PVP Combat Logging - Vindicator Jones Video

[CptSiddy]

https://www.frontierstore.net/ed-eula/?_ga=1.193035817.587976870.1480525830

Here's a link to the EULA.
I agree, CL is not found in this document specifically.

There is, however a case to be made for section 3:



Section (c) would cover any use of 3rd party equipment to force a break in the communication.
But in particular, section (f) expressly forbids "testing the vulnerability of... the authentication measures of the Game" - which would include peer to peer authentication.

Don't get me wrong, I personally think CL is far to over-complained about and isn't such a big deal.
But the challenge was with regards to mention in the ToS. And while not expressly using the coined term "Combat Logging" (which isn't exactly a legal term), the action is technically covered in the EULA

None of the clause above would come even close to condemning someone pulling their plug.

Any Bans for combat logging are grounds for a lawsuit for breach of contract.

And there is a good reason no MMO game company worth their salt has ever tried to enforce such a thing.

Closest thing that might come to this is League of Legends, that will not ban you for abandoning game, but restrict your access from competitive play in ranked games until you have shown improvement.
And they can do this because they have grounds to argue that your absence from a game has caused discomfort for other players.

 

[Charles Erika von Hackbeil]

Good job, Cmdr Vindicator Jones.

o7

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Indigo approves of this message.
Take this rep+ as a token of my endorsement.

I've said the exact same thing, more than once, more than a dozen times, just without the pretty video.

And I've made the same suggestion - to implement a reputation system that is persistent and has obvious impact. "Docking Request Denied" would certainly give someone cause to consider their actions and perhaps do something about their reputation. So would a squad of Authority Ships following them around in the systems they patrol because they're known for their criminal actions.

Finally, you couldn't be more right - ushering folk out of Open will ultimately result in an Open devoid of anyone except pyschopaths and mode-switchers stacking missions.

However...

I do see a place for Solo and for Private Groups - Solo is perhaps the single best place for brand new players to learn the ropes, learn how to operation their ships, learn how to do all the things necessary to know and to develop their skills so they don't have to have conversations like:

"Drop your cargo, or I'll open fire."
"I'm new, how do I do that?"
"Sure you are."
Commence pew-pew

Or:
"Why are you shooting at me?"
""
"Seriously, stop, I just started playing!"
""
"C'mon, I can't afford to..."
"Git gud nub."
""

And Private allows groups to play together both for similar reasons as stated above, or to engage in special events not otherwise open to the general populace. Imagine trying to hold a canyon race and then having another group just deciding to join in, or worse, hanging around to grief people trying to participate?

And... having been in both Open and Private groups, I can say, without a doubt, there are a number of people playing with absolutely terrible connections. I've seen ships skip dozens of Ls across space because of connection issues. I've seen lag like no other in Open because of this as well, and frankly, I can live without that. I've also seen some very bizarre issues - one in particular: I was docked at a station, conversing with another commander, when suddenly my camera went on a little acid trip through the station and out into space. I could no longer interact with any station functions, ship functions or anything else and had to log out and back in, and when I logged back in I found myself out in space where my trippy camera decided to come to rest - just at the edge of the no-fire zone. Also something I can live without, thanks.

 

[Eyymily]

Please point me to the clause in the ToS that explicitly forbids people from logging off or having a connection issues?

Ill wait.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...tions-on-Combat-Logging?p=4817159#post4817159

 

[Darkfyre99]

Obsidian Ant beat me to it, but here it is guys.


My take on Combat Logging.


Please note, some very mild course language and strong opinions.

Please watch the whole video before commenting and please try and respect each others opinions.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqSmR4iCku4

Great video, and a truly nuanced look at the issue.

For me, what keeps me out of open for long periods of time is simply that like every other game I've played which allows for non-consensual PvP, most of those who engage in non-consensual PvP (aka player-killers, to distinguish them from PvPers) are jerks. They simply don't seem to understand that while I may be their in-game content, they are also my in-game content.

As such, I don't consider it unreasonable for me to expect them to make the teeniest, tiniest effort to make an encounter with them memorable fun, despite being sent to the rebuy screen. Many can't even be bothered with a simple text macro broadcast on local. Many more seem to go out of their way to make an encounter with them as unpleasant as possible.

Out of the dozen attacks by players I've suffered through, only two actually initiated any kind of communication with me before opening fire. The first was a power-player during my brief time of being pledged to a power, before deciding the frequent NPC interdictions wasn't my definition of fun, and I started supporting my power more covertly. The second was an actual pirate, which made for quite a fun encounter. The rest? Opened fire without a word, though one had the audacity to call me a coward after I outran him repeatedly. My combat ranking at the time was mostly-harmless, and I was operating an unarmed (but well shielded and very fast) transport Cobra at the time.

Personally, I think the penalty for both combat logging and murder should be the same, a gradual loss of station privileges, based on the severity and frequency of the offences, starting with high security systems, until only anarchy systems remain. Privileges could only be restored after enough time has passed, or perhaps through the mission system.

If one wants to play outside the rules or laws, then the rule of law shouldn't protect them.

 

[CptSiddy]

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...tions-on-Combat-Logging?p=4817159#post4817159

That is roundabout way of saying "we don't like it but we cant do anything to do about it".

Quite simply, the burden of proof for intentional logging off while in combat to cheat lies with FD. And there is no way they can meet this burden, ergo they do not even bother to add it in EULA.

The courts are already know for tossing out unfair EULA's in favor of customer. So covering your behind with EULA in a case where you don't have 100% concrete proof of the customers wrong doing is just asking for trouble, especially in EU with its draconian consumer protection laws.

So until FD dev come and states explicitly that "COMBAT LOGGING IS AGAINST RULES AND WILL GET YOU BANNED AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON CUSTOMER THAT YOU DID NOT SUFFER A TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY", i put little weight on what he said.
And even then, i will chuckle because only way they can ban people for combat logging is to shift burden of proof on customer, and that will get sued even faster

As for now, the burden of proof of any wrongdoing lies on FD, and thus issue of combatlogging can not be solved by EULA enforcement. Only by game mechanic that punishes said activity. Its same song and dance CCP had to do.

In short, fix game, not ban ppls.

 

[Truesilver]

Out of the dozen attacks by players I've suffered through, only two actually initiated any kind of communication with me before opening fire. The first was a power-player during my brief time of being pledged to a power, before deciding the frequent NPC interdictions wasn't my definition of fun, and I started supporting my power more covertly. The second was an actual pirate, which made for quite a fun encounter. The rest? Opened fire without a word

Speaking as someone who plays as a RP vigilante, not an OOC salt-miner, it is for precisely this reason that I have used a comms macro since (literally) the first day of 1.3 for clean unknowns (ie Powerplay hostiles).

If I know I'm going to be in a particular area for a long time I make it more RP and situational (sometimes even attempting humour, groan...) but otherwise immediately before interdiction I use a generic:

"Enemy Powerplay agent, please throttle down and await Federal execution"

I feel that way we both know where we stand, and why.

I'm delighted to report that as a result, positive communication after the event (even if I've destroyed the target) exceeds negative 10 to 1.

Knowing that there was a reason and that effort was made to convey it seems to go a long way to maintaining a good take on things.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Folks, rules-lawyers especially, love to post and repost this, especially parts of it, so let's look at it closely:

"No cheating or taking advantage of exploits in the game
We do not tolerate cheating of any kind in the game, this includes using automated programs or services offered outside of the game to generate player advantage, altering game code or using cheat codes.
We also do not tolerate the use of any exploits or the use of any possible bugs in the game to generate player advantage.
Any player caught cheating or taking advantage of any exploits or bugs will be penalise and could face a game ban."

So what would be a "service offered outside of the game to generate player advantage"? Posting here a particular trade route would qualify. It's outside of the game, and gives an advantage to any player making use of it.
Sites like EDDB.IO are outside of the game and can give plenty of player advantage. So using these would qualify, but nobody complains about them.
I would also go so far as to say any threads here or on other sites that disclose any sort of weapons configuration (aka heat meta) are outside of the game and give a player advantage as well.

But where are the threads berating this behavior? Where are the calls to arms against eddb.io? Or even Coriolis.io? There's certainly a player advantage to simulating ship builds before actually spending the credits, now isn't there?

And I would certainly consider the suicide-ramming of ships entering or exiting a station to be exploiting the game mechanics, by using the station to kill a commander based on the poor handling of draconian galactic law.

Again, where's the call to arms against this?

So it's no small wonder that Combat Logging has not generated any major response from Frontier, other than for them to say that it is inappropriate behavior.
And it is inappropriate behavior.

Of course, there is also this little gem:

"Rights of other users should be respected."

And what are the Rights of other users? Do we have the right to choose when we play? Do we have the right to choose when we do not play? I should hope those are at least our most basic, fundamental rights. Since logging out via the menu at waiting your 15 seconds is not considered an exploit or cheat (though still potentially poor form if used to simply avoid an encounter), will there still be the same level of outrage at this? From some people, I'm sure there would be.

But can you really blame a for acting like a ?

 

[c00ky1970]

2 things:

How long did it take VJ to set up those poses for his video avatar? I liked it, although it did distract me from his well made and reasoned discussion on the issue as I was waiting to see what pose he would use next.

Based on the number of separate posts both here and on Reddit about the subject, we have maybe found second place for category for most intractable thread issue in ED, first going to Open vs Closed vs Private.

Thirdly, I can't count.

Fourthly, the way ahead seems to be some sort of Crime and Ounishment solution to be put into place, which won't eliminate non consensual PvP, nor will it prevent combat logging, but seems by all to add more advantages to all players gameplay experience regardless of the kind of interaction they want from the game.

Fifthly, the more well known you tubers discuss the matter, the higher the profile and therefore the more discussion occurs, this then provides feedback to Fdev as to what needs to be considered for the "Winter is coming" expansion of 2.4 or maybe another interim beta.

Keep up the good work!

 

[Mangal Oemie]

https://www.frontierstore.net/ed-eula/?_ga=1.193035817.587976870.1480525830

Here's a link to the EULA.
I agree, CL is not found in this document specifically.

There is, however a case to be made for section 3:



Section (c) would cover any use of 3rd party equipment to force a break in the communication.
But in particular, section (f) expressly forbids "testing the vulnerability of... the authentication measures of the Game" - which would include peer to peer authentication.

Don't get me wrong, I personally think CL is far to over-complained about and isn't such a big deal.
But the challenge was with regards to mention in the ToS. And while not expressly using the coined term "Combat Logging" (which isn't exactly a legal term), the action is technically covered in the EULA

Sorry. Neither 3(c) nor 3(f) refer to combat logging.

Alt-F4 or Task Manager, or switching off your router are not "cheats, automation software, hacks, mods, or any other unauthorized software designed to modify or defeat the purpose or experience of the Game". You could try to claim your Windows OS is "unauthorized software" but considering it is required to run the game, it obviously can't be.

3(f) is about proper hacking.

- - - Updated - - -

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...tions-on-Combat-Logging?p=4817159#post4817159

exploitation. Not combat logging.

 

[kofeyh]

"Ye Olde Combatte Logginge" trope is continuing alive and well I see!

If risk mitigation is the excuse used then you can probably stop there. Because ultimately CL is purely consequence avoidance. Nothing more. It's true for those who are armed to the teeth as it is for those who aren't. The worst thing Frontier could have done is created a get-out-of-jail free card. Becuse it will be abused.

Removing the damage block on disconnect would mean those who unplug when the tables are turned, now have to find a solution in game, as much as those who regularly abuse it against PVE. What was once an idea to solve occasionally disconnect issues is now a gigantic loophole.

EULA is pretty clear about it. Attempting to suggest it's "sometimes okay" is like saying it's "sometimes okay" to be above a law. No it isn't. CL makes a mockery of stiffer penalties. Better crime and punishment laws need a solid bat to enforce, and this is impacticle whilst people can avoid all care by means as simple as taskkill or unplugging.

 

[Ozram]

Excellent points. Nicely done.

 

[Hugeness]

If the rebuy was removed or made many times smaller would that solve it?
I think it would help loads, and bring more into open...

 

[vindicator jones]

Some typos / grammar mistakes just hurt our eyes, I agree - but let's be fair! It just happens. Even in our company, everytime the HVMarketing guys send out newsletters that have some bad errors, funnily enough, since they send it to customer care to perform a double check, those errors have almost vanished. It's not always about education, as you say correctly. Is VJ a native english speaker at all? If not he does a pretty good job at it, imho (german beeing my native language, not english).

I am Australian, so English is my first Language, but I also suffer a little from Dyslexia, so sometimes I will often misread misspelled words. Its not a big deal, if I am being careful, but yeah, sometimes when I am writing a post, I am not as focused as I should be.. lol

 

[X-Terminator]

No. How about if a CMDR gets your hull down to 1% and then tries to finish you off then they are instantly sent into CQC for a day.
3 strikes in a week gets them 1 week.
3 weekly strikes in a month gets them another 1 month.
3 monthly strikes in a year get them a year.
3 yearly strikes in a decade gets them a decade.
3 decades strikes in a century gets them a century.
3 century strikes in a miilenium gets them a millennium there - just because and why not!

 

[Hugeness]

No. How about if a CMDR gets your hull down to 1% and then tries to finish you off then they are instantly sent into CQC for a day.

I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy!

 

[Ozram]

I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy!

Might be a good thing. It would mean there are actually some players there when you're looking for a match.
Back on topic, after much thinking on the subject, while I am not a fan of camping gankers, the truth is I did enjoy their presence until engineers took effect. Without making some long post about it, I'm of the opinion that blame falls not on them or loggers but rather squarely on FD. They seem oblivious to the effects of recent changes. From engineering grind to special effects and lack of dedicated content. I love the core of the game (flying my ships about), but there's little content to keep people interested indefinitely. Meaningful progression has been dismissed for ship stats grinding and repetitive missions. They need storytelling, reputation system and variation of laws and content from system to system (just to name a few issues). They also need to decide what kind of game this is supposed to be. Some of the stuff just doesn't gell well.

 

[vindicator jones]

Apologies, I'm writing this as I listen to your video. (I know you said listen to the end, but I don't want to forget my train of thought here)
One little thing stood out to me as I listen.

You mention that you never combat log.... except for that one time where you combat logged because your joystick cable fell out.
Is hardware malfunction a justifiable reason? Does this then include network hubs for example?
You also go on to back up the logging by justifying it against the "5 million credits" you would have lost.
So does this mean that losing a substantial (subjectively) amount of credits is an acceptable reason to combat log?
But then you continue to say that "combat logging is a big no-no..." even though you have provided two subjective arguments for which it could be justified.

Forgive me for saying this, but your story does appear to imply at least a small degree of hypocrisy here.
(Please understand, I'm not criticising you directly for this, but merely pointing out the inconsistency in the argument you put forward).

If you believe that all combat logging is wrong, then you cannot take that standpoint on the back of admitting that you have partaken in the action (whether it's "just that one time, when I really needed to!" or it's "every time a ship flies within shooting range of me!").
In the same way, if you believe that there is nothing wrong with combat logging then you can't complain if others employ it as they see fit. (in whichever situation arises)

One might also argue that there is perhaps a "middle ground" for when combat logging is acceptable (be it through network loss, or wife went into labour, or any number of "reasonable" justifications). The problem there, however, lies in the fact that any justification is entirely subjective to the justifier and not everyone else.
And this is (in part) why this problem will never be resolved and why it needs to be forgotten for good.

I've lost count of the number of viable options there are for implementing a "force-you-to-stay" in the game but it would appear that Frontier is less interested in these than they would have you believe (I mean, it's been a number of years now!).
So perhaps it's time to shrug our shoulders, except that what is, is, and move onto a different contentious argument?

I understand where your coming from, however just because I have admitted to combat logging one time in PVE, dosent mean I condone it. I shouldnt have done it, and it is completely breaking the rules. The reason why I bring it up, is to show that sometimes commanders react badly in a tense situation. It dosent make it right to act like that, but I can understand if some poor sap in a T-6 is interdicted by a wing of FDL's who then open fire for no reason, will then consider combat logging.

Understanding why someone might do something, is not condoning it. There is NO middle ground for combat logging. Period. You shouldnt do it, and if you do, you are cheating. HOWEVER.. my point is this. Instead of punishing those commanders who may do it for extenuating reasons, educate then and encourage them. Help them to better prepare them for the rigors of open. Banishing them to solo is only going to end up hurting the game in the long run.

Habitual loggers are just as bad as griefers in my opinion and should be BOTH dealt with in a similar way.

My point of the video was to say dont group ALL combat loggers into the same pile. Not everything is black and white, and dealing with the reasons why some people combat log is more important, to me, than just punishing those that do.

 

[Hugeness]

Heartily agree Osram,
When I first started playing nearly all (not all) player interactions in open were positive.
Now most are the reverse. Insta-engineered death around CGs and Shinrata.
It prevents Piracy on both sides, my expensive ships resemble a 1st World War fleet- to expensive to leave port in open for any CG. My wing mates no longer play because its to broken, I haven't got the play-time to endlessly grind "tat" to make myself safe in open, and as a result only tend to bother in open in small stuff with a cheaper rebuy, making the game harder and less fun.
Power Plays resulted in constant interdictions, and now the money pits (Sothis/Robigo et al) that gave me the rebuy buffer are nerfed... remember when Robigo was fun?
The last time I played was an arranged Canonn thing with Cmdr ******* at the ruins, but it was a private group and had to be arranged outside of the game. We dared not even bother mustering in open.
I can't really be ars*d with it at the moment to be honest. The forums are actually more fun than the game... weird!



*Edit - Sorry Vindicator, I appear to have gone on an off-topic rant mate, dtop me a PM if you feel this is in the wrong place and I'll edit it down to nothing*

 

[xXCheeChowXx]

I don't know if you are in open to talk to others and meet new people and you are just flying around exploring, doing cargo runs, combating NPC's and someone has had a bad day and just wants to ruin peoples fun by ganking them. We have to look at the definition of combat. Is it two people engaged in a fight or is combat attacking people who have no interest in fighting and don't have their ship setup for combat? Seems to me that it take two to tango and so if one of the players hasn't fired a shot and is being fired upon the one who isn't firing is not engaged in combat so, therefore, neither is the one firing. The One who just wants to socialize but, not with Mr Bad day pulls the plug.Did he really combat log? I think not. He just refused to play the game Mr Bad Day wanted him to play and chose NOT to be Mr Bad Day's Whipping Boy. Now if Mr Social fired at Mr Bad Day and then pulled the plug that, would be combat logging.