Met My First Hacker Today
- Thread starter Blaeringr
- Start date
i started to record anything so i can easy spot bugs and such, so should i cross path with a player displaying suspicious behaviour, i'll post it
You can only get griefed in ED if you want to get griefed. Even without going solo you can undock/save&exit/reload
Indeed. Hence me asking where they drew the line between playing the psychopath and griefing. We need to know. If, in fact, there is no line and FD expect all griefing to be handled by in game mechanisms, then that's their call. But we need to know. Because until we get that clarity, I will continue to report what I think of as griefing. Like the behaviour we have been discussing in this thread. And if anything goes, no such thing as griefing, and we see no consequences, I will continue to raise that as a bug, too.
I agree it would be a minefield. Nevertheless I believe (I've not checked recently) that anti-social behaviour is against the EULA, even though it cannot easily be defined. Much of what is in EULAs is close to unenforceable, I suspect, without those judgement calls.
And I disagree. At the moment, anyway. If FD make a clear and unambiguous statement (and not these wishy-washy ones we have seen to date) that there is no such thing as griefing in E: D, that all behaviour that is not an exploit (definition?
) is perfectly OK, but there will be consequences, then we will know where we stand. If we don't like it we can go hide in solo or group mode, or go play something else. After such a statement, I would agree with this point of yours. But in the absence of such a statement, if I see someone griefing on my definition of the word (and what we had in the spaceport was griefing from where I sit), then I will report them, and I hope everyone else will do so too.
Is a ticket necessary? What about the in-game "Report a player" function?
I got suicide-bombed inside a station a couple of weeks ago and used the in-game report system, but didn't raise a ticket as I thought it would be both redundant and an inappropriate use of the ticketing system, which I thought was for bugs.
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
Point taken, but I don't think that the ability to hang around inside the station repeatedly killing other players without significant consequence is really what he meant by that. I'm not sure they would even agree that being able to use skill or equipment to avoid the station defences inside the docking bay is desirable as a gameplay feature. It's not really plausible to me in the game lore or immersion of the game, that someone would be able to do that inside a station, chaff launchers or not.
If I see a burglar in my kitchen waving around a boiling kettle, am I going to ignore him - "I can't see you it's too foggy".
I would be surprised if they don't introduce features to prevent this type of activity or at least make it not worthwhile so that there is a heavy price to pay for it.
Diablo is, and always has been, p2p. It suffers the same unsolvable problems.
You could look to games like World of Warcraft or World of Tanks for secure server side architectures supporting very profitable games. WarGaming, with their World of Tanks title, had in excess of 1/3 of a billion dollars in revenue last year. Ironically, the companies that do it right are not necessarily punished at the cashiers till.
This is untrue.
Diablo (1 maybe, but definitely 2) had 2 modes : Open BNet and Closed BNet.
- Open BNet allowed you to host games & play solo offline.
- Closed BNet were hosted on their servers. (P2S)
Diablo 3 is online P2S only.
What? There's no anti-cheat system in the game?
I would have assumed that an anti-cheat system with permanent bans for cheaters would be taken for granted in any online game. :-/
Lack of anti-cheat mechanisms have always, with virtually 100% success rate, killed games in the past with no one playing them in the end.
I would have assumed that an anti-cheat system with permanent bans for cheaters would be taken for granted in any online game. :-/
Lack of anti-cheat mechanisms have always, with virtually 100% success rate, killed games in the past with no one playing them in the end.
Any anti-cheat system would be between client and the server, it wouldn't really help in P2P as it is now. They could get around the problem by always having a random 3rd client in the loop for parity though (to check the traffic is not tampered with).
Of course it would help. Steam games use VAC client-side. People get VAC bans like crazy in many games for trying to modify their clients (like the infinite missiles in this thread.)
Now, Elite chose to not use Steam. That has some downsides. Like lack of an anti-cheat system. They will need to write their own or perhaps license a third-party one (like PunkBuster or something similar.)
But *it needs to be done*. Without a proper anti-cheat, Elite imo has no chance of surviving in the long term. Cheating has killed off games in the past. It's a fact. Don't ignore history and do something about it while there's still time.
Relying on user reports is not a solution. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Users can only report (*if* they even bother to report rather than just uninstalling the game and never coming back) what they can see. The *vast* majority of cheats cannot be seen by other players (stronger shields, more health, more ammo). They can only be seen in extremely blatant cases, like the one reported in this thread. Since there's PvP in this game, all the usual cheats apply; aimbots (your fixed weapons behave like gimbals, never miss, ignore chaff), speedhacks (higher speed), radar hacks (you can see everyone regardless of thermal signature), etc. The more popular the game gets, the more cheats WILL exist for it. The only way to not have a significant cheat problem, is for your game to be unpopular/unsuccessful.
FD: Do not risk your game's future. You need a cheat detection mechanism.
Last edited:
IMHO your expectations are WAY too high. Frontier have limited resources, so they need to find a way to automatically identify new cheats (rather than handling them one-at-a-time), which will take time (perhaps weeks given this is their first real problem with cheaters). Also, they may not yet have mechanisms for automatically punishing cheat users, so in that case they'd also need to implement that.
In short, cut them some slack, this is the first time dealing with proper cheating.
Apart from all the cheating in the alpoha, beta and gamma, of course
It's a bit like team-killing,
In any of the well known FPS games, there's the option to turn team killing on - the end result though, is whilst this obviously makes things much harder and more realistic in terms of game play - human nature ensures that half the time it's just used for griefing - which totally destroys the gameplay
I see the same thing here in the stations - there's a thing people have figured out, where if they have a specific loadout, or do something in a certain order - they can kill people unexpectedly, in a place they're not supposed to be able to, over and over, it can only subtract from the experience, I don't see what it really adds - because in pretty much every incident - the victim has no chance to retaliate, or if they do the station ends up killing them if they try.
If you're talking about actually blocking/killing people who are entering the station, or interdicting them in the system - then that's one thing, but this dumbfire thing in the station is just stupid and it needs stopping
Last edited:
Best post evaarr
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
That he's a genius?
lol - so they die anyway as we thought, and just keep respawning at the very same station - doing it over and over until they run out of rebuy, and because their bounties clear each time they die - they're not really that worse off.
If ED or anyone thinks that this is some sort of acceptable form of game-play, they need their heads testing tbh..
It costs a lot of credits to outfit A-grade ships (Anacondas, Vipers, ASP's, etc) and then take on a group of Commanders with them.
Well done for completing missing the point...