How to solve the Combat Logging Problem

[Brrokk]

To expand on my idea, the game knows you're in danger as soon as you're in danger.
Simply save this state as soon as it happens, as a sort of tag on your save, with your current mode logged.
The tag is cleared if you legitimately leave danger (die, high/low wake, menu log, etc).

If you force quit, disconnect, CTD ect, the tag isn't removed (because it can't be).
When you next load the game, it reads there's a tag, and locks the mode for 1 hour.

But what is this "tag"? A few bytes of data? Where is it saved? At the FD server (your client may not get the chance to send it)? Or on my disc (so I can just edit or delete it)?

What removes it, the client or the FD server? What if they disagree? What if another player's client thinks I should have a tag when mine doesn't?

I fear you still have a client-server model in mind, not P2P.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

But what is this "tag"? A few bytes of data? Where is it saved? At the FD server (your client may not get the chance to send it)? Or on my disc (so I can just edit or delete it)?

What removes it, the client or the FD server? What if they disagree? What if another player's client thinks I should have a tag when mine doesn't?

I fear you still have a client-server model in mind, not P2P.

Ideally, the "tag" updates your danger status to your save state to FDs server thingie, (a proper technical term!), as soon as you enter the danger state.
So no tampering. It'll clear itself if you're classed as not in danger.
If you kill the client or whatever, and the tag hasn't been removed, when you log in, your client reads your save data from the server (while loading your save, which it does anyway I guess) and "activates" the tag, locking you to the relevant mode.

No other players are involved in this process, so it'll effect all danger states, even guardian ruin parking restrictions. Lol

The time limit removes the tag. And it's the only way to remove it once it's "activated".

This is all coming from someone with absolutely no networking or coding knowledge. Lol

Basically it should work in the same manner as any other state you can acquire, like wanted status.
In theory. Lol

 

[Swordfish_01]

How to solve the Combat Logging Problem, Version 1.0, 11/15/2014,,, How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Ver 1.5, 05/15/2015,, How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Ver 2.0, 11/15/2015,,, How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Ver 2.5, 05/15/2016,,, and on and on and on, until How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Version 04/03/19 comes along.
Any answers? Any Actions? No?
Life is not fair in so many instances. It could be said that ED is not fair in so many instances. The change is not gonna happen. Get over it.
We can no longer have a Gentlemanly Duel with witnesses on an even playing field. Its the 31st Century or there abouts in this game. Honesty and Being Noble are 1000 years gone. Live with it or don't.

 

[metatheurgist]

You've got it backwards. The insta-port would transport YOU to the location of your "friend," it doesn't transport your friend/CLogger to you. You wouldn't be able to cash in multiples at once because you can only be in one place at a time. If you used your teleport to friend 2, and then immediately to friend 3, you would leave the instance of friend 2 and be brought to friend 3.

That's neat too. I get a instaport token and load up my T9 with nothing but racks. My buddy goes to my destination and instaports me to my destination. No risk, no travel time.

 

[Kaocraft]

That's neat too. I get a instaport token and load up my T9 with nothing but racks. My buddy goes to my destination and instaports me to my destination. No risk, no travel time.

Who cares? Is this a serious objection? To do this, you'd still have to meet up in the same location initially, and your friend would have to fly to your chosen destination for you, and the end result is that you got to unload or buy some cargo from somewhere without personally making the trip? Considering the time and coordination and imposition it makes in two people's schedules, what is gained and why does it matter?

 

[Kaocraft]

How to solve the Combat Logging Problem, Version 1.0, 11/15/2014,,, How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Ver 1.5, 05/15/2015,, How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Ver 2.0, 11/15/2015,,, How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Ver 2.5, 05/15/2016,,, and on and on and on, until How to solve the Combat Logging Problem Version 04/03/19 comes along.
Any answers? Any Actions? No?
Life is not fair in so many instances. It could be said that ED is not fair in so many instances. The change is not gonna happen. Get over it.
We can no longer have a Gentlemanly Duel with witnesses on an even playing field. Its the 31st Century or there abouts in this game. Honesty and Being Noble are 1000 years gone. Live with it or don't.

Dude you can wring hands about what is or isn't "gonna happen" somewhere else. This thread isn't about taking Frontier to task for their inactivity it's for proposing relatively simple solutions that Frontier *could* plausibily implement. People talk about CLing as though it were an unavoidable eternal inevitability but the fact is that the game as currently designed incentivizes it. Can you think of any modest, practical changes which could be made to the game to disincentivize Combat Logging? If so, please share!

 

[Kaocraft]

But what is this "tag"? A few bytes of data? Where is it saved? At the FD server (your client may not get the chance to send it)? Or on my disc (so I can just edit or delete it)?

What removes it, the client or the FD server? What if they disagree? What if another player's client thinks I should have a tag when mine doesn't?

I fear you still have a client-server model in mind, not P2P.

I think you're underestimating how much of a role the Frontier servers play in tracking changes to your game. If you spend some CR or use a mat for synthesis or take hull damage or gain a wanted status and then CTD right after, all of these things are nonetheless reflected in your game state when you sign back on, and were probably sent to Frontier's servers at that time. Regardless, the state is tagged *somewhere*, which means that the 1 hour timer idea is valid and implementable, and we don't need to get into the weeds of exactly how it would be coded or how discrepancies between client and server or client and client would be resolved. There are already answers to these questions so it's not a legitimate objection to bring it up as though failing to produce an answer would somehow invalidate the proposal.

When people were asking for Galaxy Map bookmarks I didn't go around asking how the data would be stored and how could it possibly synchronize between your copy of the game and the servers, etc. But other people did bring up these kinds of objections and they were seriously arguing that galmap bookmarks were some huge impossible technical hurdle that no sane person could possibly be expected to overcome. Don't be like those people.

 

[metatheurgist]

Who cares? Is this a serious objection? To do this, you'd still have to meet up in the same location initially, and your friend would have to fly to your chosen destination for you, and the end result is that you got to unload or buy some cargo from somewhere without personally making the trip? Considering the time and coordination and imposition it makes in two people's schedules, what is gained and why does it matter?

Who cares? The poorly thought out mechanics of ED are bad enough without introducing stuff you can drive T9s through.

 

[Kaocraft]

Who cares? The poorly thought out mechanics of ED are bad enough without introducing stuff you can drive T9s through.

You're bringing this up as though it were some huge glaring flaw in the idea that couldn't possibly be resolved. That's silly. And to speak the specific exploit: even if it were unaddressed its a non-issue because it requires more effort and time to pull off than it takes to achieve the same goal manually. An exploit ain't much of an exploit if it confers no real advantage. Hence: Who Cares?

 

[AtotheCtotheG]

To add to your first paragraph, Alex Brentnall, I could also see combat loggers abusing this system by logging, then coming back to open play as part of a wing. Enemy player teleports to them, gets ambushed.

 

[Lestat]

I am looking at some players don't want to PvP. So they log off. I don't blame them. Note some players systems have internet issues also.

 

[Electric Kite]

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 will take him to that other player's current location and instance the next time both of them are logged into the game. After the teleport has been used, the player 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.

Its not a problem though.

There is literally, (in most cases) no reward for killing players. So you literally are loosing out on nothing if someone logs off.

If its just about showing your e-peen and showing someone whos the "big man" then the fact you bet them to the point they actually quit the game should be ever so arousing for you.

TLDR: there is no problem.

 

[Kaocraft]

I am looking at some players don't want to PvP. So they log off. I don't blame them. Note some players systems have internet issues also.

I'm saying the first group of players do not have a legitimate right to nope out of the game to avoid confrontation. They should have to escape by actually flying their ships and escaping, not by quitting the game. This is the equivalent of flipping the chessboard over when you think you're going to lose. It's something an insane baby does and it shouldn't be encouraged. Their wants are illegitimate in this case. As to the second group of players, this proposal helps them since they obviously don't WANT to cheat their way out of a confrontation, they are merely victims of their own sketchy internet connections. Up until now they'd just have to shrug and call it a day, but now they can simply log back on and expect the encounter to resume where it left off. So it's a win-win for everyone whose opinion matters, and only becomes a "punishment" for bad actors who are trying to cheat their way out of a confrontation.

 

[Kaocraft]

To add to your first paragraph, Alex Brentnall, I could also see combat loggers abusing this system by logging, then coming back to open play as part of a wing. Enemy player teleports to them, gets ambushed.

Also going to file this under "not a big deal." The combat logger would have to actually make arrangements to gather people together in a wing, which would take time, and also implies they have friends, which is a bit of a stretch. Remember that the teleport token can be used at the owner's discretion. So if I Combat Log on you and then gather a wing together before logging back on again, I might be doing this for no reason because *you* might already be signed off by that time, or you might just opt not to use the token at the exact moment that's convenient for ME. All the time I waste trying to "exploit" this system and avoid having a legitimate confrontation is just an additional deserved punishment for acting in bad faith.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

I like the outside the box thinking, but it sounds like it could get tedious or be abused in a couple of ways, such as teleporting someone from the bubble to Colonia.

I would actually prefer an AI referee to call the match.
It could look at the following factors to determine if you were likely to be destroyed before you got disconnected, or if you could have (not would have) escaped.

-Hull integrity
-Shields remaining
-Shield cells remaining
-Operational status or remaining hitpoints on your FSD, Power Plant, and Thrusters.
-Opponents' remaining ammo (if relevant)

If the AI determines a likelihood of destruction say over 90% or 95%, then when you log back in you're met with the Rebuy screen.
It wouldn't be perfect or cover all cases, but it would be accurate enough that you'd have to just accept it, just like you have to accept the referee's judgement at a Football/Soccer match.

That is of course unless Alt+F4 or Task Manager kill are detected during combat, as both of those should just equate to a self-destruct button in that case.
Combat by the way should also be considered underway if a successful interdiction is completed.

 

[Brrokk]

I like the outside the box thinking, but it sounds like it could get tedious or be abused in a couple of ways, such as teleporting someone from the bubble to Colonia.

I would actually prefer an AI referee to call the match.
It could look at the following factors to determine if you were likely to be destroyed before you got disconnected, or if you could have (not would have) escaped.

-Hull integrity
-Shields remaining
-Shield cells remaining
-Operational status or remaining hitpoints on your FSD, Power Plant, and Thrusters.
-Opponents' remaining ammo (if relevant)

If the AI determines a likelihood of destruction say over 90% or 95%, then when you log back in you're met with the Rebuy screen.
It wouldn't be perfect or cover all cases, but it would be accurate enough that you'd have to just accept it, just like you have to accept the referee's judgement at a Football/Soccer match.

That is of course unless Alt+F4 or Task Manager kill are detected during combat, as both of those should just equate to a self-destruct button in that case.
Combat by the way should also be considered underway if a successful interdiction is completed.

This is still conventional client- server thinking which can't apply to PvP.

Is the AI referee going to run on my client, your client or the FD server? If either client, it can be killed or manipulated. If FD server, it can't keep abreast of what's going on in the fight.

How can Alt-F4 kill be detected? If I kill my client it can't detect anything as it's not running. Your client and the FD server have no way of knowing what I did as already discussed.

I'm not against the intention of these suggestions, but so often they are set in a mental picture of how other games work and simply can't be mapped to the P2P situation we have.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

This is still conventional client- server thinking which can't apply to PvP.

Is the AI referee going to run on my client, your client or the FD server? If either client, it can be killed or manipulated. If FD server, it can't keep abreast of what's going on in the fight.

How can Alt-F4 kill be detected? If I kill my client it can't detect anything as it's not running. Your client and the FD server have no way of knowing what I did as already discussed.

I'm not against the intention of these suggestions, but so often they are set in a mental picture of how other games work and simply can't be mapped to the P2P situation we have.

AI ref would be client side, with a server side checksum both on startup and after each logging instance to prevent manipulation of the client. In any case it would be the client of the combatant that remained in game which would do the refereeing, so the person who likes to combat log can’t gear their local client to cheat for them.

Also, as far as I’m aware, Alt+F4 and killing the task are currently being detected by the client, and is being used by Frontier to determine obvious cases. To avoid this, players have macros setup to kill their network connection so it doesn’t look deliberate.

 

[Kaocraft]

I like the outside the box thinking, but it sounds like it could get tedious or be abused in a couple of ways, such as teleporting someone from the bubble to Colonia.

I would actually prefer an AI referee to call the match.
It could look at the following factors to determine if you were likely to be destroyed before you got disconnected, or if you could have (not would have) escaped.

-Hull integrity
-Shields remaining
-Shield cells remaining
-Operational status or remaining hitpoints on your FSD, Power Plant, and Thrusters.
-Opponents' remaining ammo (if relevant)

If the AI determines a likelihood of destruction say over 90% or 95%, then when you log back in you're met with the Rebuy screen.
It wouldn't be perfect or cover all cases, but it would be accurate enough that you'd have to just accept it, just like you have to accept the referee's judgement at a Football/Soccer match.

That is of course unless Alt+F4 or Task Manager kill are detected during combat, as both of those should just equate to a self-destruct button in that case.
Combat by the way should also be considered underway if a successful interdiction is completed.

I'd be onboard with this if it were doable. But your suggestion is just a variation on the same solution people keep shooting down every time because it requires either a much more involved central server structure, or the cheating player's client to self-report. The benefit of the teleport token solution is that it requires no judgement calls and it doesn't matter what method the CLogger used to disconnect; it's all dealt with on the remaining, still-connected player's end.

As to the supposed "exploit" of teleporting to Colonia: you do realize that in addition to the coordination required between the two colluding parties, someone would still have to fly TO Colonia after first meeting up and Combat Logging in the bubble?

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

I'd be onboard with this if it were doable. But your suggestion is just a variation on the same solution people keep shooting down every time because it requires either a much more involved central server structure, or the cheating player's client to self-report. The benefit of the teleport token solution is that it requires no judgement calls and it doesn't matter what method the CLogger used to disconnect; it's all dealt with on the remaining, still-connected player's end.

As to the supposed "exploit" of teleporting to Colonia: you do realize that in addition to the coordination required between the two colluding parties, someone would still have to fly TO Colonia after first meeting up and Combat Logging in the bubble?

My suggestion also relies on the remaining still connected player’s end. See my response above to brrokk.

As for teleporting to Colonia, it would save one person the trip, or else bring the other player to Colonia when they didn’t want to go there. If the mechanic informs the player where they’d be going, it may effectively be a means of escape, as it’s a long way back. Though I obviously don’t see that as a commonly used method. There are other possible exploits mentioned above by others.

 

[Kaocraft]

My suggestion also relies on the remaining still connected player’s end. See my response above to brrokk.

As for teleporting to Colonia, it would save one person the trip, or else bring the other player to Colonia when they didn’t want to go there. If the mechanic informs the player where they’d be going, it may effectively be a means of escape, as it’s a long way back. Though I obviously don’t see that as a commonly used method. There are other possible exploits mentioned above by others.

Regarding the Colonia comment, I think you may have missed the fact that the teleport only takes you to the other person's location for the duration of your current game session. After you sign off you will be returned to your original location when you start your next session. Nobody gets to stay in Colonia unless they flew there on their own. Regarding any potential weird cargo ferrying exploits it's probably not that big a deal to make most station services inaccessible to the teleportee, if that is something we're worried about. However I'm not interested in discussing easily fixable edge cases and would prefer if people discussed to merits of the mechanic itself, unless anyone can think of a problem which would require drastic unrealistic changes to fix.