (Griefers) their % of fines tipples with each offense.

...............

Problem: Pirates versus Murderers (Griefers)

FIX: Any ship that fires on a 'unarmed ship' and that ship is destroyed, is a Murderer.

Pirates targeting ships must target Cargo hatches, FSD drives only.

if the targeted ship is then 'destroyed' the Pirates gets nothings, there's no cargo to collect.
and a 'bounty' is placed on the Pirate , the Ship the Pirate destroyed pays no re-buy cost and no cargo or data is lost.

....................


General Game Play:


Murderers: are restricted to Anarchy systems. Their fines are a higher % of their wealth and repeat offenders % to be fined are tippled after each offense.
In the Anarchy systems, Murderers do penance for their crime, ie specific missions to rid themselves of a Murder tag, these missions take weeks to complete.


Privates Servers
: are abolished, only two modes available Solo and Open, with the above in place.

SOLO Loose your connection in combat, No Consequence, your ship does not blow up

OPEN Loose connection during Combat, Yes Consequence, your ship does blow up

I saw that you posted this a day or so ago but left it to see what feedback (if any) others may give.

Here's my thoughts:

CLogging:

Your idea of 'locking' passes most tests I can think of, it only accounts for PvP (personally I'm okay with this, I know others aren't) but it also only considers how the CLog affects another player. I'd say if you were disconnected (deliberately or otherwise) during PvP combat, guaranteed hull loss is an acceptable rule that the playerbase would grudgingly accept. The main test it fails is that of the spoofed Clog, where the player is disconnected cynically by the instance host (ie you get hacked). Personally I think this is unlikely enough, and serious enough a cheat that it could be handled by customer support on a case by case basis.

Crime & Punishment:

The idea of linking fines & bounties to the players wealth is a complex one. Is it the cash in your pocket, the total assets? My overriding feeling is that this would apply equally to PvE & PvP crime, and would not go down well with the community. It would be too effective & discourage players from taking risks. I think it might also significantly increase the burden on Customer Support to undo massive fines created by bugs & unintended behaviour. Committing crimes is part of the game, it's fun. There should be a proportionate response, I think this is overkill.

Piracy vs murder:

Putting the criteria on targetting only specific modules doesn't solve the problem. I could target the cargo hatch of another player & still tear their hull apart simply by not hitting their belly. For me, piracy is a crime of desparation, it's opportunistic, not specifically planned. I think the Code would have been so much more fun if they had gone down the Mafia intimidation route rather than just stealing cargo they clearly didn't need (considering the ships they fly). Piracy is a sideshow, like running rares. IMO Mob rule or Mercenary Privateering is where it's at.

General Gameplay:

I quite like the idea of having a separate 'murderer' tag over & above 'wanted'. The original game had 'clean', 'offender' and 'Fugitive'. Having a complex series of hoops to jump through to clear your name is a good idea, and provides both interesting gameplay for those who want to return to the lawful side, and the choice to wear your 'murderer' badge of honour.

Private Groups:

You provide no argument for eliminating these other than a weak CLogging rule that can be handled a different way. I see no benefit in removing the instancing filters provided by the game, and I don't think it's a suggestion that would go down well with the wider community. It's just not that kind of game.


Footnote: I appreciate the thought that has gone into this, I hope you will take my feedback into account & see if you can improve your concepts. No idea is perfect straight out of the box, discussing them can lead to interesting solutions.
 
No need to. Weve already gone through this in the modes of elite subsection of the forum. Same applies here.

Your post is so vague it could apply to either side of the argument. It adds nothing without context, and comes across as just generic sniping.

Please, elaborate.
 
Your post is so vague it could apply to either side of the argument. It adds nothing without context, and comes across as just generic sniping.

Please, elaborate.

Okay, People are giving you proof. Showing and actually doing the things in this game.

And everytime someone gives the proof. Ya'll just discredit it because of who it is. Or because people dont want the game to change.

But none of that changes the facts. Combat logging is an issue. Private and Solo have advantage over open players because you have to out fit your ships for Defenses or combat.

Its not about a choice here. Its about the META. Most Efficient Tactical Advantage. Whos going to report you for logging on a NPC in solo and private, you still get to turn in those juicy +++ INF missions against the people you are attacking. Same with powerplay.

So ya'll can deny all you want. People like SDC, Me, Goose, even MAJ has been saying this stuff for years.

Every single bit of it is true.

There are 2 people going to deny this.

1, the person with 0 experience. They haven't taken part in any player faction wars or powerplay vs someone else. They usually just do Module farming.

2, They know the risks, they know the game well, They know the meta. And take advantage of it.
 
Okay, People are giving you proof. Showing and actually doing the things in this game.

And everytime someone gives the proof. Ya'll just discredit it because of who it is. Or because people dont want the game to change.

But none of that changes the facts. Combat logging is an issue. Private and Solo have advantage over open players because you have to out fit your ships for Defenses or combat.

Its not about a choice here. Its about the META. Most Efficient Tactical Advantage. Whos going to report you for logging on a NPC in solo and private, you still get to turn in those juicy +++ INF missions against the people you are attacking. Same with powerplay.

So ya'll can deny all you want. People like SDC, Me, Goose, even MAJ has been saying this stuff for years.

Every single bit of it is true.

There are 2 people going to deny this.

1, the person with 0 experience. They haven't taken part in any player faction wars or powerplay vs someone else. They usually just do Module farming.

2, They know the risks, they know the game well, They know the meta. And take advantage of it.

So you are talking about PvE CLogging, and then mostly just questioning my credentials.

PvE CLogging is still cheating, but I consider PvP CLogging to be a more pressing issue. As I've stated a few times, I believe that if the benefit of CLogging (avoiding the in-game consequence of in-game decisions) can be removed, the community stands a better chance of policing itself. My motivation here is the CLogging seal-clubber, I am personally less concerned about those who CLog when underequipped & attacked, but any solution I support should capture those anyway.

Several others on this thread have offered proposals for punishing repeat offenders that either specifically exclude PvE or are dependant on player reports (ie they are not concerned if those remaining are not bothered). It's also worth bearing in mind that throughout this thread there has been no significant discussion about the 15 timer, it seems now to be widely accepted that this is not cool, but not actually cheating.

Any system intended to capture ungraceful disconnects will inevitably capture game crashes & general network issues as well as deliberate CLogs. We are only concerned with situations where the ship is in danger, which helps to narrow it down but doesn't eliminate simple bad luck. No client can be trusted to be 100% reliable, that's what makes this less straightforward than say, the 5 for 1 exploit where it would be reasonable to assume anyone that did it more than once (by chance) did so on purpose.

Because any system that tries to identify CLogging will also capture unintended disconnects (including those where the 'CLogger' was forced out by the cynical instance host), it affects all players, not just PvPers. That you are concerned about PvE CLogging also means it potentially affects all players in all modes.


You have a view on how the game should be (open only etc) that is at odds with how FDev apparently perceive it, your opinion is biased by that & doesn't take into account how the game is, only how you think it should be. I am here because I am (or try to be) unbiased. I am the devils advocate, I am testing all ideas in as many scenarios as I can think of.

You play the game a different way & potentially can offer insight that I haven't considered, although I've had this kind of conversation plenty of times & with plenty of different people, so I bring the experience of their views to the table too. Nevertheless constructive input from different player types (including the CLoggers themselves where possible) is helpful in finding a solution. The CLogger offers a view on whether a particular reaction would discourage them from CLogging in the future, a freeform PvPer offers a view on whether they would be satisfied with a particular level of punishment.

In this thread one of the conclusions drawn was that if FDev simply produced a regular (anonymised) report stating how many CLoggers had been given whatever punishment that would go a long way towards satisfying the desire to know that something is being done.

If you can find a post where I (or stigbob or Asp Explorer) have denied that CLogging is a problem I'd be interested to see it. I play in Open, stigbob either does or has, Asp Explorer I suspect plays in a fourth mode none of us know about.

I'd like to suggest you read through the thread & consider why you are continuing to tell the world that it's a problem and complaining about a small bunch of people who are actually trying to solve the very problem you are complaining isn't being solved.

Not everyone that disagrees with you is your enemy Skid, and petty sniping doesn't help.
 
Back
Top Bottom