I think the moderator should be banned for letting this conversation continue the way it has for the past 20 some-odd pages...
What were you guys talking about again??? Jeezus....
What were you guys talking about again??? Jeezus....
Modes [Suggestion] How to incentivise open play and make it relevant
- Thread starter Lateralus
- Start date
- Status
Firewalls deliberately block connections from peers/players specifically? I never knew, and after all these years of using them.
Of course, it could just be an overzealous firewall setting, which is why I said "technically an exploit", because you'd never (reasonably) be able to adequately prove that someone had deliberately set out to block connections from other players/specific other players.
Just commenting on yet another belittling and aggressive post of yours. You just can't stop, can you?
It is posts and language like yours that do more to prejudice players against open than any other reason.
Read you like a book. So predictable. Almost like a child
Nope, you just can't stop it.
o7 CMDR, are you persecuting Nineties? If not, it does look like your few latest posts are all sniping him
Edit: let the mods do their work, and or report him if that's your thing and be done with it, I'd humbly suggest…
Last edited:
Even over the course of an hour long gameplay session in Open - looking at your logs will show whats going on.
Some people simply such poor connections and mass packet loss that the firewall thinks something fishy is going on, so blocks it. Some players attempt network shenanigans, so that gets blocked too. Some players are on such disparate linerates / latencies that the firewall never egen gets a look in, as the matchmaking server simply never pairs them.
heh, 'zactly. Now, if we beat someone in PvP and could then salvage their ship, I'd be much more interested in PvP!
You should look at the mega threads (SOG (Solo Open Groups)) locked in this sub forum.
This is tame
My point was that you, the user, can deliberately block other players from connecting to you, via your firewall.
That's exploiting the system.
It's impossible to punish, because you'd never (reasonably) be able to prove it was done with intent.
So, it may as well just be "technically" an exploit.
I really should have added a "/s" to that last post.
Thinking about it, there was talk of repelling invaders back in some of the design discussions, maybe this will be the incentive one day.
Last edited:
No - that is still firewalls just doing their job. It shouldn't even be up to the firewall to judge dodgy connections though, that takes place at router level.
Well, to be fair our Firewalls and Routers shouldn't even be a factor in this.
But it's the networking solution Frontier picked out of all the options, to keep the multiplay free.
Elite: Dangerous is a P2P game. The connections from peers are not from Fdev.
I can specifically go to my firewall, and set a rule that blocks all connections to/from ED that are not Fdev. servers.
This is exploiting the system.
The firewall is not at fault. The user has chosen to do this.
Firewalls CAN be overzealous though, I have one that defaults to "impossibly suspicious of all activity", because your router probably doesn't block outgoing connections, for one.
It's all well and good to block external connections to your network, but if someone is already behind your router thanks to another, inept user, the average router is for all intents and purposes a paperweight.
Additionally, your router's firewall isn't very likely to have such stringent rules on LAN packets.
So, yes, your firewall absolutely has to make decisions about what is or is not a "dodgy connection". That's the purpose of it.
But this is exactly how the provided Block Players List functions: you have been rendered invisible/connections blocked to those specific CMDRs. It's better than an ip block because it's tied to the player's account, which they can't circumvent, unlike an ip-level block that can be gotten around by several methods.
suggestion taken in the spirit it was given o7
That is why you stack routers, have separate firewalls, and run the good bits on your LAN on a non-routable protocol
https://www.howtogeek.com/122487/htg-explains-is-upnp-a-security-risk/
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3093362/how-to-secure-your-router-and-home-network.html
Another option for a user is turning off uPnP.
I can fly around open for a long time and not see a soul if I do.... and it is an advised thing to do if you want a secure PC.
Heck, even PC World advises turning that off.
Exploit? or bad game design?
Unlike most of the PvP I've been involved in over more years than I wish to count, E : D doesn't really offer any incentive for PvP. I blew up a heck of a lot of mechs for that tasty salvage. Also killed a lot of Hammerdins just to prove they weren't invincible (and of course, that tasty loot!).
Let me be able to blow weapons off someone's ship and then tractor them in for me to use. Let me fry their insides so I can grab their nice hull. Let them drop, say, a percentage of their net worth upon expiring. I'd be all for it!
Last edited:
Erm, I hate to do this, but that isn't exactly accurate.
The in game block feature reduces your chance of being instanced with someone, it's not 100% from what I've been reading.
Someone was having a moan a few days back that they keep seeing people they've blocked.
I think having mutual friends had something to do with it, so the matchmaker did an override on the block. Something like that anyway.
Do people really have uPnP on?
Geez, it's like back when people would advise you to set up your gaming computer in a DMZ.
Or PvP wagers?
"I wager a million credits and my sweet super ultra final laser cannon against your ship's hull"
You may not want to go into the ED configsys file. (unless you've turned it off in your router)
When ED came out, the game had uPnP off and there were complaints that people bought an MMO and couldn't find anyone to play with.
It was the player base that figured out uPnP was off in the game settings. So they edited the file and boom, it was an MMO - complete with people.
It took FDev a few days to patch the game to have uPnP on by default.
Now, folks go to a CG, it's really busy. But back then, you'd be lucky to see 1 person.
So 1 quick change and I can play as safely as I can play Solo, I just have to add my mates IP to my router and jobs a gud'un
I meant in their router, it's the router where it matters.
Then again, I'm always surprised that developers who are making online games struggle with/don't implement punchthrough NAT, in a world where NAT is literally necessary for a vast majority of users.
Anyone recognise this?
Last edited:
- Status