Indeed, and then we have those who want to "score points" on internet forums by throwing wild assertions and speculation rather than factual logic and information that benefits other players. Those who continually wish to demonize others by creating divisiveness because they can't see past their own hatred- yet have the audacity to call others "trolls" or "white knights" or "pretentious" because they cannot simply agree to disagree like an adult can.
The 15 second logout timer in action
- Thread starter Touch of Grey
- Start date
Indeed, and then we have those who want to "score points" on internet forums by throwing wild assertions and speculation rather than factual logic and information that benefits other players. Those who continually wish to demonize others by creating divisiveness because they can't see past their own hatred- yet have the audacity to call others "trolls" or "white knights" or "pretentious" because they cannot simply agree to disagree like an adult can.
I'm a retired soldier...the only folks I keep contact with are in the main, soldiers or servicemen be they ex or otherwise. I'm quite glad I got blown up instead of having to endure the civilian workplace environment. As for politics and politicians...they tried to kill me most of my life, managed to kill lots of my friends over the years... hence I'm not really interested in who's saying what about whoever.
Some of us old people are just plain tired of whoever is doing all the shouting instead of at least some of the doing
Agreeing to disagree is a cop-out.
If you log out during combat, menu or otherwise, are you combat logging?
My closest friend was medically discharged for the same reason. Put me off signing up although I'd still like to.
Thanks for your service.
What do you think should be done - should FD punish people who intentionally combat log?
I personally think there should be a warning system. Let's say three strikes and you're out. But you can appeal each one and provide whatever evidence you want.
Do you think that's reasonable? If not, why not?
You're more than welcome
Now I'm just a worried parent that has both sons and a daughter in harms way...now I know how my mother felt watching my father, then me, jump on a train to go to war all of our lives.
I'm so overprotective I don't think I'd let them leave the house if I had a choice haha. But it is the nature of a bird to leave the nest... c'est la vieYou're more than welcome
Now I'm just a worried parent that has both sons and a daughter in harms way...now I know how my mother felt watching my father, then me, jump on a train to go to war all of our lives.
I already stated my opinion on this earlier, a couple of times.
First of all - mode choice is available to ANYONE. If you don't want to be engaged by others in Open, don't choose Open. Go into PG/Solo.
Secondly - if "combat logging" is to be demonized as a form of "cowardice" then the same rules should apply to those who perform equally cowardly actions- such as firing on unarmed vessels.
Thirdly - the same penalty should apply- if you start engagement with another CMDR and log off in combat, your ship should self-destruct with a full rebuy penalty and NO insurance applied. Same if you fire on an unarmed vessel.
Did I forget anything? Any other questions?
1) Agreed
2) I don't think it should be demonized, I think it should be called what it is: An exploit to avoid the dangers of combat.
Whilst my hyperbole might have gotten out of hand as I was being riled up by the forum vets, I do not think it's cowardice in a video game. Maybe if it's a horror game.
3) I agree up to the unarmed vessel
3.1)if you yolo hansolo destroy an unarmed vessel for the sake of destruction and grief then sure, implement the same warning system I talked about for combat logging.
If you destroy a trader who refused to part with even one measly tonne of cargo - in open, at a CG for example roleplaying as a pirate, and they did not have any weapons... would you count that as firing on an unarmed vessel worthy of banning?
2) "avoiding the dangers of combat" can be construed as cowardice. In a wartime situation- it's called "desertion", no? Why should this be treated any differently?
3) What's the difference between destroying an unarmed vessel "carrying cargo" and one that does not?
In both circumstances- I stand my ground regarding the penalty. Your ship self-destructs and with a full re-buy penalty and no insurance applied.
As I detailed earlier- intent is not defined in either case. No one but the player knows what their true intentions are. But the only way to mitigate circumstance is to treat them equally. After YEARS of trying to wrap my brain around this I've found no other way to do so. Perhaps that's also why Frontier has not been able to do the same?
If someone were to choose to run around without any form of defence (therefore meeting the unarmed criteria), in a Type 9, Type 7 or Type 10... Should they not refer to point 1) and just play in Solo?
Perhaps this 15 second technique could be considered as equivalent to initiating a Klingon cloaking device. Perfectly acceptable gameplay in my opinion.
The answers seem simple:
If you don't want to be 'content' don't choose Open. If you choose this mode, a disclaimer should appear about what might happen.
Log-out timer should freeze or reset if you are under fire.
Ungraceful exits (yanking cables) should get you sent to a detention centre (not blown up or fined), just you have to pay with your time to get back to your location.
Increase logout timer to 30 seconds- or, the timer is shorter or 0 if you are in a station, parked or in space with 0 throttle and alone.
If you don't want to be 'content' don't choose Open. If you choose this mode, a disclaimer should appear about what might happen.
Log-out timer should freeze or reset if you are under fire.
Ungraceful exits (yanking cables) should get you sent to a detention centre (not blown up or fined), just you have to pay with your time to get back to your location.
Increase logout timer to 30 seconds- or, the timer is shorter or 0 if you are in a station, parked or in space with 0 throttle and alone.
I mean if we look at the broader human race perhaps life itself was a mistake...
what's your point?
Two different thoughts on this...
If Open mode were clearly defined as "de facto PvP" (as in a CLEAR dialog message when chosen gives this information) then I would most certainly agree with you... the problem is, even being the FIRST menu choice in the game, it does not.
Now, given the circumstances- not everyone knows (especially not a new player) that Open mode allows for any CMDR to shoot another without provocation of any sort- would you then agree that circumstances can be extenuating? If you just got your new shiny Xbox One, and bought Elite Dangerous- how would you know that Open mode was indeed "de facto PvP"? (I mean, as an experienced player I can tell you it is...)
Second thought on this- why on earth would anyone choose to shoot a defenseless ship to begin with? (how are they "dangerous"?) Doesn't matter if such gameplay is "allowed by mechanics" or not. I suppose the same could be said for why people combat log to begin with, no? "It's allowed by the mechanics of the game".
Last edited:
I think we agree,
FD dun goofed in many ways.
If they added immediate clarity in the form of a disclaimer saying "SPACE IS DANGEROUS" or offered advanced guides on combat like literally any other game...
Perhaps they could even pull a Jagex and just make a section of the bubble a PVP zone.
There are tonnes of solutions to both problems, but they prefer to just ignore Griefers and Cloggers...
I think so too. There's a number of missteps they took with the release of this game, especially in regard to clear communication.
Then there's avoiding dealing with the entire situation for YEARS, which quite frankly, amounts to making the problem worse for them, instead of solving itself. (which I think is what they were betting on)
IMO the only way for Frontier to "win" here is to clearly define both "griefing" and "combat logging" so that there is equal treatment given for both situations- as well as warning players WELL in advance to their new careers in Open mode that PvP is indeed possible.
agreed.
wanna make a bet on how long it takes them to do that?
I'mma put 3 video evidenced 50m Cutter suicides on 10 years.