It sure did, I just wanted 10 local saves to mess with and I got a bunch of agressive thickheads instead raging on the forum with some ideas how I should play my game. killtask surely makes it bearable, but I do wish Frontier stick to the original plan and I wouldn't have to see all these people.
Please fix the Alt F4 exploit
- Thread starter Knorlac
- Start date
- Status
what that doesnt solve are server stability issues. person crashes out due to issues beyond their control, and some smuck swings by and kills their ghost. yeah thats really fair.
and while i feel your pain, that solution is totally unacceptable.
Also what all the people asking for "ghost" ships are either ignorant of or willfully ignoring is the fact that with the way the p2p architecture works any tech savvy player could then disconnect anyone they wanted to with their firewall and then have their ghost ship at their mercy. The "ghost ship" solution would be an absolute nightmare, which is why they didn't just do that to begin with. We aren't talking about some amateur coders here, Frontier has been in the business for quite a long time. If there was a simple solution to this it would already have been implemented.
I'm with you, wouldn't want my ship blown up just because the game stuttered and crashed out. Happened for the first time since launch twice in a heavy Extraction site (recent Galnet place, can't remember the name, Ikanu?) I think the 15 second rule they have on exited, if possible, should be applied to ending the task. If you're combat logging (unacceptable practise) then it's usually when you're about to be blown up, 15 seconds (maybe 20) is enough for a Commander to finish the job.
They aren't amateurs when it comes to single player games, but multiplayer? Using p2p netcode is quite amateurish in the game world. The amount of issues it causes vs solves leans way in favor of the causes.
Forced de-sync through interrupting the connection between clients while keeping the connection to the server intact. The server has no way of knowing which client did it; it only knows the clients can't talk between themselves anymore, and that any status from when their peer to peer connection dropped onwards is invalid. The current behavior is to separate the players into different instances. Thoughts?
Not theoretical, BTW. Scripts to do this with a single keypress are already in the wild. And anyone with a bit of firewall knowledge can re-create them easily anyway.
yes and no. if you crashed out yes, but if your combat logging, you'll just do it earlier. so its not really a solution to the problem, so might as well leave it as it is until something better is thought of.
The habit of doing that is easy to track and deal with.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I've seen their anti cheat measures and can say beyond a shadow of a doubt we are in fact dealing with amateurs.
Have to agree dogoncrook. I guess it boils down to whether this is meant to be just simply a variance of multiplayer or something more massive and persistent (and in the case of exploitation, authentic and within the rules of intended gameplay). Purely out of preference I'd prefer the latter.
I've founded the counter reasons pretty poor TBH, when reasons are actually offered. Still, each to their own.
I've founded the counter reasons pretty poor TBH, when reasons are actually offered. Still, each to their own.
They arent statistics, like I've already said in this thread. They are my subjective observations in my player interactions.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
P2p is fine in FPS/RTS games. Its cheap, and does the job there. But not in this game, or any other mmo's (yes I know E: D isnt an mmo)
Can't understand the people saying that combat logging is acceptable and are whining 
around that PVP is not the focus of the game. It's not even about PVP. I see it more as a simulation which the game is, in open mode it's kind of like going out of your cellar. There are dangers out there, risks you take everyday. Basically you risk your life every day leaving the house. That's the same in Elite. It ruined hours of work? Get over it champs! I love that ED made things like they. It adds this little extra spice, just like real life. Kill your bullie and don't just quit, sometimes violence is the answer to your problems and not logging off.
Weirdest comm i've ever seen here, can't you people enjoy yourselfs?
around that PVP is not the focus of the game. It's not even about PVP. I see it more as a simulation which the game is, in open mode it's kind of like going out of your cellar. There are dangers out there, risks you take everyday. Basically you risk your life every day leaving the house. That's the same in Elite. It ruined hours of work? Get over it champs! I love that ED made things like they. It adds this little extra spice, just like real life. Kill your bullie and don't just quit, sometimes violence is the answer to your problems and not logging off.Weirdest comm i've ever seen here, can't you people enjoy yourselfs?
Last edited:
Some people cannot enjoy themselves unless they ruin someone else's day. Otherwise, me and my cat approve this messageWeirdest comm i've ever seen here, can't you people enjoy yourselfs?
what is amateurish is to actually use P2P architecture for such a game.
what is amateurish is to not even think player would exploit this to avoid death on a massive scale.
what is amateurish is to not even respond to the player base about such a game breaking exploit.
no game can survive long to that kind of exploit left unsolved, so they HAVE to come up with a way to prevent players from using it, should they fail, no pvp players will stay, hell game is public since a month and players are already leaving upon this (not only this but it is also partly responsible), they better solve this fast, or everyone will know the game is flawed.
abusing of this is very very easy to detect, try again.....
it is actually as easy to detect such behavior as it is to create the script you are mentioning
Hatsune Miku
Banned
This shouldn't be an issue. It's possible to differentiate between a player who has genuinely lost connection (or broke it by killing the process) from someone who has actively blocked their connection by using the matchmaking server's connection status as a flag.
What's going to detect it? the server thats in contro... oh wait, yeah thats right, there ISNT ONE! ROFL HAHAHA
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
You can block the other players connection but leave the matchmaking connection always on. Without them hacking into a person's ROUTER there's no way that they can know why the connection isn't working. It's a variant of the same issue people have been having on Xbox Live since it went online with NAT's being either Strict or moderate.
Hatsune Miku
Banned
Being ignorant and uneducated is a really poor way to go through life, you know.
You don't need to? Both players have connections established with the matchmaker. Enough selective disconnecting creates a pattern that can be used to question whether the player is genuine.
Last edited:
You mad bro?
Surely they really depends on how smart Frontiere servers are and what each client is reporting to Frontiere servers. If each client is telling Frontiere servers that it communicating with another 20 clients and it sends each IP address of those clients to the server then suddenly one of those peers is still sending data to Frontiere but not send data peer to peer whilst in open play then you know that a player has interfered with tthe connection, especially if every other player in that instance have maintain contact with that peer.
Or you could just go shoot someone else?
- Status