How to stop Combat Logging and make the game more FUN for all in open play.

[c48113]

I still don´t understand why these people are in open in the first place but they are made not to feel like real players if they don´t so perhaps that´s why they are there.

.

I prefer to play in open, most of the chance encounters you have are not with some PVP'r out kill hollow squares, its just someone trading or exploring or whatever. This obviously excludes cg's and other announced gatherings that PVP'r seem to want to ruin for everyone else, then I go to private group.

I agree with the rest of your post.

I would add that another reason is probably that PVP loadouts are very different to PVE loadouts and the PVE ship isn't going to stand much of a chance.

 

[S'Rau]

LOL you two should try politics, you sound like my former president : the people didn't vote as expected, let's reform the people ... instead of trying to understand why we gave him a middle finger.

 

[SpeakerToAliens]

I agree but combat logging needs to be dealt in conjunction with crime & punishment as a joint effort one without the other unbalances the game.

These two problems are so easy to fix:-

1) Make the Combat Log timeout 120 seconds. Your ship remains vulnerable for the whole time. If it's destroyed while you're logged out you get to see the rebuy screen when you log in again.

2) There are no real punishments for Griefing. The punishments should be hard enough and last long enough to dissuade CMDRs from Griefing other "unwanted" CMDRs ("Wanted" CMDRs are fair game for anyone). First some definitions:-
Piracy: Find a ship with cargo, stop the ship, collect dropped cargo, fly away leaving your victim alive and able to reach a repair base (that bit's important).
Griefing: Destroying a CMDRs ship, by whatever means (including suicide-by-ramming) for the hell of it.

Piracy is fine. I have nothing against piracy. Next time I wipe my save I'll probably try it myself. It's certainly on my ToDo list.

Punishments for Griefing would include:-

1) Expulsion from the Pilots Federation - making it's ship-rebuy insurance policies unavailable to you. You would not be allowed to rejoin the Pilots Federation for an amount of time that increases exponentially each time you Grief a CMDR.

2) You remain "Wanted" for the entire time of your expulsion, regardless of the number of times your ship is destroyed, even if you wipe your save!

3) The star system you are in and your bounty would be broadcast in the 20 closest systems to any you are in.

4) A bounty will be paid upon the destruction of your ship. It shall be N times whatever you cost the CMDR(s) whose ships you destroyed. The bounty shall include the value of the ships, cargo, bounty claims, exploration data, etc that your victims lost. The bounty lasts the entire time of your expulsion. The bounties paid out would be paid by you - initially they'd be taken from your funds, then any goods you have will be sold and finally any ships you own will be sold. Once all of your assets have gone, the Pilots Federation will pick up the tab (enjoy the E-rated freewinder).

5) No CMDR can claim the bounty on you more than once a day - though they can attack you when they like.

6) The Bounty against you would not be claimable by CMDRs who've been expelled from the Pilots Federation at any time in the previous N months.

The multiplier N

This would start at one, but would double with every crime.

N would decrease by 1 every 7 days of real time elapsed until it is down to one again.

 

[c48113]

But the implication is that exploits that have clear detrimental effect on other players are "allowed" in Open. It's like allowing aim botting .-.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Except it isn't logical .-.

PvP is legitimate, combat logging isn't.

Many players don't give a rats _ss about PVP and would be happier with the game if it was removed, your solution is for them to leave open. Please show me where Dev's state that open belongs to PVP players. PVE'ers have the same right to Open as you do, you don't like them CLing to avoid your game, then create a private group where you ban people who CL. Problem solved.

 

[Cosmos]

The way to stop combat logging is to make it unacceptable and unrewarding to do.. Its as simple as that.

And if Frontier care about the integrity of their game and don't want it to be populated with cheaters and exploiters they'll something​ about it.

 

[Zambrick]

But the implication is that exploits that have clear detrimental effect on other players are "allowed" in Open. It's like allowing aim botting .-.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Except it isn't logical .-.

PvP is legitimate, combat logging isn't.

It is logical until the add a crime and punishment aspect to the game. Right now the whole Piracy or unwanted PVP aspect of this game is reliant upon the victim of said crime. If the victim is not in open then Pirates or PVP people have no one to kill. They cant have it both ways. FDEV needs to add a system that will mitigate the risk of being a trader and a pirate. If the victim of the crime knew there would be retribution or meaningful consequence, then I doubt you would see as many combat loggers.

If a pilot knew that the cops would show up and actually help, then they would be more likely go engage in meaningful PVP.

If the pilot actually knew that the Pirate would have even the tiniest bit of risk applied to their activities, then they would be more inclined to stay in game.

As it stands now its the victim of the crimes sole responsibility to make an encounter meaningful and or fun. There is no bonus for surviving Pirates or PVP actions against them. The mission system is 100% pass or fail. If any cargo is lost its a 100% fail. It doesnt matter if 99% of the cargo is still their to be delivered.

A better mission and encounter system as well as crime and punishment will fix this issue in its entirety.

 

[jacozilla]

The way to stop combat logging is to make it unacceptable and unrewarding to do.. Its as simple as that.

And if Frontier care about the integrity of their game and don't want it to be populated with cheaters and exploiters they'll something​ about it.

They did. They came out with an explicit statement that said logging out in combat or any other situation is just fine - as long as one logs out via the timed menu.

Given your position, it is unclear whether you are lumping anyone that logs out during combat vs. someone that artificially ends the game instantly via Alt-F4.

 

[Cosmos]

They did. They came out with an explicit statement that said logging out in combat or any other situation is just fine - as long as one logs out via the timed menu.

Given your position, it is unclear whether you are lumping anyone that logs out during combat vs. someone that artificially ends the game instantly via Alt-F4.

Its all words.. and no action and frankly I have little respect for anything they say about this when Sandro states that using the 15 seconds (SERIOUSLY LOL WAT?) log out timer via the menu is 'exiting the game gracefully'.. With the greatest respect, he is talking out of his backside.

Its a full on exploit fest.. Players pull the plug and feel immune, there are no consequences and as a result a huge number of players feel they can CL with impunity. Forum policy and moderation is so laughably biased folks are happily saying they pull the plug just to annoy other people.

Frankly, Frontier are total crap on this, its amateur behaviour and covers up what is a deep flaw in both the games design and Frontiers attitude towards cheating. The message this sends to me is that they don't care.. I don't know where this leaves players who don't cheat. What a joke. This comes from the top though, make no mistake about that.. DB, has it in for us 'griefers' and apparently couldn't care less about huge exploits that have gone on over the years..

What a cesspit..

 

[Alex Brentnall]

To be honest if all you want to do is to stop it the simple way is to do a banwave like Blizzard did with Overwatch. Many tears, many issues and now the game's cheaters are probably under 5% of what it was before.
A few more banwaves and it'll be near 0% just like valves VAC system.

Yep those systems are harsh, not perfect and have many flaws but a zero tolerance approach does stamp out cheating to a bare minimum. Its up to FDev what they want, cheaters in game or a 0 tolerance reputation.

Edit: ^slightly ninja'd on this by Cosmos

But what the OP is discussing is changing the insurance to alter mindsets of players and this is what this thread should be about otherwise it will get locked again.

Returning to my point on pages 1 & 2 of this thread I personally do not believe mindset of the players that login to open then combat log is not something we can understand. I honestly believe even if the insurance was set to 1% instead of 5% that people would still combat log as they hate to make negative progress and many can't handle being in a game where they arn't the plucky hero main character that never dies.
I could be wrong, as I said I can't understand those people at all when they press the open button.

Edit: For the record my current perspective on the timer is that I disagree but I don't lump the people that exit via timer as "combat loggers" that term is specifically for people that logout using out of game methods.

 

[LoneKharnivore]

a private group where you ban people who CL.

​That's supposed to be Open.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Many players don't give a rats _ss about PVP and would be happier with the game if it was removed, your solution is for them to leave open. Please show me where Dev's state that open belongs to PVP players. PVE'ers have the same right to Open as you do, you don't like them CLing to avoid your game, then create a private group where you ban people who CL. Problem solved.

._.

Well, someone's triggered for no apparent reason.

I never stated Open mode belongs to PvP players, so I don't know if you're playing strawman or you can't read.

No one's stopping PvE players from playing in Open, but playing in Open means there will be PvP players and PvE players alike. So the one discriminating here isn't PvP players but PvE players. Those that can't handle the possibility of PvP should leave Open for obvious reasons.

PvP isn't an exploit, combat logging is, so get your definition right before spilling nonsense onto the screen.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

It is logical until the add a crime and punishment aspect to the game. Right now the whole Piracy or unwanted PVP aspect of this game is reliant upon the victim of said crime. If the victim is not in open then Pirates or PVP people have no one to kill. They cant have it both ways. FDEV needs to add a system that will mitigate the risk of being a trader and a pirate. If the victim of the crime knew there would be retribution or meaningful consequence, then I doubt you would see as many combat loggers.

If a pilot knew that the cops would show up and actually help, then they would be more likely go engage in meaningful PVP.

If the pilot actually knew that the Pirate would have even the tiniest bit of risk applied to their activities, then they would be more inclined to stay in game.

As it stands now its the victim of the crimes sole responsibility to make an encounter meaningful and or fun. There is no bonus for surviving Pirates or PVP actions against them. The mission system is 100% pass or fail. If any cargo is lost its a 100% fail. It doesnt matter if 99% of the cargo is still their to be delivered.

A better mission and encounter system as well as crime and punishment will fix this issue in its entirety.

I'm totally for crime and punishment update to arrive at the same time as combating combat logging.

 

[jacozilla]

Its all words.. and no action and frankly I have little respect for anything they say about this when Sandro states that using the 15 seconds log out timer via the menu is 'exiting the game gracefully'..
With the greatest respect, he is talking out of his backside.

Its a full on exploit fest.. Players pull the plug and feel immune, there are no consequences and as a result a huge number of players feel they can CL with impunity. Forum policy and moderation is so laughably biased folks are happily saying they pull the plug just to annoy other people.

Frankly, Frontier are total crap on this, its amateur behaviour and covers up what is a deep flaw in both the games design and Frontiers attitude towards cheating. The message this sends to me is that they don't care.. I don't know where this leaves players who don't cheat. What a joke.

What a cesspit..

Well, that's your opinion and I can respect that. Disagree, but agree to disagree politely, sure.

You gave a reason, stated why, and conclusion. I disagree, but fair enough.

But it seems given the clarification and the repeat of calling players cheaters, that it's fair for me to point out that what you are essentially saying is you are in camp#3 - you don't care and still call "cheaters" any player that follows FD's explicitly stated ok for logging out.

Which seems to me then the real root of your dissatisfaction and lumping anyone that avoids combat for whatever reason (fair or unfair, victimized or not), is that you just don't want nor approve of people being able to avoid PVP via logout manner, and if they 'get away' at all, must only be due to actual thrust mechanics (e.g. no exiting of game mechanic)

I'm with you up to the prefer players escape via thrusters mechanic part, but not with you in lumping players who follow FD design as "cheaters".

That sparks too much as one who is so blinded by animosity towards anyone who prefers only consensual pvp - vs - one that supports non-consensual pvp. I am admittedly the former, not supporter of the latter. There are plenty of games where non-consensual pvp is encouraged, and indeed entire game designed around.

I can't read minds so I don't know what FD intended or future intends in this manner, but I for one am glad that options exist to allow those that only desire consensual pvp to log out in approved manner.

Because further bottom line is this - no, I don't like the thought of some player who consented to pvp but then becomes a sore loser by using approved timer logout to escape consequence of his choice to engage in combat. I would totally agree that is cheap and that player is in essence cheating a honest contest.

But you go way to far to lump every player into that category - you're lumping players who didn't desire that pvp match at all, vs one who only logged out cheaply because they found themselves losing. I can concede easily that this happens, but it seems either you can't - or don't desire to concede that players who do not want non-consensual pvp in open should be perfectly allowed to log out via legit manner that FD has provided.

 

[Cosmos]

Well, that's your opinion and I can respect that. Disagree, but agree to disagree politely, sure.

You gave a reason, stated why, and conclusion. I disagree, but fair enough.

We can agree to disagree for sure

But it seems given the clarification and the repeat of calling players cheaters, that it's fair for me to point out that what you are essentially saying is you are in camp#3 - you don't care and still call "cheaters" any player that follows FD's explicitly stated ok for logging out.

Not saying that actually. Whilst we have solo and pg I don't think there are excuses for exiting the game to avoid a loss. That be true if its a PvE or PvP situation.

Which seems to me then the real root of your dissatisfaction and lumping anyone that avoids combat for whatever reason (fair or unfair, victimized or not), is that you just don't want nor approve of people being able to avoid PVP via logout manner, and if they 'get away' at all, must only be due to actual thrust mechanics (e.g. no exiting of game mechanic)

I'm with you up to the prefer players escape via thrusters mechanic part, but not with you in lumping players who follow FD design as "cheaters".

I'm stating that what Sandro said is utter tosh.. If they want a menu log out timer to be respected they may wish to set the bar higher than a microbes limbo dance competition.. 30 seconds or 60 would seem reasonable..

That sparks too much as one who is so blinded by animosity towards anyone who prefers only consensual pvp - vs - one that supports non-consensual pvp. I am admittedly the former, not supporter of the latter. There are plenty of games where non-consensual pvp is encouraged, and indeed entire game designed around.

Look, when I hear of words like consesentual I consider things like sexual encounters.. Taking such terms and planting them in a game is beyond ridiculous particuarly when we are playing a game where we pilot ever increasingly heaviy armed spaceships, set in a cutthroat galaxy

I can't read minds so I don't know what FD intended or future intends in this manner, but I for one am glad that options exist to allow those that only desire consensual pvp to log out in approved manner.

DB has been on a crusade over PvP for as long as I can remember.. He's labelled anyone who shoots at others in the past as 'snot nosed teenagers'...

Because further bottom line is this - no, I don't like the thought of some player who consented to pvp but then becomes a sore loser by using approved timer logout to escape consequence of his choice to engage in combat. I would totally agree that is cheap and that player is in essence cheating a honest contest.

WIll you stop this about 'consent'? Jezuz.. There are THREE modes to use, which we can switch between at any time? WHY IS THIS NOT ENOUGH?

But you go way to far to lump every player into that category - you're lumping players who didn't desire that pvp match at all, vs one who only logged out cheaply because they found themselves losing. I can concede easily that this happens, but it seems either you can't - or don't desire to concede that players who do not want non-consensual pvp in open should be perfectly allowed to log out via legit manner that FD has provided.

Forgive if I'm a bit testy on this.. Having been a member of this forum for two years now I've never seen players so maligned and dragged through the mud over what is a natural thing to do in said space game cutthroat galaxy, set against a back drop of RAW ANARCHY and power plays

For the love of god..

 

[Infinity Eagle]

Why not have open like it is now, and have another server for PVE, where Commanders can`t attack each other?
I have been playing solo, since after getting attacked by wings of"pvp" people while in a unarmed trade ship.
Is all good, just made Elite trade rank the other day, now to work on explorer.

 

[Kingston@#]

@OP for it to stop, there can only be some sort of penalty for doing it. though how would you know when its not a innocent crash. if only the FDEVs could perform a miracle and make it so solid it doesn't crash. the crashing is always going to be with us.
not all of us run so beware take a chill pill or smoke a j, have a pint and move on.

 

[Zaggeron]

I think the OP has a point. OP claims that reducing the consequences of death make for more engaging interactions and gives as evidence his interactions in a mode that has *no* consequences. The response that he's getting these better interactions with other players in Beta because there are no consequences in Beta (the data is wiped) is a statement that supports his position not an argument against it as some seem to think.

I know this is a lost cause (at least in this forum). Everyone seems to think the only way to make death meaningful is for it to be expensive. But the fact is that money doesn't scale well in this game. One thing that might scale well in this game are time penalties -- If I lose an hour, then I lose an hour of potential income. So I would much prefer some sort of a time-sink death penalty with a lower rebuy. I've suggested in other places some sort of "salvage mission" option to trade time for money allowing someone to reduce their rebuy.

 

[jacozilla]

WIll you stop this about 'consent'? Jezuz.. There are THREE modes to use, which we can switch between at any time? WHY IS THIS NOT ENOUGH?

No. Because while you make a lot of sense in other areas, this is one of the roots of disagreements that divide some -like me- who believe running after engaging in combat because they think they are losing is cheap and cheating by logging out - and the open = consenting to pvp which you predefine as the one and only meaning of open.

It's crystal clear that to you --> Open = consent to PVP.

It is unclear whether you disagree or not, that you even realize the position Open = PVP only if between parties that wish to mutually enter it exists with others.

My position is basically part of both sides, which I guess makes me a moderate.

If FD added a 1000 sec timer to anyone that tries to log out after actively firing their weapons, I'd be fine with that. Because if you fired = engaged in combat, and if you want to cut and run because you think are losing, tough luck.

But if people like you keep insisting that only your fabricated definition of Open mode = must PVP mode, sorry - until FD comes out and says the same, that Open means mandatory PVP, you are just like me - expressing an opinion only, not stating what you think is some obvious, god given fact or universal law.

 

[c48113]

​That's supposed to be Open.

Why because you decided it is? Where do the Devs say that. PVPers like to tell everyone else if you don't like what they are doing to leave open. Well if you don't like what other people are doing leave open. As someone who isn't interested in PVP I have no problem if someone combat logs, you seem to have a problem with so form a group that doesn't allow it.

 

[Cosmos]

But if people like you keep insisting that only your fabricated definition of Open mode = must PVP mode, sorry - until FD comes out and says the same, that Open means mandatory PVP, you are just like me - expressing an opinion only, not stating what you think is some obvious, god given fact or universal law.

I've never said Open should = mandatory PvP. Fact is having spent almost all my time exclusively in Open I rarely encounter PvP unless I go looking for it, and even if it finds me the game allows one to easily escape unless folks are playing like lemons. What I do think is out of whack is that peeps are expecting not to have players ever shoot at them unless they sign a consent form, witnessed by two, and filed in a state court whilst we wait two weeks for duplicate copies to be issued to the various parties. Thats how ridiculous this 'consent' garbage sounds to me.

Anyone who has ever played an online game would kind of expect to be shot at in a multiplayer game on occasion when they come across other players. Its not like we are stuck in one asteroid field where there is no where else to go is it? There's a galaxy of 400 billion systems, and who knows how many gazzilons trillon planets we can land on, not even considering the geographic square meterage.. that's a LOT of play area..

Whats next? Telling the Thargoids to hold up on their invasion because we haven't 'consented'? [haha]

 

[LoneKharnivore]

Where do the Devs say that.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/105778-“Combat-Logging”-Update

For clarity’s sake, “combat logging” is when a Commander ungracefully exits the game [...] to avoid defeat, destruction and damage.

First things first: we do consider this an undesirable exploit. It’s not “part of the game”.

At some point [...] we will start to take action against Commanders using this exploit.