Now that board flipping is going to be gone here's an idea to fix combat loggers.

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Nope. Lol

There's a mega tread in the suggestions section with a much more logical and simple idea.
It's also my idea. Lol

Too tired to repeat it.

Edit:

Found it!
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/359238-Combat-Logging-Punishment-Proposal

 

[Ian Skippy]

That's not quite what I understand about the gaming world. Game cheats and logging are as common as rules. Not to say I think CLogging is ok, but your picture of expected gamer ethics seems quite off the mark.

There was a serious scandal over cheating the Engineers system. Would you consider those that lost modules/upgrades to that issue candidates for players that need to find a new game?

And, how about those that claim the Menu Exit is cheating? The menu exit is a build it mechanic sanctioned and created by the developers. Should all of those Commanders mislabeling a Menu Exit be shown the door?

Sanctimony over Combat Logging is pure double standard material. Combat Logging is completely poor sportsmanship and pretty cheap, but it isn't a crime against humanity or anything. Even that SDC guy did it on stream, with no compunction. Then he remembered he was being watched. It goes on in just about every online game, since forever.

Just because it is common doesn't mean I have to be positive about it. In general, I feel that people who cheat should get a temp ban first, and a perma-ban the second time. That goes for CL'ing, those engineer cheaters etc. Menu Logging isn't cheating. Its cheap as heck, and I am in favor of extending the timer to a minute or so, or have it be reset whenever you take damage. But as long as it is what it is, I just have to suck it up and accept that it is acceptable behavior according to the devs. Dont get me wrong, I am not arguing they are horrible criminals or anything, and I am sure many cheaters are perfectly cool dudes IRL. I also am sure many CL'ers arent even 'conscious cheaters' but are surprised and cheat out of impulse. But within the context of 'just a game', if you 'only cheat' I prefer them to be removed from the game. Even better, I'd prefer if people would play a game they are comfortable playing without cheating.

FWIW: I worked for the Dutch IRS for a few years ages ago. I am not surprised by anything any more. [haha]

 

[Ian Skippy]

We don't have any rules or regulations on PVP and I do not agree with that.

Big Ships Vs Small Ships isn't something I'm against, it's the lack of structure/rules/consent to the PVP fight.

Powerplay was supposed to be the game's Legitimate and consensual PVP system but Frontier hasn't done anything about that yet, but if they did, and players died to players then we wouldn't be here as it's more consentual to get ganked by a opposing player

If you tell me PVP is working as intended and shouldn't be updated or changed then I have no hope for the future of the game or it's PVP as this will scare off so many new players and give power to gankers. Intended Gameplay and Lazy Design are two TOTALLY different things.

I am all for Open Only PP as a vehicle for structured PvP. I am also totally for unrestricted PvP with no 'consent' needed. And again, you dont agreeing with a role is no excuse for breaking it.

 

[Riverside]

Nope. Lol

There's a mega tread in the suggestions section with a much more logical and simple idea.
It's also my idea. Lol

Too tired to repeat it.

Edit:

Found it!
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/359238-Combat-Logging-Punishment-Proposal

Ta!

It's a problem that needs to be addressed for sure.

 

[LeoBartlet]

...and you can collect materials that will reduce the timer as a reward from missions.

Right screw this mate, get onto Braben and talk licences, we're making Elite IV.

We can see what Ian Bell is doing these days besides waving about glow sticks.

 

[Kreutzwald]

Nope. Lol

There's a mega tread in the suggestions section with a much more logical and simple idea.
It's also my idea. Lol

Too tired to repeat it.

Edit:

Found it!
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/359238-Combat-Logging-Punishment-Proposal

Not a bad idea, but I wonder if it would be easier to limit choosing game mode on login when your ship is docked at a station. (Perhaps this was suggested, I'm not reading that whole thread right now.)

 

[Riverside]

Not a bad idea, but I wonder if it would be easier to limit choosing game mode on login when your ship is docked at a station. (Perhaps this was suggested, I'm not reading that whole thread right now.)

Explorers don't dock for long periods & switching to solo gets you high-res screenies. The basic idea works though, with a few exception rules it could work. For example no mode switching while the ship is in danger would cover those that log out with the 15 sec timer too.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

I pitched a proposal in the Focused Feedback that addressed all the concerns of power play and combat logging all in one perfectly thought-out, rational and balanced manner. It's such a perfect, simple solution it can never be implemented. But feel free to hunt it up from the archives.

 

[Sylveria]

Explorers don't dock for long periods & switching to solo gets you high-res screenies. The basic idea works though, with a few exception rules it could work. For example no mode switching while the ship is in danger would cover those that log out with the 15 sec timer too.

"You LIE!!!! You're not there for screenies!!!! You're there to mess with my game!!!! You're manipulating the BGS!!!"

Seriously, it's hilarious when people try to justify how others play the game or interpret their reasons for "why". As I stated recently, what if someone happens to get disconnected by their ISP or suddenly lose power and reconnect? Does that count as a "board flip"? Does it mean someone is "combat logging"?

The levels of paranoia are astounding.

Yes, some admittedly use it as a tactic, or even to "maximize their cr/hour". Some also admit to doing a lot of other things, like murderhoboing too- but applying it to the entire playerbase as a result is just ridiculous. What's next? Instantly having your ship self destruct because you accidently strafed someone in a REZ?

 

[Riverside]

"You LIE!!!! You're not there for screenies!!!! You're there to mess with my game!!!! You're manipulating the BGS!!!"

Seriously, it's hilarious when people try to justify how others play the game or interpret their reasons for "why". As I stated recently, what if someone happens to get disconnected by their ISP or suddenly lose power and reconnect? Does that count as a "board flip"? Does it mean someone is "combat logging"?

The levels of paranoia are astounding.

Yes, some admittedly use it as a tactic, or even to "maximize their cr/hour". Some also admit to doing a lot of other things, like murderhoboing too- but applying it to the entire playerbase as a result is just ridiculous. What's next? Instantly having your ship self destruct because you accidently strafed someone in a REZ?

This issue is intent, yes. In that thread Cmdr_CosmicSpaceHead linked to I have written a great deal about the motivations & ramifications of CLogging, and many of us have brainstormed the pros & cons of a great many good ideas (and even more bad ones). It's worth a read, I linked to several helpful posts in the OP but the whole thing is an educational experience. Well it was for me anyway

 

[Stealthie]

This issue is intent, yes. In that thread Cmdr_CosmicSpaceHead linked to I have written a great deal about the motivations & ramifications of CLogging, and many of us have brainstormed the pros & cons of a great many good ideas (and even more bad ones). It's worth a read, I linked to several helpful posts in the OP but the whole thing is an educational experience. Well it was for me anyway

The fundamental problem is any kind of punitive action for "ungraceful exits" from the game is that you create a motivation for people to try and cause that deliberately.

It's just never likely to happen (reliably) while ED retains a P2P architecture.

 

[Riverside]

The fundamental problem is any kind of punitive action for "ungraceful exits" from the game is that you create a motivation for people to try and cause that deliberately.

It's just never likely to happen (reliably) while ED retains a P2P architecture.

I agree an automated punishment (eg ship destruction) isn't an option, but the elegant thing about mode locking is that the 'punishment' (being forced to rejoin the mode you left) is to force the cynical exploiter to take the path the innocent victim would naturally choose - to rejoin the mode they originally chose.

A few weeks ago I was having problems running at 144Hz. The game ran fine at 60Hz but any higher & it would CTD regularly in station instances and occasionally in other situations. Each time it dies I would essentially log back in ASAP to whatever mode I left. If I'd faced ship destruction every time it would have been very expensive to go through the diagnosis tree, if I'd been forced to rejoin the mode I left I might not have noticed at all

 

[Stealthie]

I agree an automated punishment (eg ship destruction) isn't an option, but the elegant thing about mode locking is that the 'punishment' (being forced to rejoin the mode you left) is to force the cynical exploiter to take the path the innocent victim would naturally choose - to rejoin the mode they originally chose.

Yeah, for sure.

The idea of setting a flag as soon as you start playing and then only removing it after you quit back to the main-menu, so the game can check for that flag and automatically restart where you left-off if it finds it, is a perfectly good one.
Hell, you could even "spin" that as a QoL improvement, even if it's main purpose was to help deter CLing.

As I said, though, any kind of punitive action for CLing is simply going to encourage people to find ways to exploit the P2P architecture to cause deliberate disconnects.
Unless FDev can find a foolproof way to establish what caused a disconnect, any punitive action for CLing is a non-starter.

 

[EdzUp]

OP a better idea would be if in combat the ship remains there controlled by a NPC AI they already have the counter why not extend it. At least this way it doesn't break your attackers immersion when a ship just vanishes.

The quitter still keeps their stuff but the spoils for the kill still go to the attacker, if the quitter has a bounty it will remain on their head.

 

[4gui4]

Yes, let's destroy noobies assets for the fun of it whith end game ships in wings of 4 !!!!!


( I'll never do that, I support the new players I will always defend this, so that why I hate to this day the damn Operation Sirius business)

 

[kofeyh]

The fundamental problem is any kind of punitive action for "ungraceful exits" from the game is that you create a motivation for people to try and cause that deliberately.

As opposed to now, where the game (and developer mostly) don't give a crap, because the architecture uses P2P and they cannot really trust the traffic between two clients. Frontier have just done the impossible, and decided a single mission system is possible after all. So they've closed one gap. Never say never.

It's worth remembering that people have been known to CL against stations, as well as NPCs when things go south, so it's not just ye-olde emergent delivery expert. It's never really as black and white as people want to think.

Quite probably, in the same sorts of trivial percentage as it was for flipping; a statistical margin of error, as it were.

 

[Stealthie]

As opposed to now, where the game (and developer mostly) don't give a crap, because the architecture uses P2P and they cannot really trust the traffic between two clients.

Yes, exactly.

Right now we have a situation where CLing only ever serves the interests of the "loser".
The "winner" still gets the warm, fuzzy feeling of superiority and/or gains the strategic advantage of removing any threat presented by their opponent.

This is infinitely preferable to the hideous toxicity likely to arise if players are punished for disconnecting.

 

[M00ka]

Yes, exactly.

Right now we have a situation where CLing only ever serves the interests of the "loser".
The "winner" still gets the warm, fuzzy feeling of superiority and/or gains the strategic advantage of removing any threat presented by their opponent.

This is infinitely preferable to the hideous toxicity likely to arise if players are punished for disconnecting.

If that is the case why are only the 'winners' complaining about CLing? From what I have read, CLing only affects a small proportion of players, exclusively those engaged in PvP. Yes it does happen outside of the PvP world, but no one really cares about it there.

 

[Arindor]

All I see here is a lot of nonsense which could encourage to play in solo mode. But it's early morning and I haven't had coffee yet.

However, is this the right place to mention that ED will never work as a true multiplayer game and should have been offline in the first place? /sarcasm.

 

[Toumal]

Make our ships persistent even after logging off.

There they are, floating in space or nestled in a station safe and secured while we go on our daily activities in real life.

But who am I kidding, they still don't have wing instancing 100% fixed yet.

Terrible idea! I can make you "combat log" on me by blocking your packets, then shoot your immobile ship.

Your idea does not work with P2P unfortunately.