How to solve the Combat Logging Problem

[Kaocraft]

1.
Your Suggestion is Impossible to Implement.
It would Destroy any Resemblance of Proper Gameplay and would be Extremely Easy to Abuse for both Sides.
If this can be Used without a Time Limit then this would make my Earlier Suggestion on Abusing it less Viable as you might end up Waiting.
But instead it would Open the Door to a Far more Absurd way of Abusing it.
Which is that I would take some Friends. Let them Shoot on me to get a Token to have Instant Teleport to me.
And this way being able to Instant Teleport them to any Location in the Galaxy upon Demand.
Which I could not just Abuse for Ganking but even for alot of PvE Stuff like doing Instant Transport of Goods or having an Instant Return Button after doing a Week long Exploration Trip etc etc.
Another Funny thing would be to basicly Combat Log on an Enemy Commander.
Then Take a Cheap Exploration Ship in Solo and Fly into Deep Space. So that the Guy when using the Token can Kill me like 10k Light Years out of the Bubble and have Fun Flying Back gg

To your first point, I guess my main rebuttal is "who cares?" It makes no difference to anyone else if you do that. Maybe station services and buying/selling of cargo could be disabled when you use a token, though. The second scenario with the Cheap Exploration Ship is not possible, though, because when you use a teleport token it is only valid for the duration of your session. If I teleport to you and kill you, I won't be trapped I'll be back in my original location after logging off and back on again.

2.
It would Completely Break Immersion for Several Players.
Especially because other Players can Abuse it.
The Worst is.
This Game is not really that Stable.
It is not that Rare for Players to be Disconnected after an Succesful Interdiction due to the Matchmaking Server Failing to Create a Stable Connection between the Two Clients.
This has happened to me several Times in the Past when trying to Play together with Friends which ended up with one of us Being Disconnected after trying to Enter an Instance together.

Instability of the game doesn't matter. This solution is intended to mitigate the problems that arise from instability in the first place. People would be granted tokens regardless of whether or not it is an accidental disconnect or a combat log or whatever. It doesn't matter WHY the disconnect happens, this solution is a reparative measure to ensure that a dropped interaction can be resumed. It's a punishment to anyone who is trying to cheat, but only because it deprives them of the advantage gained by cheating. For everyone else it's a net neutral at worst.

There is no negative impact on immersion whatsoever. For anyone using a teleport token, it provides an opportunity to restore some of the immersion that is lost when someone else suddenly disappears from their game. For anyone being teleported to, it will just look like yet another ship warping in; no different from what you experience when interacting with any other CMDR or NPC.

3.
It would not actually Fix the Problem. Because the only thing Changing would be that People will Simply Combat Log BEFORE they are Attacked to Avoid Granting a Token to Someone.
Especially because here anyone can Safely use the Menu Logout Button which is not considered Combat Logging by Frontier and which will Disconnect you before the Interdiction Succeeds.
Which is another thing. What do you do with the Regular Logout which FD does not Consider Combat Logging ?

Under my solution, there is no need to distinguish between Regular Logout, Combat Logging, and accidental disconnects. All would grant a teleport token and thus an opportunity to resume the interaction at a later time. The teleport token is not punitive to the person who disconnects, it merely gives the other party an opportunity to re-initiate the dropped interaction should they wish to do so.

You cannot Menu Log during an interdiction - the menu won't show up until the interdiction has succeeded or failed. If you log out of the game before anyone has even initiated an interdiction - well no harm no foul.

4.
The System is Incredible Greasy as you would need to constantly Monitor Hundreds or Potentially Thousands of Ships for their Exact Location and Instance in the Background.
To Avoid that a User of such a Token is Teleported into a Station or Something like that.
And we are not even Talking about what we do when when a Non Horizons Player gets such a Token on a Horizons Player. And the Horizons Player goes down to a Planet.
Mean in all such cases do you just Grey out the Button ??

The system is no more "Greasy" than the already existing friends list and multicrew system. It does not require anything more sophisticated than that. Yes you can Grey out the button or you could simply have the game teleport you at the first available opportunity after you hit "confirm" or whatever.

 

[[VR] Goooost]

edit: reworded 1st paragraph for hopefully better clarity

If two players are in an engagement where shots have been fired, and one of the players suddenly disconnects for any reason, the player still signed into the game is granted a "pick up where we left off" option in his contacts panel. This is a one-time use instant teleport which he may activate anytime both parties are signed into the game, which takes him to that other player's current location and instance. After the teleport has been used, the token expires and the player is free to do whatever, but after logging off he will be returned to his original location the next time he signs into the game.

If of course the target happens to have yet another "accidental disconnect" or has to "gracefully log off" due to personal business during the re-engagement, then an additional "pick up where we left off" token will be granted to the party left behind during the disconnect.

This cycle can be repeated as many times as needed until both players have successfully completed their interaction, no matter how many times those pesky routers, crying babies, boiling teakettles, and sketchy Frontier servers get in the way.

Plus, there is no need to worry about who is or isn't "Combat Logging" vs "Menu Logging" vs "having Internet problems," because this method doesn't punish anyone it simply allows good actors to act in good faith, while limiting the benefits to bad actors of acting in bad faith.

Eh, that's pretty cheap.

I say that the party that disconnected will still keep their ship in the other player's instance, and will revert to an AI set to flee. If the ship is destroyed, the person who let will receive their rebuy cost as a legacy fine or something. They'll keep their ship, but any fine that they want to pay in the future has to be paid with that rebuy they owe.

 

[Misty_Dark]

To your first point, I guess my main rebuttal is "who cares?" It makes no difference to anyone else if you do that. Maybe station services and buying/selling of cargo could be disabled when you use a token, though. The second scenario with the Cheap Exploration Ship is not possible, though, because when you use a teleport token it is only valid for the duration of your session. If I teleport to you and kill you, I won't be trapped I'll be back in my original location after logging off and back on again.



Instability of the game doesn't matter. This solution is intended to mitigate the problems that arise from instability in the first place. People would be granted tokens regardless of whether or not it is an accidental disconnect or a combat log or whatever. It doesn't matter WHY the disconnect happens, this solution is a reparative measure to ensure that a dropped interaction can be resumed. It's a punishment to anyone who is trying to cheat, but only because it deprives them of the advantage gained by cheating. For everyone else it's a net neutral at worst.

There is no negative impact on immersion whatsoever. For anyone using a teleport token, it provides an opportunity to restore some of the immersion that is lost when someone else suddenly disappears from their game. For anyone being teleported to, it will just look like yet another ship warping in; no different from what you experience when interacting with any other CMDR or NPC.


Under my solution, there is no need to distinguish between Regular Logout, Combat Logging, and accidental disconnects. All would grant a teleport token and thus an opportunity to resume the interaction at a later time. The teleport token is not punitive to the person who disconnects, it merely gives the other party an opportunity to re-initiate the dropped interaction should they wish to do so.

You cannot Menu Log during an interdiction - the menu won't show up until the interdiction has succeeded or failed. If you log out of the game before anyone has even initiated an interdiction - well no harm no foul.


The system is no more "Greasy" than the already existing friends list and multicrew system. It does not require anything more sophisticated than that. Yes you can Grey out the button or you could simply have the game teleport you at the first available opportunity after you hit "confirm" or whatever.

Wow, so who cares about combat logging in the first place then? If you do nto care at all about how the disengaged from the combat happened, just as it is combat logging according to your "definition"...

What about the other side of the story, I decide to fight you after you attack me, and then something happens with my internet that of course is seen as combat logging... it is resolved in a few minutes and I log back in, cannot find you, and you decide not to cash in your token, you keep it... next day I change to do something else, like mining, now you cash in your token and an unfair fight ensues... Yeah that is even more unfair than issue you are trying to solve.... What an impressive win that would be... but who cares, mighty PvP'er can ambush players on their own decision...


And the fact that you do not make any difference on how the disconnects happens, tells me you are not AFTER any fairness or the like, you are after REVENGE here. you want to PUNISH the other party. Punish so hard that the player would not DARE to even think about leaving the fight... That is pure BULLYING.


That seems to be core of your suggestion, to punish players. What if players in weak ships would get a tocken of instant destruction on players trying to prey on them? if you are in a much stronger ships just attacking "weak" players, a common setup where players actually are doing combat logging, if they would get a token to instant destroy the other players ship at their won leasure, and to make it worse they get to teleport to your instance and watch your ship go KABOOM!!!! this would also solve a big chunk of the cause of the combat logging... so you blew me up, I can then blew you up... so that would put a damper on your selection on targets wouldn't it? so no more seal clubbing weak commanders, and thus they have no reason to combat log...

 

[Eliza]

Didn't went throw the whole post, just read the suggestion...

I doubt it will function as desired. How can one differ between "pulling the plug" and a disconnect through the ISP? Technically it'll be the same "message" for the code: PPPoE timeout failure.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Didn't went throw the whole post, just read the suggestion...

I doubt it will function as desired. How can one differ between "pulling the plug" and a disconnect through the ISP? Technically it'll be the same "message" for the code: PPPoE timeout failure.

Simple, it doesn't, and the OP does not care, he does not even differentiate between combat logging and menu logging!

And what is even worse, since this game is P2P, that means one of the players is the instance holder, that means that if I hold the instance, I can figure out your IP address and block you in my Firewall, and this basically kicks you out of my instance, and you did nothing wrong... and I get rewarded with a token to resume this combat at time I choose...

 

[Eliza]

Simple, it doesn't, and the OP does not care, he does not even differentiate between combat logging and menu logging!

And what is even worse, since this game is P2P, that means one of the players is the instance holder, that means that if I hold the instance, I can figure out your IP address and block you in my Firewall, and this basically kicks you out of my instance, and you did nothing wrong... and I get rewarded with a token to resume this combat at time I choose...

Thanks for clearing this up!

 

[Chaparral]

I propose a public stat in the contacts panel.
"# Disconnects during game play".
Put it next to the commander's portrait.
You can't penalize them with game mechanics, but you can certainly let commanders that encounter them know the "connectivity profile" of the contact they are dealing with.

 

[Morbad]

You can't penalize them with game mechanics, but you can certainly let commanders that encounter them know the "connectivity profile" of the contact they are dealing with.

This would say nothing about rate or circumstance of disconnections and would inject yet more out-of-character information into the setting.

It might be fine if depicted in some other context, used as precident when looking at reports, or worked into matchmaking, but having it plastered on my CMDRs view would serve little useful purpose and be just as out of place as these "Store" icons.

 

[Drelthar]

This idea is exceedingly silly while not "fixing" the unfixable "issue"

Hence I approve!

 

[Chaparral]

This would say nothing about rate or circumstance of disconnections and would inject yet more out-of-character information into the setting.

It might be fine if depicted in some other context, used as precident when looking at reports, or worked into matchmaking, but having it plastered on my CMDRs view would serve little useful purpose and be just as out of place as these "Store" icons.

I wish there was some way to tease out the cause of the connectivity issues. There might be utility in the information beyond combat logging. It may be useful with Multicrew and Wings...

 

[DaggerSnake]

Why wouldn’t you just add a combat logging player to your block list? That’s what it’s made for. Filtering out the people who are a negative impact to your experience.

Eventually you won’t see combat loggers any more and your game world is tailor made for you!

Unless everyone combat logs, then some actual development mechanics would be needed.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Why wouldn’t you just add a combat logging player to your block list? That’s what it’s made for. Filtering out the people who are a negative impact to your experience.

Eventually you won’t see combat loggers any more and your game world is tailor made for you!

Unless everyone combat logs, then some actual development mechanics would be needed.

That is a good question, and what about a player who combat log, and then proceeds to blocks the other player... would that render the other player's token useless? which system would have priority? Well I can already guess OPs priority here...

 

[DaggerSnake]

That is a good question, and what about a player who combat log, and then proceeds to blocks the other player... would that render the other player's token useless? which system would have priority? Well I can already guess OPs priority here...

At the end of the day, regardless of who blocks who, the two players no longer have to interact and can move forward with their games being slightly better because of it.

The best solution for all issues is to not have players with subtractive behaviors interact. That doesn’t work out for anyone.

Modes are one way to apply global filters, but selective blocking is a much more refined process to tailor a personal game.

I don’t want to meet combat loggers. I just block them. I DO want to interact people in that add to my game experience, including pvp. This makes Open with selective blocking my favorite option.

I think some kind of instant teleport is a little weird in the immersion sense. But then again, they did just magically disappear.

 

[Havvk]

Best way to solve it is to stop ganking. Leave them be

 

[Kaocraft]

Why wouldn’t you just add a combat logging player to your block list? That’s what it’s made for. Filtering out the people who are a negative impact to your experience.

Eventually you won’t see combat loggers any more and your game world is tailor made for you!

Unless everyone combat logs, then some actual development mechanics would be needed.

The problem here is that you can only block them AFTER they have Combat Logged. So, yeah yay hooray at least they can’t do it again, but you’re still going to have this same problem over and over and over again with other players, where they waste your time by Logging.

You did give me an idea, though: What if Combat Logging put some kind of invisible flag on your account designating you as a CLer, and there was an in-game option to pre-emptively block all accounts with this flag? Basically you could check a toggle called “Do not instance me with cheaters” or something like that? Not a complete solution, and it probably wouldn’t work as a simple binary, but if there were some kind of weighting to it (number of CLogs, frequency, recency, etc), maybe it could help reduce the frequency of these types of interactions?

 

[Kaocraft]

Didn't went throw the whole post, just read the suggestion...

I doubt it will function as desired. How can one differ between "pulling the plug" and a disconnect through the ISP? Technically it'll be the same "message" for the code: PPPoE timeout failure.

The point is that the system does not need to differentiate between accidental, intentional, or menu disconnects since the token is not a punishment to anyone. All the token does is insure that nobody can reliably escape or otherwise gain advantage in a combat encounter by disconnecting. It makes Combat Logging into a poor tactical choice rather than an “I win” button, but it doesn’t impose a penalty on anyone. All it does is give the abandoned party an opportunity to re-initiate the encounter at a future time.

 

[Eliza]

The point is that the system does not need to differentiate between accidental, intentional, or menu disconnects since the token is not a punishment to anyone. All the token does is insure that nobody can reliably escape or otherwise gain advantage in a combat encounter by disconnecting. It makes Combat Logging into a poor tactical choice rather than an “I win” button, but it doesn’t impose a penalty on anyone. All it does is give the abandoned party an opportunity to re-initiate the encounter at a future time.

Misty_Dark made up a very good point, why it could be misused

Simple, it doesn't, and the OP does not care, he does not even differentiate between combat logging and menu logging!

And what is even worse, since this game is P2P, that means one of the players is the instance holder, that means that if I hold the instance, I can figure out your IP address and block you in my Firewall, and this basically kicks you out of my instance, and you did nothing wrong... and I get rewarded with a token to resume this combat at time I choose...

 

[Riverside]

The problem here is that you can only block them AFTER they have Combat Logged. So, yeah yay hooray at least they can’t do it again, but you’re still going to have this same problem over and over and over again with other players, where they waste your time by Logging.

You did give me an idea, though: What if Combat Logging put some kind of invisible flag on your account designating you as a CLer, and there was an in-game option to pre-emptively block all accounts with this flag? Basically you could check a toggle called “Do not instance me with cheaters” or something like that? Not a complete solution, and it probably wouldn’t work as a simple binary, but if there were some kind of weighting to it (number of CLogs, frequency, recency, etc), maybe it could help reduce the frequency of these types of interactions?

I think that while nice in theory the issue of intent (false positives) remains. I suppose there may be some 'name & shame' aspect to it as well.

 

[Kaocraft]

This doesn’t happen very often, but of course it does happen and that’s OK. Since it’s such a rare occurrence I don’t see why you should be so worried about it. If it happens often to you, I would argue that you are disrupting other people’s gameplay with your frequent disconnects, and that it’s not fair to demand that a multiplayer game cater primarily to your unreliable internet connection at the cost of multiplayer functionality.

If you experience a random disconnect, you can send the CMDR a message, tell him you were accidentally disconnected, and ask him to rematch you under circumstances similar to the fight you were already in. This is what you SHOULD be doing anyway if you have an accidental disconnect under the current system, if you are being a good sport.

The point of my proposal is that it does not allow disconnecting from combat to give you an ADVANTAGE. It does not rise to the level of “punishment” just because the CMDR you disconnected from has the opportunity to re-engage with you. I will concede that perhaps the token could come with an expiration date, maybe 30 days or so?

 

[Kaocraft]

I think that while nice in theory the issue of intent (false positives) remains. I suppose there may be some 'name & shame' aspect to it as well.

Which is why it would have to be invisible and only something that operates for purposes of blocking/instancing. It’s probably not altogether dissimilar from some aspects of Sandro’s now-abandoned “karma” system he was talking about once upon a time.