That sounds good as well. But FDev will need to make cargo ejected as part of that action hangs around much longer in order to gather up. That way if your Pirate wing has a cargo hauler with them, then they have the time to jump into the instance and gather the items.
Recent discussions of CG, Combat logging, "Griefers", etc, PLEASE explain...
- Thread starter FurtivePygmy
- Start date
- Status
That sounds good as well. But FDev will need to make cargo ejected as part of that action hangs around much longer in order to gather up. That way if your Pirate wing has a cargo hauler with them, then they have the time to jump into the instance and gather the items.
As long as there's a way for me to actually get my cargo or my prey actually use reasonable in-game mechanics to evade/outmaneuver me, I'm happy.
That was always the problem before...you had better have a scooping mechanism or your stuff will disappear before you can get it. I always thought it was funny to dump a hundred or so items for a single pirate as the lag would make it near impossible to pick stuff up.
Interesting that they mention the lack of an arbiter in that thread you linked about why they can't fix it. That really makes no sense at all unless they are worried about what system to hand off control to when it is more than 1 v 1, but a simple dice roll should do for that. As long as they perform a connectivity check to the client and only accept an AI controlled kill (ie, the player's system wasn't available to report status), then there isn't an issue of trustworthiness as a hacker could force their computer to stop receiving updates, but would not be able to force the victim of the hacking to be unavailable to the scorekeeper.
So the gankers hurt both traders and pirates. Thats pretty sad.
Doesn't hurt the traders, they just go to solo or private and happily carry on. Gankers only hurt the real PVP players and pirates.
A player bounty system would help with this too, especially if the interdiction displayed the info while being interdicted. If you have a huge player bounty on you, you're more likely to be a griefer as I imagine a lot of players wouldn't put huge personally funded bounties on someone being a reasonable pirate role player. I know I wouldn't. I might add a little bit to it, but I'd be much more inclined to throw millions to anyone taking out someone who's just pure griefing for kicks vs being a true role player in the story of the game.
Combat logging? Is this the same as ambush logging or anti at logging?
Combat logging is like your dodgeball example, bad sportsmanship.
Ambush logging, well this is something different. If you know that the bucket of turd that is attacking you is doing so because he/she derives enjoyment from solely spoiling yours, then spoiling theirs seems like just deserts. There they are, pew pewing you just as you have returned from a 3 month exploration, knowing that you can't fight back, giggling to each other like they are auditioning for high school musical, I say fight back! Deny them the one thing that they want and that is a helpless victim. Well maybe we aren't helpless, maybe we pull the plug and ambush log so we can ruin their game.
Seems only fair to me.
Combat logging is like your dodgeball example, bad sportsmanship.
Ambush logging, well this is something different. If you know that the bucket of turd that is attacking you is doing so because he/she derives enjoyment from solely spoiling yours, then spoiling theirs seems like just deserts. There they are, pew pewing you just as you have returned from a 3 month exploration, knowing that you can't fight back, giggling to each other like they are auditioning for high school musical, I say fight back! Deny them the one thing that they want and that is a helpless victim. Well maybe we aren't helpless, maybe we pull the plug and ambush log so we can ruin their game.
Seems only fair to me.
Well you see thats the problem, i dont think anyone could prove that a given player was causing, or intending to cause, detriment to another player by not playing the game at any particular time.
Extending that line of thinking, you would have a game where players were forced by the software licence to show up to be killed when convenient to another player
In any case, if fd banned combat loggers, it would set such a terrible precedent, allowing software companies to tell users when they could and couldnt start or stop their programs, that a legal challenge to it would be bound to succeed.
Well you see thats the problem, i dont think anyone could prove that a given player was causing, or intending to cause, detriment to another player by not playing the game at any particular time.
Extending that line of thinking, you would have a game where players were forced by the software licence to show up to be killed when convenient to another player
Would it?
Doesnt the EULA and terms of service expressly forbid exiting the game to avoid in game consequences? I know xbox live does.
Last edited:
Well you see thats the problem, i dont think anyone could prove that a given player was causing, or intending to cause, detriment to another player by not playing the game at any particular time.
Extending that line of thinking, you would have a game where players were forced by the software licence to show up to be killed when convenient to another player
You're are making a hyperbole out of my explanation then pointing out the flaw in said disproportionate strawman.
Combat logging has been flagged as an exploit by FD, and exploit that has direct harm against other players' legitimate game play. Thus the ones disobeying the rules will be rightfully punished. It's a very simple concept that doesn't need distortion.
This is the second time I'll say this, logic is my strong suit, please don't start.
Well the biggest problem in your arguement is your definition of detriment and who is causing it to who, and the definition of combat logging vs legit quitting, but if you want to declare yourself the winner thats fine with me
Last edited:
Well the biggest problem in your arguement is your definition of detriment and who is causing it to who, and the definition of combat logging vs legit quitting, but if you want to declare yourself the winner thats fine with me
I've clarified both on several occasions on this thread and I dislike repeating myself.
Detriment caused by illegitimate action taken by a player against a legitimate player is what needs to be punished.
Definition of combat logging is a player disconnecting when in danger.
Legitimate menu exit is when a player utilizes menu log when there is not piracy or bounty hunting occurring at the time.
You can probably find all your questions for me answered in my posts in this thread.
Unfortunately Mr Fang, that is what logic is all about
I'd disagree there. A Legitimate menu exit is when a player utilises the menu log and waits out any applicable timeout - at any time he/she chooses to do so, wether in combat or not.
Since the players who log do it for perhaps different reasons, very few solutions will address the issue as a whole.
1. balance crime and punishment -- This will reduce the absolute number of combat logs by virtue of reducing the absolute number of interdictions. The ratio will likely stay the same. This will mostly benefit the class of folk who just aren't into combat. This may be hard to balance because most games who allow players to be "bad guys" don't impose draconian penalties for those actions and I'm betting it's really tough to tell the difference between being an "approved bad guy" and just being a ganker (whatever that is)
2. Impose severe penalties for combat logging. This sounds reasonable right? But this seems like treating the symptom and not the underlying disorder. Ultimately it will drive people to Solo or PG meaning less folk in open for the "bad guys" to prey upon. Not exactly the right outcome for people complaining that they are not able to kill players because they log off.
3. Address the balance between risk and reward -- one example, seriously re-evaluate the current death penalty. This has ramifications beyond just combat logging. It might be that folks that like combat and might be up for a little PvP or Fight or Flight scenarios with pirates would be willing to go back to open if they could afford to lose their ship a couple times a night. This seems to me to best the best option that addresses not the just the symptom (combat logging), but the underlying reason in many cases.
1. balance crime and punishment -- This will reduce the absolute number of combat logs by virtue of reducing the absolute number of interdictions. The ratio will likely stay the same. This will mostly benefit the class of folk who just aren't into combat. This may be hard to balance because most games who allow players to be "bad guys" don't impose draconian penalties for those actions and I'm betting it's really tough to tell the difference between being an "approved bad guy" and just being a ganker (whatever that is)
2. Impose severe penalties for combat logging. This sounds reasonable right? But this seems like treating the symptom and not the underlying disorder. Ultimately it will drive people to Solo or PG meaning less folk in open for the "bad guys" to prey upon. Not exactly the right outcome for people complaining that they are not able to kill players because they log off.
3. Address the balance between risk and reward -- one example, seriously re-evaluate the current death penalty. This has ramifications beyond just combat logging. It might be that folks that like combat and might be up for a little PvP or Fight or Flight scenarios with pirates would be willing to go back to open if they could afford to lose their ship a couple times a night. This seems to me to best the best option that addresses not the just the symptom (combat logging), but the underlying reason in many cases.
FD support disagrees:
Using a feature in an unintended manner that leads to detriment toward legitimate players is a malicious exploit.
Last edited:
GF, with all due respect, I think you're making a bit too much of that response.
It actually says that the 15 sec log out is legit.
It is not the _intention_ to nullify piracy or bounty hunting. Nor is it FD's intention to have gankers in the game, but the game play exists and is also legitimate.
The hint to post in the suggestions forum would be the same for anyone having suggestions for, say, a C&P system. That clearly means that it is not the case now, but could be considered to be changed.
I value the way you reason your posts. I think here you're going a bit beyond what is actually stated.
It actually says that the 15 sec log out is legit.
It is not the _intention_ to nullify piracy or bounty hunting. Nor is it FD's intention to have gankers in the game, but the game play exists and is also legitimate.
The hint to post in the suggestions forum would be the same for anyone having suggestions for, say, a C&P system. That clearly means that it is not the case now, but could be considered to be changed.
I value the way you reason your posts. I think here you're going a bit beyond what is actually stated.
Last edited:
Hmm, the text in the spoiler actually supports Asp Explorer's position
"At the current time, FD do consider the 15 second log out to be legitimate, yes."
It basically says menu logging is not considered an exploit "at the current time", but that might change as the Dev team makes changes to improve the game.
But logically...
IF Logout = TRUE
AND Combat State = TRUE
AND 15 Second Timer = TRUE
AND FD currently consider timer legitimate = TRUE
THEN..........
I've soldered more 7400's than I care to remember
IF Logout = TRUE
AND Combat State = TRUE
AND 15 Second Timer = TRUE
AND FD currently consider timer legitimate = TRUE
THEN..........
I've soldered more 7400's than I care to remember
I view it as that there is exception to the usage of menu exit, since the intention of the feature is not to cripple piracy and bounty hunting. The fact that it does and people uses it/attempts to use it for that very purpose makes the feature at that instance an exploit.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
It's legitimate until it is used for an unintended purpose which turns it into an exploit, there are two facets to the answer. One proposition and one modifier.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
That would be true if the boolean values are actually true and translated as true propositions, but you seem to have missed an "if" statement.
GF, you know as well as I, that if "intention" counted, there wouldn't be an SDC member left in the game.
- Status