FD have given their opinion (one I share, when the 'logging' in question involves someone who has voluntarily engaged in combat, or knowingly played in a context where combat could reasonably be expected). Their opinion does not form part of the EULA contract however. It isn't a 'rule'. It is an opinion.
Open letter to Frontier
- Thread starter Cowboy Bats
- Start date
- Status
FD have given their opinion (one I share, when the 'logging' in question involves someone who has voluntarily engaged in combat, or knowingly played in a context where combat could reasonably be expected). Their opinion does not form part of the EULA contract however. It isn't a 'rule'. It is an opinion.
Combat logging is more than a way to evade kills. There is a form of honorable piracy that they want to be a viable activity between players. Legal combat-logging would also be used to evade those encounters without effort, etc.
Many pirates are not PvP'ers, at least not in the sense that they want to fight or kill other players. They want a PvP game of cat and mouse, but the ultimate victory in their game is not a kill. (Often it's not even cargo, often it's an interesting or satisfying encounter regardless of resolution)
Last edited:
Morally and legally (for lack of a better term regarding game rules) are 2 very different things though.
Which has been my main point since I've been in the thread.
What SDC did was morally wrong - I said this already. But what they did was not "legally" wrong.
Frontier are a business not the local vicar, they are not here for spiritual or moral guidance - they are here to make money, by providing a service.
They care as much about what is morally right as an ant cares about the situation in the middle east - not one iota. As long as people pay for the game and the extras, they will carry on.
They will only look at the black and white "legally" of each situation. Sort any problems according to it, and carry on.
As for those who combat logged while in the private group, it is down to FD how heavy handed they want to be about that - I doubt they will take any action due to the circumstances, but it would be worth noting, 2 wrongs do not make a right.
Again, semantics. Theirs is the only ENFORCABLE opinion which makes it a rule.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Absolutely nothing you said here is wrong... as far as it goes. If FD "are not the local vicar" and shouldn't make rulings about gaming ethics then the ruling they made about combat logging is void. If they CAN make rulings about ethics, then they can also make rulings about ethics in private groups. You can't have it both ways.
One slight tangent here. I don't recall anyone at any point ever coming to the forums to complain about being shadowbanned. I have a hard time believing it has ever been enforced... I realise that sounds a bit passive-aggressive. If FDev habitually stand behind the "we can't prove it so we can't act", I would casually suggest that Clogging in Mobius will never draw any kind of sanction from FDev...
Certainly, we both have already said FD do not need to give a reason to why they set any rules and can set any they want.
As long as we all know what rules to play by, then it is all good.
We all know, CL'ing is wrong and FD will enforce that rule.
And now we know, FD don't mind invasions in to private groups, if the group owner is going to be daft enough to just admit anyone.
So as long as FD keep everyone updated on what they consider to be fair and equal game play - at least we know what to expect from those we play with.
Turns out Leto was right all along, Mobius should be more careful over who he lets in to his group.
Better take Leto off block and apologise I suppose. I fell out with him over that, turns out - it's the stance FD is taking.
I'm under the impression that we're not allowed to complain in here about punitive actions? Of course that wouldn't stop you complaining elsewhere.
They are well aware that online games plagued with unpleasant player-interactions become financially stunted and die. Their financial interest depends heavily on their ability to successfully provide "moral guidance", and they know this and they believe it.
Also, it's not just financials, they do actually care. More than you care about it even. When you pour years of your life into building an edifice like Elite, you don't have zero interest in your masterpiece beyond a paycheck. Well, inevitably some do, but many or most people in these studios care greatly about what people are getting out of the experience they've crafted for them.
Providing guidance that works robustly at massive scale with limited human oversight against a hostile userbase that is actively searching for "legal" ways to make people miserable, it's no easy thing.
Last edited:
Jimmy Carter? Leave him out please he was spotting UFO's in 1969...Thargoids I think?
Peanuts anyone?
Who said the CL'ing rule is just about ethics?
Perhaps the client sends a crash report in the background if it does not detect a legitimate logout.
Perhaps the matchmaker holds a much needed port for your connection and tried a connection keep alive, wasting valuable server time.
Perhaps it is just a head count, for them to see how many people login per day - and without cosponsoring logout information it messes with their stats.
Perhaps the constant in/out puts excess strain on the login server.
There could be a number of reasons they decided to class CL'ing as wrong, as well as just following what every other online game does. Sheep don't need ethics, they just need to know who to follow.
But a smart PR department will dress it up as being something the players wanted for what ever reason.... after all, if it looks like they care - people spend more money.
Conjecture.
Irrelevant too.
FD have made rulings and can continue to do so about whatever they want, and by the terms of the EULA you agreed to you can either agree with them or stop playing.
Last edited:
... Not if their opinion isn't covered by the EULA for the game.
The only clause in the EULA that's even close to "don't grief a private group" is section 4.1, but that seems to be more towards don't be malicious and fraudulent in the game code.
To be honest, reading the EULA of Elite Dangerous, it's very, VERY weak; there is no clause similar to Blizzard's EULA:
- Blizzard reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for any reason, or for no reason, with or without notice to you. For purposes of explanation and not limitation, most Account suspensions and terminations are the result of violations of this Agreement. In case of minor violations of these rules, Blizzard may provide you with a prior warning and/or suspend your use of the Account due to your non-compliance prior to terminating the Agreement or modifying or deleting an Account.
To be clear, the Elite Dangerous EULA basically says that you have to violate the EULA for them to take away the game. Technically, you can be an ass, but you can play the game.
Technically, Blizzard can revoke your right to play the game because you got arrested for a DUI. Or your last name is Poopsmith. Or that you're a total ass ruining the game for the community.
Sigh. Okay, I'll go back to talking to people involved in this discussion.
Same as almost all the content of this thread. All we know for a fact is that a bunch of pew-pew kiddies signed on (not 'infiltrated' please - it took no effort) to a private group, and acted like the pathetic bunch of trolls they clearly are. All this talk of so-called 'combat logging' is an irrelevance - though par for the course when the behaviour of some PVPers (almost certainly a minority) is brought into question. Evidently some people would rather drag the discussion off-topic rather than have the central issues actually discussed...
Name them...
EVE Online, still going after 10 years despite having the worst player communities I've ever had the misfortune to encounter
Star Trek Online, SFD and NoP have done and still do some of the worst things you can do in the game - then YouTube it and brag on the forums. 6 years this month and still going.
World of Warcraft seems to go through some right cycles of good / bad within the community as well as gold seller spam and a fierce echo chamber support group.
As for honourable mention, try saying something bad about Star Citizen or mention the 107 million for something that is not even a game yet....
Very few games have died due to player actions - only through bad decisions by those in charge.
re: Combat logging, this is against the rules, PER FD on these very forums, and it applies to NPC, PvP or other situations, if you close the game via bypassing the logout option ingame, you have combat logged and broken their rule. Doesn't matter if it's because you are about to slam into the toaster rack and can't stop, if an NPC wing of Anaconda's has interdicted your Hauler or if a slimeball got into Mobius and started opening fire on you, it's not allowed in any situation.
And FD can see when you do this, there's a difference between your connection dropping due to internet issues and closing the program via Task Manager, shutting off your router or just pulling the cord out, a little info for you folks who don't know how this stuff works, it can be seen, so don't think you are safe and can't be caught, you aren't, you can be. EVERYTHING is logged you know, so FD can always look at the logs and find out if you are doing this and see if you make a habit of it, and they have stated, publically and officially, that it's not allowed and will be subject to punishment.
As for why we don't see people complaining about being punished, well, as Sandmann said, it's not allowed on these forums. Other places, you could probably say something about it, but the fact is, most people busted for stuff in a game never say a word publically, maybe cry that they are innocent, like the wonderful example of humanity in MechWarrior Online banned for using hacks on HIS personal account, he blamed his little girl, said she used them on her account. Except, her account didn't get banned, his did, because he was the one using them, not his 10 yr old daughter. THAT'S the type who usually post something about punishment, the ats who KNOW they got busted but refuse to take any blame and will try and get the punishment removed so they can go back to breaking the rules again. PGI lets anyone who gets banned get a new account, guess what the above at did? Go on, you can guess....yeah...busted again, blamed someone else this time...lovely person isn't he?
And FD can see when you do this, there's a difference between your connection dropping due to internet issues and closing the program via Task Manager, shutting off your router or just pulling the cord out, a little info for you folks who don't know how this stuff works, it can be seen, so don't think you are safe and can't be caught, you aren't, you can be. EVERYTHING is logged you know, so FD can always look at the logs and find out if you are doing this and see if you make a habit of it, and they have stated, publically and officially, that it's not allowed and will be subject to punishment.
As for why we don't see people complaining about being punished, well, as Sandmann said, it's not allowed on these forums. Other places, you could probably say something about it, but the fact is, most people busted for stuff in a game never say a word publically, maybe cry that they are innocent, like the wonderful example of humanity in MechWarrior Online banned for using hacks on HIS personal account, he blamed his little girl, said she used them on her account. Except, her account didn't get banned, his did, because he was the one using them, not his 10 yr old daughter. THAT'S the type who usually post something about punishment, the ats who KNOW they got busted but refuse to take any blame and will try and get the punishment removed so they can go back to breaking the rules again. PGI lets anyone who gets banned get a new account, guess what the above at did? Go on, you can guess....yeah...busted again, blamed someone else this time...lovely person isn't he?
Uhh.. yeah. You keep on believing that FDev can't make rules here... see how that works out for you.
For my part, FDev's definition of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors takes a back seat to my own. I'd be unlikely to combat log to a pvp'er, if one came across me in Mobius (which is itself incredibly unlikely), but that's only because I'm confident I could space the loser without breaking a sweat. Whether I treat someone fairly and on even terms is determined entirely upon whether or not I think they deserve to be treated fairly and evenly.
So if it happened and I wanted to combat log, then I'd combat log. What's he going to do? Report me? What's going to happen then? FDev will eventually investigate the report. They will find that I have no history of disconnects that look like combat logging, and so that particular disconnect could be coincidence and the investigation will come back as inconclusive. FDev might send me a warning message about combat logging, and we'll all have a bit of a laugh. And then it will never happen again because a pvp'er is unlikely to ever come across me again, and if he does, as I said above, I'd probably just take him out.
Which is what I've been saying.....
You're the one who wanted to say they make them due to "ethics".
Truth is, we do not know why FD do what they do - unless we start getting invited to some of the internal meetings, it will always be speculation / conjecture.
- Status