An investigation into Frontier's actions on Combat Logging

[CptSiddy]

https://www.frontierstore.net/usd/code-of-conduct

Granted, while it does not state combat logging, it does cover exploitation of the game.

Please go say that the burden of proof is shifted on player, i want to see that court case when u ban some troll for combatlogging and he drags you in to court and wins it.

Or better yet, fix you game and stop using EULA or CoC as your core game mechanic.

 

[Karunamon]

Please go say that the burden of proof is shifted on player, i want to see that court case when u ban some troll for combatlogging and he drags you in to court and wins it.

Or better yet, fix you game and stop using EULA or CoC as your core game mechanic.

Trolls don't get banned for combat logging, they can still play the game. It's just that nobody connects to them anymore - all modes are equivalent to solo.

Still, the fact that the EU laws are bent so slinky-like that you can't outright ban people who break the rules is just a little bit insane.

 

[CptSiddy]

Trolls don't get banned for combat logging, they can still play the game. It's just that nobody connects to them anymore - all modes are equivalent to solo.

Still, the fact that the EU laws are bent so slinky-like that you can't outright ban people who break the rules is just a little bit insane.

Its not the laws, its the burden of proof.

The burden of proof for wrongdoing rest on the FD.

And in cases like combatlogging it is night impossible to prove without actual admission from the player.

Also, shadowbanning is one other thing that might end up biting FD in the rear, as it did with twitter.

 

[znôrt]

Because of the death penalty: Having people "die" when the game crashes or disconnects is a bad idea.
Or do you support a "game crashed" penalty? Should players be punished when FD puts out bad code?

i have a very hard time taking this argument seriously.

first, if game crashes are so frequent as to be relevant, then we have a far bigger problem than combat logging. in fact, it would make the whole discussion pointless. not to mention the boutade of designing a mechanic for a game that doesn't even work properly. lets assume the bare minimum level of quality, meaning it at least runs uninterrupted for the most part!

second, game crashes are actually pretty rare in elite (in my experience, ymmv). connection issues ... well, apart from the fact that the current arch simply isn't apt for any form of competitive play, there is still the issue of bad connections, for whatever reason. that's a bummer and there's no right answer, but my personal choice there would be that those players of course should be able to enjoy the game to some extent but simply not expect a good experience in any dangerous mode or activity, for obvious reasons.

edit/add: answering your specific question, yes. games are games and accidents (cats walking over keyboards, glasses spilling, connections dying, power loss) will always happen and when they do you just suck it up and get over it.

 

[Ozram]

i have a very hard time taking this argument seriously.

first, if game crashes are so frequent as to be relevant, then we have a far bigger problem than combat logging. in fact, it would make the whole discussion pointless. not to mention the boutade of designing a mechanic for a game that doesn't even work properly. lets assume the bare minimum level of quality, meaning it at least runs uninterrupted for the most part!

second, game crashes are actually pretty rare in elite (in my experience, ymmv). connection issues ... well, apart from the fact that the current arch simply isn't apt for any form of competitive play, there is still the issue of bad connections, for whatever reason. that's a bummer and there's no right answer, but my personal choice there would be that those players of course should be able to enjoy the game to some extent but simply not expect a good experience in any dangerous mode or activity, for obvious reasons.

edit/add: answering your specific question, yes. games are games and accidents (cats walking over keyboards, glasses spilling, connections dying, power loss) will always happen and when they do you just suck it up and get over it.

As of latest patch game crashes, black screens, crash to main menu, desink from instancing and a plethora more have been happening more frequently than in all previous years combined. Then there's being stuck in loading screen when exiting Orbital cruise or jumping in/out of witchspace. There's being stuck waiting for the map view to load (where you simply cannot exit or move) and a few more. Those describe the ones at the top of my head and all have happened within the past week. Yeah, way bigger issue than logging.

 

[JerryLove]

i have a very hard time taking this argument seriously.

first, if game crashes are so frequent as to be relevant, then we have a far bigger problem than combat logging. in fact, it would make the whole discussion pointless. not to mention the boutade of designing a mechanic for a game that doesn't even work properly. lets assume the bare minimum level of quality, meaning it at least runs uninterrupted for the most part!

If I'm in combat zones: I might crash every other hour or so. If I lost my ship to those: that would be a bit more than -10mil/hr (while in CZ). This seems to be mostly since 2.2.

I had a small spate of disconnects over the weekend (3? 4?), that's unusual and none occurred while in combat. One time I had to exit out of the game and restart to re-establish connection. It did not appear to be an issue with my ISP. More typical is maybe 1-2 disconnects a week.

edit/add: answering your specific question, yes. games are games and accidents (cats walking over keyboards, glasses spilling, connections dying, power loss) will always happen and when they do you just suck it up and get over it.

Then we have a simple difference of opinion. I disagree with punishing players for game crashes.

I'm already not sure how any useful PvP (that is to say: two people who want to fight fight, as opposed to gankers going around after easy targets) is sustainable.

 

[lenna]

games are games and accidents (cats walking over keyboards, glasses spilling, connections dying, power loss) will always happen and when they do you just suck it up and get over it.

Based on this reasoning perhaps all those QQing over Combat Logging should just report the incidents to FD then just suck it up and get on with playing the game.

It is irrelevant whether FD act on specific combat logging incidents or not, it is their prerogative to deal with the incidents as they see fit. If anyone has an issue with how FD have handled their specific cases then they need to dispute the points directly with them. Open forum is not the appropriate place to discuss such matters if you expect the cases to be dealt with fairly and reasonably.

Combat Logging is not an in-game offence in terms of in-game mechanics it is just a real world breach of the EULA. No in-game penalties should be allocated for such incidents and to do so would not be in the spirit of it being a "game" IMO.

 

[Karunamon]

It is irrelevant whether FD act on specific combat logging incidents or not, it is their prerogative to deal with the incidents as they see fit. If anyone has an issue with how FD have handled their specific cases then they need to dispute the points directly with them. Open forum is not the appropriate place to discuss such matters if you expect the cases to be dealt with fairly and reasonably.

Please. The response to this amounts to "FD has investigated FD and found that FD did nothing wrong". Shame is a powerful motivator, and whoever put in place the policy (ignoring this many reports is not a "mistake") should feel ashamed for being dishonest about it.

Combat Logging is not an in-game offence in terms of in-game mechanics it is just a real world breach of the EULA. No in-game penalties should be allocated for such incidents and to do so would not be in the spirit of it being a "game" IMO.

I'm curious what you think the penalties for violating the game EULA should be if they are not related to the game.

 

[Obnoxious_Gamer]

Please. The response to this amounts to "FD has investigated FD and found that FD did nothing wrong". Shame is a powerful motivator, and whoever put in place the policy (ignoring this many reports is not a "mistake") should feel ashamed for being dishonest about it.



I'm curious what you think the penalties for violating the game EULA should be if they are not related to the game.

Okay, I have to make ONE political joke. For giggles.


"Hillary Clinton has investigated Hillary Clinton, and has found that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong."

 

[JerryLove]

Okay, I have to make ONE political joke. For giggles.


"Hillary Clinton has investigated Hillary Clinton, and has found that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong."

And Trump has found no conflicts of interest.

 

[lenna]

Please. The response to this amounts to "FD has investigated FD and found that FD did nothing wrong". Shame is a powerful motivator, and whoever put in place the policy (ignoring this many reports is not a "mistake") should feel ashamed for being dishonest about it..

Stop talking ... it is nothing to do with FD investigating FD but FD investigating individual cases of player activities reported by other players.

Their primary penalty for breaches of EULA is plain and clear and have been for ages - Shadow banning. In some of the more extreme cases, they may be well within their rights to cancel the game account but I would expect this to be reserved for the more illegal behaviours (e.g. persistent and wide spread verbal/textual harassment, hosting a bot, or acts of cheating via reverse engineering or hacking).

EULA is nothing to do with the game per se but about FD trying to limit certain behaviours which are either deemed as illegal or undesirable by them. FD should not be under scrutiny IMO, they are well with-in their rights to enforce their EULA as they deem appropriate. None of us have a say in how this is done and to my mind we should not either unless the enforcement involves them acting directly against us as individuals in an unfair or illegal manner. This is not the case as I see it.

 

[Starstrydur]

Wow... How many pages now. About something that seems to be impossible to even prove or disprove in general? The only impact it has on other players is that another player may not take a loss or be sent to the rebuy screen!!!

Will we ever stop feeding the trolls? [squeeeee]

 

[Comrade Error]

Wow... How many pages now. About something that seems to be impossible to even prove or disprove in general? The only impact it has on other players is that another player may not take a loss or be sent to the rebuy screen!!!

Will we ever stop feeding the trolls? [squeeeee]

A troll asking people to stop feeding the trolls?

Oh god, I fed the troll.

 

[Karunamon]

None of us have a say in how this is done and to my mind we should not either unless the enforcement involves them acting directly against us as individuals in an unfair or illegal manner. This is not the case as I see it.

I see FD's failure to do anything about logging, and being deceptive about it, as acting directly against my interests in an unfair manner.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[NeilF]

I see FD's failure to do anything about logging, and being deceptive about it, as acting directly against my interests in an unfair manner.

Your mileage may vary.

IMHO, if FD start taking action against combat logging it will most likely be counter productive if other issues are not addressed first?

I suspect there's only one "type" of players who would see it as a positive outcome to address combat logging before other areas are first addressed.

Pirates might appreciate is, but I suspect, (a) most pirates feel the whole career needs some attention in truth, (b) many actually don't find combat logging too much of an issue (I didn't), and it's the mindless interdiction/destruction that is doing them a dis-service!

- - - Updated - - -

Wow... How many pages now. About something that seems to be impossible to even prove or disprove in general? The only impact it has on other players is that another player may not take a loss or be sent to the rebuy screen!!!

Will we ever stop feeding the trolls? [squeeeee]

As pointed out...

Someone needlessly interdicts another CMDR who is not interested in fighting back, or actually cannot fight back... They are then fired upon and there's either an explosion, or the CMDR disappears (combat logs due to the the mindless/pointless destruction)...

The only difference in this outcome is does the interdicting CMDR gets a "mental reward" of knowing he's possibly upset/aggravated another player, or doesn't... And this is the mentality we're trying to discuss here?

 

[masCh]

2-step solution:

1) Make the ship not logout when the player d/c for 60 seconds. The ship (if not in normal space) will be sent to normal space upon d/c. During combat, the ship will have a marker on it to say "pilot unconscious" when the ship pilot is d/c, and after 60 seconds it will disappear.

2) A pilot needs to have an SOS button, instead of the "report to authorities" setting on the right panel. A large, clear SOS button will put his location as a Red Signal Source to every pilot in the same system and a Tip-Off notification to every other pilot 1 jump range from that system.

Then you will have hacks to contend with. In a p2p environment, a hack can disconnect the other player. The repercussions of that far outweigh the benefits of a disconnect penalty. Now that's cheating, which incidentally your suggestion would guarantee if taken.

1) You will punish people, potentially very badly, for game crashes and connectivity issues.
2) Disconnect for whom?

Example of #2. You and I are in a fight. We lose connection to one another but not FD. Then what? What if we lose connection to FD but not each other?

Your suggestion throws out the baby with the bathwater.

been saying that for ages. it's the only real solution, and what any other serious mmo does, not by coincidence.



bad idea. sos spam in 1, 2 ....

Did you all misread the post?

1. Instead of the 15 second timer (or immediate on task kill), you let the ship remain in the game for 60 seconds (instead of 15, or 0). It doesn't have to die. The ship will have a marker on it saying "pilot unconscious". It will be up to the other human player to decide to kill or not kill in those 60 seconds. After 60 seconds the ship disappears. This doesn't punish anyone who has a game crash or connectivity issues while in flight, other than during a pvp fight - but that's why you have the notification marker. Hacks are a different issue, you'd have to determine the other user's IP and so on, and if you are willing to do that then you could pretty much hack any game and this will be a totally different issue.

2. The SOS button could be made so that you can only push it once. It will put a permanent Signal Source in your own system and nearby systems so that ordinary players can jump in and help. If both of you have a Wanted tag then you'll have to decide whether you really want to press the SOS button.

 

[Ozram]

Did you all misread the post?

1. Instead of the 15 second timer (or immediate on task kill), you let the ship remain in the game for 60 seconds (instead of 15, or 0). It doesn't have to die. The ship will have a marker on it saying "pilot unconscious". It will be up to the other human player to decide to kill or not kill in those 60 seconds. After 60 seconds the ship disappears. This doesn't punish anyone who has a game crash or connectivity issues while in flight, other than during a pvp fight - but that's why you have the notification marker. Hacks are a different issue, you'd have to determine the other user's IP and so on, and if you are willing to do that then you could pretty much hack any game and this will be a totally different issue.

2. The SOS button could be made so that you can only push it once. It will put a permanent Signal Source in your own system and nearby systems so that ordinary players can jump in and help. If both of you have a Wanted tag then you'll have to decide whether you really want to press the SOS button.

I hear you and think in a game where C&P had consequences, that's actually an excellent idea. As is, I think you'd just have a lot of rebuy screens. Also, what I mean by hacks is people disconnecting their target through a hack and then killing it while "unconscious". I've heard that's not exactly a sophisticated hack and can be done with easy in a p2p environment. I could be wrong.

 

[bitstorm]

2. The SOS button could be made so that you can only push it once. It will put a permanent Signal Source in your own system and nearby systems so that ordinary players can jump in and help. If both of you have a Wanted tag then you'll have to decide whether you really want to press the SOS button.

I almost feel this should happen anyway. Assuming the player has "report crimes against me" turned on, it pushes out a notification to all in the system.

The lore could be the authorities push out the system-wide message once it gets a valid report, I mean they can't be everywhere can they.

 

[NeilF]

Did you all misread the post?

1. Instead of the 15 second timer (or immediate on task kill), you let the ship remain in the game for 60 seconds (instead of 15, or 0). It doesn't have to die. The ship will have a marker on it saying "pilot unconscious". It will be up to the other human player to decide to kill or not kill in those 60 seconds. After 60 seconds the ship disappears. This doesn't punish anyone who has a game crash or connectivity issues while in flight, other than during a pvp fight - but that's why you have the notification marker. Hacks are a different issue, you'd have to determine the other user's IP and so on, and if you are willing to do that then you could pretty much hack any game and this will be a totally different issue.

2. The SOS button could be made so that you can only push it once. It will put a permanent Signal Source in your own system and nearby systems so that ordinary players can jump in and help. If both of you have a Wanted tag then you'll have to decide whether you really want to press the SOS button.

From what I understand the P2P networking approach ED uses means this is hard, if not impossible to do?

ie: I could abuse this mechanic such that I prevent traffic from your IP address reaching my machine... Your mechanic is then invoked and I blow the hell out of your static defenseless ship. What's going to happen?

Now, I'm not certain about this, but I believe that is the issue!


As regards, exiting to Menu and the existing 15 second timer:-
1) The timer should be shown to all CMDRs in the instance. This is a long standing issue for pirates who see any delay in a response from a victim as them potentially sitting their watching a 15 second countdown... Displaying a players countdown to all players in the instance would help with this.
2) Consideration - If a ship receives a weapons hit... Return the counter to 15 seconds.


As regard combat logging. The game knows if are in a combat situation, so can work out if when entering the game, if it last "died unexpectadly" during such a combat situation. It cannot react to individual cases, but can build up a "trend". I'd suggest if X cases of it happen in a Y period:-
1) The user receives a warning and...
2) ...in effect the user is on probation for a period of time. If the trend does not continue, they return to (1). However, if the trend continues...
3) They are banned to SOLO for a period of time.
4) On return (after the ban) they return to (2)

 

[znôrt]

Did you all misread the post?

i actually supported your idea. did you misread the post? yeah, you didn't mention a hefty cooldown for the sos button. technical detail!

I've heard that's not exactly a sophisticated hack and can be done with easy in a p2p environment. I could be wrong.

like any hack, once it's in the wild anyone can use it.

it's frontier's responsibility to deal with it if they want to include 'competitive multiplayer' in their ads. no, they're not doing well at all in that regard.

sw architectures and stuff being a great topic to me, i'm still astonished that this is a factor in the discussion. this just means that some engineers (and i'm not meaning the rng ones) are just not doing their job. and being in the profession, i know that this might be or not their fault. yeah, life's complicated. keep firing!