Suggestion for shadowban server

[Kapow]

Thing is whether it is piracy or not, FD has said killing for any reason or none at all is within the rules of the game. When you choose open you have to accept that as a possibility, even NPCs do it. To ungraceful exit is something that they said over a year and a half ago was an exploit.

But this conversation has gotten off track. This was a suggestion about making shadowban a true punishment for anything it is to be used for and not to argue just combat logging

Personally I think that FDs priority should be a complete rework of their netcode and networking setup. With the plans to have multi-crew I genuinely can not see it being anything else then catastrophe with miss-instancing rather then fun play in a group. All wings I've ever played with suffered from some missinstancing at some point and it is simply a complete joke that we are still on the same shady setup 2 years past release and FD is still advertising this game as MMO. So first point I would say should be rework of the Netcode to include server instancing and hosting when players play together or engage in battle. Before anybody shouts out about unbearable costs - Elderscrollsonline manages it on Buy to play/small cash shop and subscription option if you want to and it works fine for them as well as Guild Wars 2 being buy to play and then Cosmetic Store (which we have already, minus proper servers) So costs are not prohibitive unless you expect unreasonable reinvestable income for other projects.

Punishing loggers in more then just Shadowban should have been here from the beginning before Combat Logging became a play option. But I will whole heartedly support anything that affects combat loggers.

I also strongly agree that the 15 sec counter to exit is a joke. It should be indefinite if engaged in battle. Even NPCs have their right to kill

 

[DocLooshkin]

Hello, Lucifer Hate.

I can't help but think that there might be good reasons FD has not responded to the ceaseless calls for stronger punishments - both for in-game crimes and for exploits, such as logging.

While the loggers are relatively harmless, I think there have been enough gankers, abusive exploiters and cheats that we can confidently say that a section of the playerbase would really enjoy the opportunity to use this mechanism to harm other players in a more impactful way.

With the game's networking set up the way it is, FD is basically dependent on players' clients to report what's happening. A handful of players with modified clients could do an awful lot of damage to the game. In that eventuality, the average PvP pirate would be almost as likely to end up shadowbanned, if the proposed mechanics were to become reality.

In any event, I think FD might really want to address why some players combat log, in the first place. I don't have access to FD's statistical data, but I'd be surprised if most loggers weren't doing so only after being pointlessly ganked more times than they want to deal with.

Punishing them for logging - on top of their previous losses - might not have the outcome you expect. I can't see those opposed to logging really benefiting from all the loggers simply abandoning open for PvE Groups and Solo - especially since the fewer remaining players might quickly be mass-ganked into leaving Open, as well.

 

[JYD75]

Ontop of all the Arguments why it is not a plausible option you forgot a valid point:Shadowbanning Combat loggers alone is not right. If you do that then you need to shadowban the griefers, gankers and lulbunniez too.Then we might have a workable system. Can't have one without the other.Remember, Combat loggers are taking this attitude because they are frustrated that there is no punishment for griefing and ganking

 

[Martind Forlon]

Ontop of all the Arguments why it is not a plausible option you forgot a valid point:Shadowbanning Combat loggers alone is not right. If you do that then you need to shadowban the griefers, gankers and lulbunniez too.Then we might have a workable system. Can't have one without the other.Remember, Combat loggers are taking this attitude because they are frustrated that there is no punishment for griefing and ganking

... oh, really? It's not more because they decided to play in game mode which is not theirs cup of tea? Open always will be dangerous with potential risk being killed by other commander. If you are not up to accept this, do not play in open ... it's not so hard.

 

[Lucifer Hate]

Ontop of all the Arguments why it is not a plausible option you forgot a valid point:Shadowbanning Combat loggers alone is not right. If you do that then you need to shadowban the griefers, gankers and lulbunniez too.Then we might have a workable system. Can't have one without the other.Remember, Combat loggers are taking this attitude because they are frustrated that there is no punishment for griefing and ganking

It is not just a suggestion for combat loggers, the conversation got off topic. It is for anyone breaking the rules as written by FD. If the griefers (although FD definition of griefer is alot different then many players definition), gankers, and lulbunniez, do so in a way that breaks the rules then yes I agree with you

The point is you have people saying that shadowban does not bother them as it is little different than playing solo. That is where shadowbanning needs teeth to make it a punishment as it should be.

 

[JYD75]

It is not just a suggestion for combat loggers, the conversation got off topic. It is for anyone breaking the rules as written by FD. If the griefers (although FD definition of griefer is alot different then many players definition), gankers, and lulbunniez, do so in a way that breaks the rules then yes I agree with you

The point is you have people saying that shadowban does not bother them as it is little different than playing solo. That is where shadowbanning needs teeth to make it a punishment as it should be.

Thanks for your explination, it would seem that we have the same view on the subject. I can get behind a Shadowban for all players breaking the rules as written by FD. Seems fair enough for me.

... oh, really? It's not more because they decided to play in game mode which is not theirs cup of tea? Open always will be dangerous with potential risk being killed by other commander. If you are not up to accept this, do not play in open ... it's not so hard.

It is not the mode, it is about the griefers, gankers and lulbunniez. If you play in open you can expect to be interdicted, pirated etc, that is clear. If you don't want that you can play in privat or solo, agreed. The point is if people can accept that why should they still have to avoid open to avoid the griefers etc.?

Fair fights are a given in open, also the fact that you can (and probably will) lose a ship or two in a fight. I can live with that, what I can't live with is people purposly ruining other peoples games in open. There needs to be a heavy punishment for that. (as there should be for people combat logging against normal players not out to grief or gank).

 

[Martind Forlon]

It is not the mode, it is about the griefers, gankers and lulbunniez. If you play in open you can expect to be interdicted, pirated etc, that is clear. If you don't want that you can play in privat or solo, agreed. The point is if people can accept that why should they still have to avoid open to avoid the griefers etc.?

Fair fights are a given in open, also the fact that you can (and probably will) lose a ship or two in a fight. I can live with that, what I can't live with is people purposely ruining other peoples games in open. There needs to be a heavy punishment for that. (as there should be for people combat logging against normal players not out to grief or gank).

But what you asks is simply impossible, there is absolutely nothing what can assure really "fair" fight not mentioning a fact that "fair" is only personal assessing of the situation. There always will be pilots which like do problems and imo it is good, because only this can make game really dangerous. It is quite irrelevant for you, being a target, if attacker want kill you for a lulz or because he just decided that this system is only his own. You will die on both cases unless you are prepared and either escape/flee or kill the attackers. Fleeing actually is not as much problem if you know what you are doing. Something else are situations where player found exploit and use it for harming others, this is imo when you should report this situation as a "bug" and ask if you can get back your moneys back (it it ends fatal). Then it is up to FDevs to come with a solution which will prevent this exploit (have a examples like using rewerb torps attack against ship leaving station, or using weak engineers bases defences). But nothing from this can excuse you from clearly breaking game rules. If you have no issue doing so, and FD accept this behaviour, well ... then play is not going on much smoothly and ppl get upset (on one side or another or on both). I also agree with idea that intense use of exploits should lead to "shadow ban" server, but this should be not players, but FDevs decision and everyone should know (no double explanations) this. But this needs some more experience and time, to get to more "solid" state on ED.

 

[Lateralus]

I see this has already turned into a 'PvP isn't required' thread... This line of reasoning is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Anyway back to the original OP idea, yes I agree, make life more difficult for those in the Shadow Universe as they are unlikley to be there unfairly.

To all those talking about bad connections etc... I doubt FD shadow-ban people who've had technical difficulties, they probably just study video evidence of repeat offenders (players on /r/EliteCombatLoggers 3+ times are unlikley to just be 'unlucky', come on). Players who've been accused of combat logging because of instancing or connection issues (happened to me once) are usually exonerated when the video evidence is studied.

It seems like a lot of players on this forum are just looking for an excuse to prevent combat logging from being stamped out (I'm not going to get into a debate about why it's ok because of griefers - I'm bored of having that conversation).

 

[JYD75]

But what you asks is simply impossible, there is absolutely nothing what can assure really "fair" fight not mentioning a fact that "fair" is only personal assessing of the situation. There always will be pilots which like do problems and imo it is good, because only this can make game really dangerous. It is quite irrelevant for you, being a target, if attacker want kill you for a lulz or because he just decided that this system is only his own. You will die on both cases unless you are prepared and either escape/flee or kill the attackers. Fleeing actually is not as much problem if you know what you are doing. Something else are situations where player found exploit and use it for harming others, this is imo when you should report this situation as a "bug" and ask if you can get back your moneys back (it it ends fatal). Then it is up to FDevs to come with a solution which will prevent this exploit (have a examples like using rewerb torps attack against ship leaving station, or using weak engineers bases defences). But nothing from this can excuse you from clearly breaking game rules. If you have no issue doing so, and FD accept this behaviour, well ... then play is not going on much smoothly and ppl get upset (on one side or another or on both). I also agree with idea that intense use of exploits should lead to "shadow ban" server, but this should be not players, but FDevs decision and everyone should know (no double explanations) this. But this needs some more experience and time, to get to more "solid" state on ED.

I actually think we are talking about the same thing/same idea bit kinda talking past each other. What I am on about is the purposful griefing. In your example of a situation of a Commander defending a system I would expect a warning to get out of his space and then a fight if I don't. I have the option to fight or flee. He does not just interdict me and open fire to see how fast he can kill me. In my opinion that is ok and a valid fight - because I willingly submitted to it and made the choice. Same if a Pirate pulls me and I attack him or refuse to give him cargo - I brought it on myself.

What I do not condone are the players (like the heat lulbunniez) that purposly griefed players for no other reason than to show their OP Heat weapons and for the lulz. That needs banning and is a very clear situation.

I fully agree with you that a report needs to be made stating the specifics and FD needs to have the final call. Anything else (i.e. a player being able to ban another player to a shadowserver) would just open the door to a world of grief and tears.

So yes, I actually do think we are actually both arguing the same point