Combat Logging

[Vorxian]

Combat logging is the tip of the iceberg. A symptom of both game design and game philosophy. People combat log because of the loss.

In World of Warcraft you do not suffer any durability damage or lose items if killed by a human player. Would it work in ED? If you get killed by a human player, you suffer no loss, but, start at the station you last docked from? Would that actually help things? I think it would.

The LOSS is the problem in ED, not the actual encounter, so I'm inclined to think this may be a solution of sorts.

 

[znôrt]

Just how people use the lesser path of resistance to impact a player faction knowing they could be stopped.. I think you got this mixed up with the other 2v2 video. But thanks dude.

of course, i did. i even clicked on the second video but didn't even remember. i'm really getting old! (or too much internets!)

 

[StiTch]

Disagree - in fact even my suggestion of lumping all the PGs into one might prove contentious.

So...PvE players suddenly have a problem with affecting each others' BGSs from the shadows? Can't say I expected it ol' pal, but good to know empathy is finally settling in

Srs bsns, you're trying to pick a hole in a very specific part of the general sentiment I put forward. I made it pretty clear I don't personally care how it happens: what I am interested in is the multiplayer aspect of ED; somewhere where your actions have a true effect, and you can make changes happen through initiative, rather than winning effectively scripted competitions based on who grinded out the solo play hardest.

I don't think it's an unfair sentiment at all. In effect it's the "correct" solution to PvE and PvP game modes; truly speaking, PvP and PvE game modes solve nothing. All you do is give somewhere for players to avoid them nasty gank0rz, which you effectively already have though I understand the PG groups need a little sorting, while completely missing the point of improvement for "PvP mode".

However it's achieved, what I am putting forward in its entirety is that FD recognise they can make positive changes for both "sides", and that it doesn't have to be seen as discrimination to do so. Well it does, but discrimination can be positive.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Systems are objectives for all players to fight over. They can be attacked, and they can be defended.

Complaining that group A can't beat group B unless they put in at least as much effort is just bizarre.

I assume that those who argue this would also argue it's unfair that those who don't put the time and effort into upgrading their ships and practising PvP should be able to compete with skilled PvPers.

True multiplayer folks just want somewhere that continuity reigns; where you can make a difference by taking some form of initiative, rather than being one part of a few thousand people that happened to grind harder at an activity alone.

Initiative like complaining on the forum how unfair it all is that you have to put the same amount of effort into the BGS as the other guys?

edit: hey, isn't this the same discussion as all the other discussions in the modes section?

I know this has zip all to do with combat logging.

 

[StiTch]

Initiative like complaining on the forum how unfair it all is that you have to put the same amount of effort into the BGS as the other guys?

Come now Ziggy, poorly misjudged personal attacks are not your thing.

You usually judge them much better than that, anyway.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Come now Ziggy, poorly misjudged personal attacks are not your thing.

You usually judge them much better than that, anyway.

How was that a personal attack when I'm describing an activity?

Oh Sir True Multiplayer Scotsman

 

[GreyAreaUK]

So...PvE players suddenly have a problem with affecting each others' BGSs from the shadows? Can't say I expected it ol' pal, but good to know empathy is finally settling in

Srs bsns, you're trying to pick a hole in a very specific part of the general sentiment I put forward. I made it pretty clear I don't personally care how it happens: what I am interested in is the multiplayer aspect of ED; somewhere where your actions have a true effect, and you can make changes happen through initiative, rather than winning effectively scripted competitions based on who grinded out the solo play hardest.

I don't think it's an unfair sentiment at all. In effect it's the "correct" solution to PvE and PvP game modes; truly speaking, PvP and PvE game modes solve nothing. All you do is give somewhere for players to avoid them nasty gank0rz, which you effectively already have though I understand the PG groups need a little sorting, while completely missing the point of improvement for "PvP mode".

However it's achieved, what I am putting forward in its entirety is that FD recognise they can make positive changes for both "sides", and that it doesn't have to be seen as discrimination to do so. Well it does, but discrimination can be positive.

Keep in mind that there aren't really any 'modes' - it's all just instancing filters. I truly think that splitting the BGS at all would be a huge amount of work for something that I suspect the bulk of the player base doesn't really care about.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Keep in mind that there aren't really any 'modes' - it's all just instancing filters. I truly think that splitting the BGS at all would be a huge amount of work for something that I suspect the bulk of the player base doesn't really care about.

nor want to pay for.

Perhaps a separated Open subscription server.

 

[StiTch]

How was that a personal attack when I'm describing an activity?

You put up a strawman to torch off the back of a completely reasonable point. PvP/multiplayers want something different in their game to PvE/solo players; that is objectively true, regardless of whose "side" you're on.

Keep in mind that there aren't really any 'modes' - it's all just instancing filters. I truly think that splitting the BGS at all would be a huge amount of work for something that I suspect the bulk of the player base doesn't really care about.

Again, you're picking holes in what was just an example. Got nothing better to do than whine about anyone that dares speak in favour of Open style mechanics? Cute, but I'm not interested

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Again, you're picking holes in what was just an example. Got nothing better to do than whine about anyone that dares speak in favour of Open style mechanics? Cute

It's not 'picking holes'. It's stating a fact. There are no actual modes. Splitting the BGS would mean creating actual modes. That's not trivial.

 

[StiTch]

It's not 'picking holes'. It's stating a fact. There are no actual modes. Splitting the BGS would mean creating actual modes. That's not trivial.

And my point wasn't "split modes or go home". I simply said that FD could address Open and PG players with changes that would benefit either, and BGS splitting would be one such example. It's you that's taken that as a target to burn.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You put up a strawman to torch off the back of a completely reasonable point.

So a Strawman is a personal attack nowadays is it?

Plus, I'm not that sure it's a Strawman, since that needs an argument to riff off, not a statement.

PvP/multiplayers want something different in their game to PvE/solo players; that is objectively true, regardless of whose "side" you're on.

Is it objectively true that you can generalise to that extend?

Ok. If you say so

So .... how about that Combat Logging eh?

 

[StiTch]

So a Strawman is a personal attack nowadays is it?

Plus, I'm not that sure it's a Strawman, since that needs an argument to riff off, not a statement.

Is it objectively true that you can generalise to that extend?

Ok. If you say so

Go get a snickers. You're not you when you're hungry.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Go get a snickers. You're not you when you're hungry.

Still enough me for you to have to bail

 

[GreyAreaUK]

And my point wasn't "split modes or go home". I simply said that FD could address Open and PG players with changes that would benefit either, and BGS splitting would be one such example. It's you that's taken that as a target to burn.

*shrug* ok, if you're just going to be antagonistic then have fun with that.

 

[Vorxian]

Go get a snickers. You're not you when you're hungry.

[video=youtube;LaRBGBHsjU8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaRBGBHsjU8[/video]

 

[StiTch]

Still enough me for you to have to bail

And a coffee. That usually improves my coherence too.

*shrug* ok, if you're just going to be antagonistic then have fun with that.

I put forward that it's okay to make changes that benefit different players, you took an example I made for the sheer sake of having a go at it. Antagonistic? Moi?

I was actually being quite positive and unbiased, but yonder forum never surprises me. People like to complain for the sheer sake of it; I would never have known!

 

[znôrt]

It wouldn't take nine; at most four (and each with a quarter of the load ). Solo/PG across all consoles can still share a BGS. This isn't about giving in to the sheer demands of each group that wants their own server, it's about whether the universe you see requires continuity. At present, changes can be made to the BGS from PG where one cannot be seen, and this contradicts true multiplayer because there's no continuity; I cannot barricade a station to stop someone UA bombing it, for instance. And if that's the way that PG players are happy to play, they can happily fight their galaxy's wars from the background like they desire - and would be better off for having all players affecting the same server, no matter PG/solo/console. When your changes revolve around activities you do specifically for the BGS, the more the merrier.

True multiplayer folks just want somewhere that continuity reigns; where you can make a difference by taking some form of initiative, rather than being one part of a few thousand people that happened to grind harder at an activity alone.

that would be a solid first step. actually easy, but it would have a serious implication: it would promote the conectivity problems (clogging, instancing, non scalability) to critical. right now, they don't actually matter that much, but with people doing REAL competitive pp/bgs/cg/whatever it would be a crapfest. and those are not so easy to fix ...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

What do you guys consider combat logging? Alt tabbing and ending the task? Waiting the 15 seconds then exit the game? Or both?

Ending the task or disconnection is Combat Logging.

The other thing is called Menu Logging.

 

[znôrt]

How was that a personal attack when I'm describing an activity?

in that you attributed a negative attitude to stitch "complaining, not ready for effort" while you seemed to completely fail to grasp his point. reread. do it, ziggy! prrrrrleaaase!