Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking

[GloatingSwine]

I don't agree with that though, some of the uber player groups that go full on into PP have a huge number of members.

They can have a large number of members and still be a small minority of the overall playerbase.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That depends on what each player wants from the game - and we don't all want to play the same way.

But if you are involved in a feature like PP thats competitive and you are in Open, its exploiting features to avoid rivals. Or, pirating at CGs, or even competitive CGs where its OK to kill others in Open to compete. If you are deliberately blocking and logging to avoid destruction and go on to dock, thats not really playing the game- its avoiding consequences (cheating) to win. Thats what solo and PG are for.

Piracy suffers from is relative indistinguishability from ganking and griefing at the start of any encounter. Do many players find other players leaching their commodities to be a "fun" experience? Frontier can allow players to engage in piracy and give them tools to accomplish it with but they can't make other players participate or enjoy it.

Thats true, but without the driver of survival there is no game for the trader who should be driven to live, or to the pirate who wants to steal. As with the above pirating at CGs, if you can't deal with pirating or PvP, Open is not for you and viewing logging or blocking as proxy shields should be looked down on because they are not fostering a game.

Powerplay was consciously implemented in all three game modes - it's not a feature that requires players to engage in PvP to participate in.

Well, in Open it does, since its opportunistic. If you can block rivals shooting at you, whats the point of going into open to begin with?

.... or they just don't see things the way that players who prefer PvP do.

The trouble is problems are in places where PvP is encountered, i.e. Open.

No situation in this game "demands it" - players might fervently wish it was the case however no-one needs to endure the attentions of predatory players in this game. Piracy suffers because gankers / griefers exist - and there's no apparent difference between them from the perspective of the target until after the event.

A piracy loop demands the victim be subdued, rivals in Open in Powerplay are to be destroyed. Thats why Open exists, to replace NPCs with players. If no-one can folllow these game loops to the end (trader escapes, pirate steals, rival pledge destroyed) then that loop has broken.

If an encounter is not "fun" then it's likely to be a waste of the player's game time. Players seeking to potentially waste other players' game time don't necessarily deserve targets.

The problem is that term "wasting my time" is very elastic. Is it wasting a rival pledges time by killing them in Powerplay? The answer is no because thats the objective, waste your rivals time so they can't pursue their weekly agenda.

Is the game really about strife, conflict and danger when two of the three Elite ranks can be gained without firing a shot in combat?

Is the game really about strife, conflict and danger when the games advertising says it is?

You choose to be in open, and yet don't accept its dangerous and do not desire to 'be ready'.

 

[Rubbernuke]

They are the basic aspects of the game we play - whether we agree with them or not.

They are basic aspects that are circumvented rather than used and applied correctly to gain.

There seems to be an assumption being made that competition must involve PvP. It doesn't, in this game. Powerplay is not a mode in and of itself - it's a pan-modal feature that any player can engage in if they choose to.

And they do- as you say its double gated and yet even then people feel the need to block even though they know whats possibly waiting.

One and five are not contradictory in a game where PvP is entirely optional - they merely give precedence to the choice of the player not wanting to be engaged in PvP over the player who might want to engage them in PvP, i.e. players can choose to shoot at anything they instance with, however no player needs to instance with them.

1) shoot at anything we instance with;

5) block any player we wish to block.

Ordinarily outside of Powerplay I'd agree, they then serve a purpose because you are free roaming. But inside Powerplay with the potential to stop someone you catch (who might be carrying vital merits) blocking and logging is unfair since you are using them to advantage (hence my wish for an exemption).

 

[Sir Ganksalot]

@Sir Ganksalot
You need to come out of that place you hide in. I was trying to track you down yesterday but you kept jumpin around, which was pretty annoying as I was in a ship with no scoop and a crappy jump range. Y'all need to stand still so I can kill ya. Probably don't have time today, but maybe we should just find a place and do high noon.

@Everybody else
Just out of curiosity: I know what salt mining is, but why? I'm serious about that question. I do not understand why, and I would like to know why some of you salt mine. I'm not necessarily being salty here, I'm just curious. I might miss out on something. Is it just something you do because it's "fun", or is it something else?

Yeah my buddy was engineering and I was actually doing gank evasion training with a couple of players we had onboard the fleet carrier. I'm gonna be on for a bit today to do some more evasion training and then I'll meet up with you.

 

[CMDR_Elver]

Yup, it's one of those threads...

PvP consistently seems to be the last thing considered with game features. If anything, features are introduced that hamper PvP in Elite. This pattern I believe is contributing to the infamous ganking "problem" so often posted on reddit or these forums. Full disclosure, I do my share of ganking. Let's go over some avenues that can bring about meaningful PvP in this game.

1) BGS: One player faction comes into conflict with another for control of stations and systems. This has great potential to drive meaningful PvP since each side has an incentive to hamper the efforts of the other. But there are some things that get in the way:

Solo / PG: Actions are just as effective in these modes compared to open, so players have no incentive to play in open if there's threat of hostile action.
Menu Logging: Allowed by FDev, reviled by the PvP community. You can de-spawn your ship in 15 seconds after getting attacked, leaving players very little time to complete an attack. With today's defensive modules and engineering, it's incredibly easy to have a ship that can survive 15 seconds of fire from fully decked out PvP ships.
Blocking: Say each group has 3 players in a wing. Wing 1 has blocked 2 members of the opposing wing already. Because of this, instancing will likely be incredibly broken, such that either the two wings don't see each other at all, or Wing 1 will only see a single member of Wing 2, while the other two members fail to instance with the rest of the players, giving Wing 1 an advantage. They can also just proceed to block any member if the opposing faction, effectively playing in PG but in open.

2) Powerplay: This was built to help encourage PvP, so seems like this would be perfect for those who want to do PvP. Again, there are many things that get in the way.

Solo / PG: Actions are just as effective in these modes compared to open, so players have no incentive to play in open if there's threat of hostile action.
Menu Logging: Allowed by FDev, reviled by the PvP community. You can de-spawn your ship in 15 seconds after getting attacked, leaving players very little time to complete an attack. With today's defensive modules and engineering, it's incredibly easy to have a ship that can survive 15 seconds of fire from fully decked out PvP ships.
Blocking: Say each group has 3 players in a wing. Wing 1 has blocked 2 members of the opposing wing already. Because of this, instancing will likely be incredibly broken, such that either the two wings don't see each other at all, or Wing 1 will only see a single member of Wing 2, while the other two members fail to instance with the rest of the players, giving Wing 1 an advantage. They can also just proceed to block any member if the opposing faction, effectively playing in PG but in open.

(Look familiar?)

3) Pirating: This is great fun when it works and is perhaps the only PvP activity that can net a potentially meaningful monetary reward. This is generally an activity that should not result in the death of even the victim (provided they comply with demands). Again, we have problems here:

Solo / PG: Obtaining cargo and selling it are just as effective (if not more so in this case with mining) in Solo or Private Group. NPCs pose just a minor fraction of risk that a player does. So there's really no incentive at all to play in open. Instead there are specific incentives to conduct this in solo / pg for the current mining meta.
Menu Logging: Allowed by FDev, reviled by the PvP community. You can de-spawn your ship in 15 seconds after getting attacked, leaving players very little time to complete an attack. With today's defensive modules and engineering, it's incredibly easy to have a ship that can survive 15 seconds of fire from fully decked out PvP ships. While some cargo can be extracted with hatchbreakers, pirates tend to announce demands first and give time for their victim to comply since they want to encourage this behavior. The small time window however doesn't afford this luxury.
Blocking: The entire purpose of pirating is to find players transporting high value items. If no players are found, there is no pirating to be done at all. Broken instances from blocking only exacerbates empty instances from the lack of players playing in Open.

(Again, look familiar?)

4) CQC: Perhaps the only PvP that actually works, but it's not very meaningful in the sense of personal CMDR progression or contributing to something bigger. We also cannot use the ships we want to fly, which are the ones we've spent credits and time building.

5) Organized PvP Events: These can be great fun, and many who enjoy PvP attend such events. But these tend to be few and far between, and have the problem of not contributing to something greater.

So, put yourself in the shoes of someone who really enjoys combat with other players in the grand universe provided in Elite. You're really just ending up hitting roadblock after roadblock. What's there left to do? You probably guessed it: Ganking. It's true for me, and I'm sure it is for others, ganking you see in Elite is largely a result of boredom.

To be successful at ganking, you have to:

1) Go somewhere that you have a chance of finding a target. This means an engineering system, where everyone is mining, or where it's being sold (though sell systems have been empty in open lately). We've already established BGS and Powerplay functionally do not provide an adequate environment for open PvP. With many in solo / pg or blocking, these are the only systems that you have any chance to encounter players.
2) Attack quickly and ruthlessly because you potentially only have 15 seconds if your target decides to combat log (or less depending on method). Time spent messaging or attempting to pirate often just results in the player combat logging.
3) Don't communicate before interdiction otherwise you might just get blocked.

So really, if there is a ganking problem, its really due to the design of the game, and the lack of compelling options for PvP because of it. As someone who ganks, I would absolutely love to have a compelling BGS war with another player group far more than just ganking in a random high traffic system. There'd be more fun pirate interactions as well if the current situation didn't overtly hamper pirating efforts so harshly.


TLDR: PvP players are left with little to no compelling options for PvP content, resulting in increased ganking.

PvP bounty hunting mechanics would be where I would start also.

 

[Robert Maynard]

They are basic aspects that are circumvented rather than used and applied correctly to gain.

The fact that two, three and four exist suggests that one is not a required part of the game - it's an optional extra that players may choose to engage in.

And they do- as you say its double gated and yet even then people feel the need to block even though they know whats possibly waiting.

Indeed.

Ordinarily outside of Powerplay I'd agree, they then serve a purpose because you are free roaming. But inside Powerplay with the potential to stop someone you catch (who might be carrying vital merits) blocking and logging is unfair since you are using them to advantage (hence my wish for an exemption).

Powerplay is no different - it's a feature that offers the possibility of PvP for those who wish to engage in it (on both sides, I might add) but no requirement to engage in PvP in any mode.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The fact that two, three and four exist suggests that one is not a required part of the game - it's an optional extra that players may choose to engage in.

You may choose to engage and risk your merits, or block and log to protect them? The same can be said for trading and piracy to a lesser extent.

Not a good look really in either case.

Indeed.

So why bother? If you are not willing to engage and/ or risk your current work, why go into Open at all? I would suggest PG for that, but that in itself is an issue since you gain Opens advantages and remove its downsides.

Powerplay is no different - it's a feature that offers the possibility of PvP for those who wish to engage in it (on both sides, I might add) but no requirement to engage in PvP in any mode.

So your argument is that because solo and PG exist circumventing direct conflict, any conflict in Open between pledges allows people to log / block anyway to protect your work? If this is the case, then there is no point to Open at all in Powerplays current design.

Thats no foundation for gameplay, thats excusing it, and again trying to apply a CG mechanic over whole sections of the bubble.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But if you are involved in a feature like PP thats competitive and you are in Open, its exploiting features to avoid rivals. Or, pirating at CGs, or even competitive CGs where its OK to kill others in Open to compete. If you are deliberately blocking and logging to avoid destruction and go on to dock, thats not really playing the game- its avoiding consequences (cheating) to win. Thats what solo and PG are for.

While Powerplay is competitive, it does not require any player to engage in PvP competition.

If Frontier considered menu exit to be cheating then it would not be possible. What Sandro did say is that it is acceptable at any time (and he acknowledged that not all players would agree).

Thats true, but without the driver of survival there is no game for the trader who should be driven to live, or to the pirate who wants to steal. As with the above pirating at CGs, if you can't deal with pirating or PvP, Open is not for you and viewing logging or blocking as proxy shields should be looked down on because they are not fostering a game.

The trader who wants to be "driven to live" can play in Open. The pirate who wants to steal can steal from NPCs if no players are available - players as piracy targets are a choice by the player pirate and don't need to play with them.

If there were an Open-PvE mode then the complaints about players using menu exit or block in an open game mode would likely decrease. If Frontier were to offer an Open-PvE mode then they might also make changes to menu exit in Open(-PvP) mode.

Well, in Open it does, since its opportunistic. If you can block rivals shooting at you, whats the point of going into open to begin with?

That's up to the player doing the blocking - it's their choice. There are no apparent rules relating to the use of the block feature.

The trouble is problems are in places where PvP is encountered, i.e. Open.

Quite - which suggests that PvE and PvP players don't mix well yet Frontier only offers a single game mode with an unlimited population, and it's PvP enabled.

A piracy loop demands the victim be subdued, rivals in Open in Powerplay are to be destroyed. Thats why Open exists, to replace NPCs with players. If no-one can folllow these game loops to the end (trader escapes, pirate steals, rival pledge destroyed) then that loop has broken.

If players were able to completely subdue other players then griefers would have a great new tool in their arsenal.

Why Open exists seems to be simpler than that - it lets players play among lots of other players.

The problem is that term "wasting my time" is very elastic. Is it wasting a rival pledges time by killing them in Powerplay? The answer is no because thats the objective, waste your rivals time so they can't pursue their weekly agenda.

It's not a problem - it's down to each player. If someone likes Powerplay but doesn't like PvP then they may well view being attacked by a player while engaging in Powerplay as a waste of their time - they maybe ought to choose their game mode more carefully though.

Is the game really about strife, conflict and danger when the games advertising says it is?

You choose to be in open, and yet don't accept its dangerous and do not desire to 'be ready'.

Marketing is marketing - designed to appeal to as many different types of player as possible.

It doesn't mention the fact that players can be blocked or that any encounter can be left at will, possibly subject to a delay. It does make clear that there's no need to play in Open though.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You may choose to engage and risk your merits, or block and log to protect them? The same can be said for trading and piracy to a lesser extent.

Not a good look really in either case.

It is what it is - unless and until Frontier changes it. The direction of travel, i.e. strengthening of the block feature and making it easier to use, does not seem to be going in the direction that those seeking inescapable interactions would want though.

So why bother? If you are not willing to engage and/ or risk your current work, why go into Open at all? I would suggest PG for that, but that in itself is an issue since you gain Opens advantages and remove its downsides.

PGs aren't advertised - so finding one that suits the player is non-trivial - then there's the limited population issue.

PvP can be considered a downside of Open, I'd agree. Thankfully PGs exist at all to allow players to play together without those who might wish to engage them in PvP.

So your argument is that because solo and PG exist circumventing direct conflict, any conflict in Open between pledges allows people to log / block anyway to protect your work? If this is the case, then there is no point to Open at all in Powerplays current design.

Thats no foundation for gameplay, thats excusing it, and again trying to apply a CG mechanic over whole sections of the bubble.

There are no restrictions on use of game modes, menu exit or the block feature - Frontier put them in place and let players use them as they wish.

Open exists and those who wish to play in it using the features available to them can do so. It does not force players to sit still while others shoot at them however nor does it mean that particular players can't be excised from a player's gameplay.

 

[gorankar]

Open Only PP means I don't engage in PP activities. Take away the ability to block or quit from menu when I want, and I stop playing in Open. Open Only much else, and I find another game to play and stop adding to their player count and buying the occasional cosmetic. And the moment Fdev were to Open Only PP, the PvP centric players would start demanding Open Only BGS, then Open Only mining, and so on. Because Open Only PP is not going to generate the number of victims they need to be happy with the game long term. People that like PP will jkust move on if they don't care for the PvP aspect, or do their pledge work at off hours.

Odyssey is coming, how much do you think Fdev are willing to rock the boat with Open Only anything until after it is released, if ever?

 

[Rubbernuke]

While Powerplay is competitive, it does not require any player to engage in PvP competition.

Its not required but when it does it should mean something, its one of the few places in ED where it does. And yet....

If Frontier considered menu exit to be cheating then it would not be possible. What Sandro did say is that it is acceptable at any time (and he acknowledged that not all players would agree).

Which is why people find Powerplay a hopeless grind, because thats what this issue has done to it in the face of 5 years of nothing (in comparison to the BGS which has grown and evolved).

The trader who wants to be "driven to live" can play in Open. The pirate who wants to steal can steal from NPCs if no players are available - players as piracy targets are a choice by the player pirate and don't need to play with them.

And yet even when you play in open, the consequences are optional when it goes wrong and you face destruction or having to lose cargo.

If there were an Open-PvE mode then the complaints about players using menu exit or block in an open game mode would likely decrease. If Frontier were to offer an Open-PvE mode then they might also make changes to menu exit in Open(-PvP) mode.

If you are going open PvE, you might as well just have separate BGS/ PP instances because Open PvE solves none of Powerplays problems, and instead maintains the status quo.

That's up to the player doing the blocking - it's their choice. There are no apparent rules relating to the use of the block feature.

And yet in a feature about competing against players or NPCs, danger and consequences are optional....

Quite - which suggests that PvE and PvP players don't mix well yet Frontier only offers a single game mode with an unlimited population, and it's PvP enabled.

If players were able to completely subdue other players then griefers would have a great new tool in their arsenal.

Why Open exists seems to be simpler than that - it lets players play among lots of other players.

It's not a problem - it's down to each player. If someone likes Powerplay but doesn't like PvP then they may well view being attacked by a player while engaging in Powerplay as a waste of their time - they maybe ought to choose their game mode more carefully though.

Then why are they in Open? All its doing is wasting the time of the person legitimately attacking while the other player loses nothing. This erodes any potential action in Open yet further.

Marketing is marketing - designed to appeal to as many different types of player as possible.

And yet its not saying all of that is one fat lie because danger is irrelevant for a great deal of players.

It doesn't mention the fact that players can be blocked or that any encounter can be left at will, possibly subject to a delay. It does make clear that there's no need to play in Open though.

Seems to be it suggests if you choose to be in Open you better be ready, especially for rogue commanders.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Its not required but when it does it should mean something, its one of the few places in ED where it does. And yet....

Whether PvP should, or should not, mean something in a game where it is entirely optional is a matter of opinion. I'd expect that those who wish to engage in it do so, subject to finding a willing target.

Which is why people find Powerplay a hopeless grind, because thats what this issue has done to it in the face of 5 years of nothing (in comparison to the BGS which has grown and evolved).

Maybe it's simply because the choice of the player who doesn't want to play with another player takes precedence.

And yet even when you play in open, the consequences are optional when it goes wrong and you face destruction or having to lose cargo.

That's down to Frontier.

If you are going open PvE, you might as well just have separate BGS/ PP instances because Open PvE solves none of Powerplays problems, and instead maintains the status quo.

Not at all - Frontier have been clear that there is only one galaxy state, shared between all game platforms and modes and that all players affect it. An Open-PvE game mode is not designed to fix Powerplay's problems, it's designed to fix the lack of an open game mode that has PvP switched off.

And yet in a feature about competing against players or NPCs, danger and consequences are optional....

Then why are they in Open? All its doing is wasting the time of the person legitimately attacking while the other player loses nothing. This erodes any potential action in Open yet further.

Players attacking without asking whether they are wasting their target's time don't seem to be too bothered about it - why should the target consider the attacker's time to be more precious than theirs?

And yet its not saying all of that is one fat lie because danger is irrelevant for a great deal of players.

I expect that those writing the marketing material take care to be factual without necessarily being explicit.

View attachment 179107

Seems to be it suggests if you choose to be in Open you better be ready, especially for rogue commanders.

It certainly seems to suggest that - but then, it's marketing. Other bits of the same marketing refer to all players affecting the economy.

 

[Rubbernuke]

It is what it is - unless and until Frontier changes it. The direction of travel, i.e. strengthening of the block feature and making it easier to use, does not seem to be going in the direction that those seeking inescapable interactions would want though.

Its a case of having a robust loop of action and consequences- you can't build an ecosystem if there is no foundation. FD don't seem to really think that far ahead really- for example mine arming times, an utterly stupid change that made mines useless. Powerplay has been largely forgotten, frozen for five years while the rest of the game has moved on.

PGs aren't advertised - so finding one that suits the player is non-trivial - then there's the limited population issue.

Its easy with the tools given- Powerplay groups players via proximity and via friends build groups.

PvP can be considered a downside of Open, I'd agree. Thankfully PGs exist at all to allow players to play together without those who might wish to engage them in PvP.

PG just enables more grind, with wings and especially AFK. As I said it has Opens advantages with no real downsides.

There are no restrictions on use of game modes, menu exit or the block feature - Frontier put them in place and let players use them as they wish.

Which means that in essence FD have tried and failed to make more of the CG mechanic, and that danger is entirely optional with no consequences- even logging out during combat with NPCs....so you can still deliver those merits regardless of what happens.

Open exists and those who wish to play in it using the features available to them can do so. It does not force players to sit still while others shoot at them however nor does it mean that particular players can't be excised from a player's gameplay.

The whole point of open is interaction, good and bad. Powerplay filters that further defining enemies and allies- if you choose to fight directly you should not be allowed to fail and yet still win (i.e. escape the punishment of ship destruction and loss of merits / time).

 

[Sir Ganksalot]

Whether PvP should, or should not, mean something in a game where it is entirely optional is a matter of opinion. I'd expect that those who wish to engage in it do so, subject to finding a willing target.

This argument makes no sense. EVERYTHING in this game is optional and yet PvP is one of the only "options" that has no meaning to it.

Imagine if mining had no meaning or reward to it, and every time someone asked if it could have meaning, other players would just respond with "mining is optional".

So why is it that it's cool for your favorite activity to have meaning but not mine?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Whether PvP should, or should not, mean something in a game where it is entirely optional is a matter of opinion. I'd expect that those who wish to engage in it do so, subject to finding a willing target.

How can a rival be willing when it is a competition thats pledged? The other question is how to you agree on terms between 11 powers and have people stick to them? This is what I mean by hard rules for features, so you know where you stand and competition is not abstracted via a prism of rules different to each player.

Not at all - Frontier have been clear that there is only one galaxy state, shared between all game platforms and modes and that all players affect it. An Open-PvE game mode is not designed to fix Powerplay's problems, it's designed to fix the lack of an open game mode that has PvP switched off.

Which is not solving anything, its just adding yet another clause to a long list of clauses and abstractions.

Players attacking without asking whether they are wasting their target's time don't seem to be too bothered about it - why should the target consider the attacker's time to be more precious than theirs?

Because the attacker has spent time tracking the target to stop its mission. Unless the attacker destroys the target, they have gained little because the target blocks or logs and they carry on.

I expect that those writing the marketing material take care to be factual without necessarily being explicit.

In reality FD, and marketing are confused as to what they have delivered.

It certainly seems to suggest that - but then, it's marketing. Other bits of the same marketing refer to all players affecting the economy.

But players do affect the economy, we have sliders and states for that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This argument makes no sense. EVERYTHING in this game is optional and yet PvP is one of the only "options" that has no meaning to it.

It apparently has meaning to some of its proponents. To those disinterested in it it can be a tedious waste of their game time when encountered.

Imagine if mining had no meaning or reward to it, and every time someone asked if it could have meaning, other players would just respond with "mining is optional".

No-one would do it if it had no reward. Frontier has spent a fair amount of development time on it though - so I expect that they'd fix it if few were engaged in it. It's also an activity where those who engage in it aren't really bothering any other player.

So why is it that it's cool for your favorite activity to have meaning but not mine?

It depends on what sort of meaning is being sought and how that affects other players.

 

[Robert Maynard]

How can a rival be willing when it is a competition thats pledged? The other question is how to you agree on terms between 11 powers and have people stick to them? This is what I mean by hard rules for features, so you know where you stand and competition is not abstracted via a prism of rules different to each player.

Which is not solving anything, its just adding yet another clause to a long list of clauses and abstractions.

Because the attacker has spent time tracking the target to stop its mission. Unless the attacker destroys the target, they have gained little because the target blocks or logs and they carry on.

It all comes back to the fact that PvP is optional in this game - there's no requirement for any player to engage in it.

 

[GloatingSwine]

How can a rival be willing when it is a competition thats pledged? The other question is how to you agree on terms between 11 powers and have people stick to them? This is what I mean by hard rules for features, so you know where you stand and competition is not abstracted via a prism of rules different to each player.

You're conflating Powerplay with PvP though. And that's not actually true, is it.

Powerplay can be affected by competitive PvE activity, it is not inherently PvP and it is not designed to be.

Remember, like all elements of the BGS, Powerplay is designed to operate between players on different platforms who cannot encounter each other at all, let alone engage in PvP with each other.

 

[Rubbernuke]

It all comes back to the fact that PvP is optional in this game - there's no requirement for any player to engage in it.

Thats not what I'm debating- its when it happens and its going on- is it optional at any stage? When you click Open? When you are losing?

The point is, it may be optional but its not a case of grandmas footsteps where you log when caught when it happens. In the mode that allows it, there has to be a start and end to it rather than being able to stop it at any time which is just dysfunctional.

A question: would you accept a clause in logging if you held cargo over a certain value or Powerplay merits / cargo? So, just as if clean PP pledges don't get attacked you can log as now if you are not doing anything?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Thats not what I'm debating- its when it happens and its going on- is it optional at any stage? When you click Open? When you are losing?

Optional means optional - and the lack of restriction on menu exit or the block feature is strongly suggestive of "at any stage".

The point is, it may be optional but its not a case of grandmas footsteps where you log when caught when it happens. In the mode that allows it, there has to be a start and end to it rather than being able to stop it at any time which is just dysfunctional.

That's down to Frontier.

A question: would you accept a clause in logging if you held cargo over a certain value or Powerplay merits / cargo? So, just as if clean PP pledges don't get attacked you can log as now if you are not doing anything?

Combat logging is an exploit and players can be subject to sanctions for engaging in it.