Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
eLLioTT wave
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 13:50:00 -
[1]
Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 12/04/2007 13:48:59 Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 12/04/2007 13:47:28 CCP I believe you have tied your GM's hands on this one.
Fair enough you can't always tell an intentional logoff from a genuine disconnection..... on very rare occasion.
What about when someone logs off, then logs on a different char 2 seconds later? while their original char was being shot at - precisely at the time they logged off??
There is no doubt, there is no uncertainty, there is no excuse CCP.
I will anonymously quote a GM recently, please remove this excerpt if it is against rules: "I perfectly understand how frustrating your situation is as I am playing the game and agree that such a tactic is indeed shameful, but I remain unable to take any action as we canŠt make any distinction between normal log outs and connection drops."
Now I believe the GM knows exactly what is going on, but that it is CCP policy tying his hands in this matter.
CCP please untie their hands and stop this madness.
IMMEDIATE ACTION TO RESOLVE EXPLOIT: Allow GM's to ban / heavily punish players who log off and log on a second character to avoid getting the first character killed in combat. This is easy.
SECONDARY ACTION TO TAKE IN FUTURE AFTER CAREFUL PLANNING: Enforce policy that GM's investigate and ban/punish every genuine log off that is reported where the offender did so to avoid dying.
That is all, thank you and fly safe!
-eLLioTT
|
Frozen Light
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 13:52:00 -
[2]
Word.
|
Thread Winner
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 13:52:00 -
[3]
Two Words
Fight against log off tactics to protect your space from isk farmers! |
Garia666
Amarr T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 13:59:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Thread Winner Two Words
let me guess starts with F and ends on u
->My Vids<- |
Y Ashanti
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:01:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Y Ashanti on 12/04/2007 13:57:41
Originally by: eLLioTT wave What about when someone logs off, then logs on a different char 2 seconds later? while their original char was being shot at - precisely at the time they logged off??
To my knowledge, this bug has been fixed more than 2 years ago (unless it was re-introduced in one of the last 1-2 patches).
|
Stakhanov
Shih Yang Tong
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:01:00 -
[6]
It's true , GMs should be given more freedom to defend their game. The current state of logoff and ISK farming is sickening.
|
Thread Winner
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:02:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Garia666
Originally by: Thread Winner Two Words
let me guess starts with F and ends on u
Word is the singular form for the word Word
Two Words is Two Words.
Fight against log off tactics to protect your space from isk farmers! |
eLLioTT wave
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:08:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Y Ashanti Edited by: Y Ashanti on 12/04/2007 13:57:41
Originally by: eLLioTT wave What about when someone logs off, then logs on a different char 2 seconds later? while their original char was being shot at - precisely at the time they logged off??
To my knowledge, this bug has been fixed more than 2 years ago (unless it was re-introduced in one of the last 1-2 patches).
As it was not fixed 10 minutes ago I will assume it was re introduced? |
Riho
Gallente Magnificent Beavers Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:14:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Y Ashanti Edited by: Y Ashanti on 12/04/2007 13:57:41
Originally by: eLLioTT wave What about when someone logs off, then logs on a different char 2 seconds later? while their original char was being shot at - precisely at the time they logged off??
To my knowledge, this bug has been fixed more than 2 years ago (unless it was re-introduced in one of the last 1-2 patches).
its sooo not fixed :( --------------------------------------- Sig killed by MODs.... reworking it Great being Gallente... aint it ? ----------------- YARRRR, sig hijack! -HornFrog ----------------- |
Y Ashanti
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:22:00 -
[10]
Originally by: eLLioTT wave
Originally by: Y Ashanti Edited by: Y Ashanti on 12/04/2007 13:57:41
Originally by: eLLioTT wave What about when someone logs off, then logs on a different char 2 seconds later? while their original char was being shot at - precisely at the time they logged off??
To my knowledge, this bug has been fixed more than 2 years ago (unless it was re-introduced in one of the last 1-2 patches).
As it was not fixed 10 minutes ago I will assume it was re introduced?
Well, the last time I tried a while ago (to test if it actually works with two characters in the same system), I ended up with two characters on the same account peacefully sitting next to each other at a gate for a few minutes.
How do you know whoever you were shooting at logged on another character?
And yes, the log-off timer is very low, unless you have aggro (especially if the log-off happens during a long warp), but that is an altogether different issue.
|
|
eLLioTT wave
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:49:00 -
[11]
Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 12/04/2007 14:45:52 Dunno how you managed 2 char's sitting next to each other except lag maybe?
Anyway in this particular scenario we chased a dominix a few jumps, he was shot at on one side of the gate, forced through to the other where there was a dictor bubble, he then logged off, his ship appeared, we shot it to structure and then it instantly disappeared from space. |
Marketcheck2
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:52:00 -
[12]
Been there done that too.
Not fixed.
|
Elgar Lightfoot
Lightfoot Industries
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:53:00 -
[13]
This can't be policed through GM's. It needs a code fix to prevent.
A simple fix is to prevent logging on an alt if another character on that account is currently in space awaiting a log off timer.
|
Cabadrin
Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:01:00 -
[14]
GM looks at account for character list - 30 seconds. GM then looks to see if first account was online and fighting at the time of the complaint - 1-2 minutes? GM then looks to see if second account is online - 30 seconds GM then verifies that first account was in combat and logged off, then logged in second account - 1 minute GM issues warning not to do this again - 30 seconds.
Time spent investigating this issue: 3.5 - 4.5 minutes. Number of petitions about hostile fleet doing this (say, 20-30 players) - 20 (zomg we all saw them do it!) 3.5 minutes x 20 = 70 minutes.
Number of new petitions popping into management system during those 70 minutes: unknown, but probably enough to make you regret doing all that investigating.
I'm sure it's a significant time sink to do all that investigating, and it'd be much better if you could poke the dev team to make some new functionality that would eliminate these tickets altogether. I don't think it's reasonable for you to demand that GMs investigate and take action against this, since a huge fleet where dozens log off may take up an eigth of their shift. This may then happen several times a day, so they lose a lot of time investigating more serious things (macro-miners, harassment, cheating, etc). So I don't think it's a matter of CCP tieing their hands, but rather a matter of limited resources. It may also be as the GM said, and he simply does not have the tools to determine why soemthing happened. I think the ebst solution would be from the dev team, to make sure that even if you log on an alt, your other character's ship stays in space for 15 minutes. _______________________________________________
|
hydraSlav
Synergy Evolved Sparta Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:17:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Cabadrin GM looks at account for character list - 30 seconds. GM then looks to see if first account was online and fighting at the time of the complaint - 1-2 minutes? GM then looks to see if second account is online - 30 seconds GM then verifies that first account was in combat and logged off, then logged in second account - 1 minute GM issues warning not to do this again - 30 seconds.
Yup, this must be enforced. The excuse that CCP gives these people is that they cannot verify an intentional logoff from a disconnect. But if the account logs on his alt immediately after the so called "connection drop" in battle, then it definitely was not a connection drop but intentional logoffskii
Save your own game, CCP!
== Above comments are my personal views Oveur >Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
|
ZZandra
TARDZ Gods of Night and Day
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:17:00 -
[16]
Would people settle for a 1-2 minute wait before being able to login another toon? |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:17:00 -
[17]
Originally by: eLLioTT wave Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 12/04/2007 14:45:52 Dunno how you managed 2 char's sitting next to each other except lag maybe?
Anyway in this particular scenario we chased a dominix a few jumps, he was shot at on one side of the gate, forced through to the other where there was a dictor bubble, he then logged off, his ship appeared, we shot it to structure and then it instantly disappeared from space.
Timers reset on session change.
He was not aggressed. He logged, two minutes later his ship dissappear from space.
Just as it should have happened. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Lab Technician071548
Astro-Support Services
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:24:00 -
[18]
GMs play the game.
Do you really want other players making judgement calls about whether or not a player should be disciplined for something that cannot be proven beyond a doubt 100% of the time? I think CCP has it right but not because they are not sympathetic to the problem. Can you imagine what will happen when a GM pulls a logoff and it is later revealed that person is a GM who was ruled not to have logged off despite all appearances to the contrary? CCP doesn't want that. I don't want that. You don't want that. http://www.koolsource.com/slandark/evelabtech.gif Please keep your signature below the 24000 bytes limit.- Thx Pirlouit
|
Claska
Amarr Magnetar Ltd Dark Synergy
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:52:00 -
[19]
actually i've been thinking about it and i think there is a way to tell if a person Quites or if its a connection drop.You simply have a signal that is there when a person is playing, if the signal gets a cut off command from the client(as in quits) then that person has quit, if the signal is cut off but receives no cutoff command (as in lagged out ,crashed or DC'd) then the person has well lagged out or crashed or DC'd. The other way is to simply have the client tell the server hey i'm quitting then the server will know the person has quit intentionally, but if the server stops receiving data and had no Quite message then the person lagged or crashed out. two way's, i prefer the first. Also in all honesly i have no idea if either of those ideas were mentioned before.
|
Gone'Postal
Minmatar LuthorCorp Combat Division
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:57:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Claska actually i've been thinking about it and i think there is a way to tell if a person Quites or if its a connection drop.You simply have a signal that is there when a person is playing, if the signal gets a cut off command from the client(as in quits) then that person has quit, if the signal is cut off but receives no cutoff command (as in lagged out ,crashed or DC'd) then the person has well lagged out or crashed or DC'd. The other way is to simply have the client tell the server hey i'm quitting then the server will know the person has quit intentionally, but if the server stops receiving data and had no Quite message then the person lagged or crashed out. two way's, i prefer the first. Also in all honesly i have no idea if either of those ideas were mentioned before.
Turns off modem...
Petitions for ship loss due to ISP fault or other related issue.
Force one thing, they will find another.
Originally by: Dark Shikari Anyone comparing CCP to a glacier is really not being fair to the glacier.
Tripping The Rift Since 2005 |
|
eLLioTT wave
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:58:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Elgar Lightfoot This can't be policed through GM's. It needs a code fix to prevent.
A simple fix is to prevent logging on an alt if another character on that account is currently in space awaiting a log off timer.
Nice! Also add that if a character logs off and then gets shot he is aggressed (normal 15 minute or whatever) and he cannot login a different character until after that aggression. I am so sure this can be fixed it just needs enough people to complain and then it gets done!
The squeaky wheel gets the oil. |
Kruel
Beyond Divinity Inc Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 16:03:00 -
[22]
When someone ctrl-q's or disconnects, they should still be scramble-able (assuming their ship is targeted and scrambled before the auto-warp takes place). Furthermore, they should not disappear in 1 minute if someone has attacked them. Passive Drakes get away too damned easily because of this.
|
TheEndofTheWorld
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 16:04:00 -
[23]
WHAAAT? ...
NO, THEY DO NOT DISAPPEAR DUE TO LOGGING IN ANOTHER CHAR ON THE SAME ACCOUNT.
They disappear in 60s due to not having a pvp timer on. It is perfectly normal gamemechanic.
PROOF OR STAY SILENT TBH
|
Repentant Sinner
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 16:11:00 -
[24]
For what it's worth...
I play chess on the Internet Chess Club (ICC)and at times a losing player will disconnect to avoid defeat (sound familiar?).
In any event, it appears ICC can easily tell a willful disconnect from a dropped connection. They routinely forfeit players who "quit", while allowing dropped connections to reconnect and finish the game.
I don't know all the ins and outs of the programing, but apparently there are ways to tell.
|
Plutoinum
German Cyberdome Corp Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 16:14:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Plutoinum on 12/04/2007 16:13:06 As always, I propose a change of the game mechanics.
Old a bit modified proposal:
- Ctrl-q, cdts, crashing don't remove your ship from space for something like 2 minutes. If you get aggressed during that time, you get the aggression timer,online or not. (The timer should be visible, once you log back in. )
- The regular log-out mechanism gets changed. When you do a regular log-out in space and are not at a pos, a timer runs down. Any action or aggression cancels that timer, aggression flags you for pvp. If the timer succeeds, you are out and your ship gets removed from space immediately.
That would stop all kind of emmergency log-offs. To log in space, you needed to go to a safe position, where you have time to click log-out and wait for the timer to run down without being aggressed, like a safespot, when hostiles are around.
And if you crash, cdt, 'accidently' control-q in space, you would have to log back in to check, if you are aggressed and do a regular logout like described above, if you want to go offline. This mechanism would only apply to logging in space of course. ___________ Muuuhhh !!! |
Claska
Amarr Magnetar Ltd Dark Synergy
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 16:15:00 -
[26]
Better then nothing postal, at least this way they will have to do more then simply ctrl+q. Plus its still a better way to find out if some one truly quit or not then now.
|
Maraude Fury
Minmatar Shadow Of The Light R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:08:00 -
[27]
Why not simply make a log in CCP's database that tells them how you logged out last time.
If they hit Ctrl Q, then it gets logged as the last way they logged off.
If they simply DC becuase of their ISP went down, then it would show a connection time out.
Maraude Fury Shadow Of The Light .SOL.
|
Thesas
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:09:00 -
[28]
The problem with the software observing a logout function call to confirm a player logged out is that it could be easily defeated.
A system crash or disconnect could be easily simulated by simply flipping the power switch on the modem or PC. Any software functionality that analyzes the player log off routine can be defeated client side. That is a fact.
A possible course might be a penalty for any kind of disconnect at specific times during game play. If you are about to be disintegrated and disconnect for any reason, access a penalty on that player which will be in effect when they log on next. That penalty would need be defined.
If a connection is so unstable as to be dropping a player frequently, then that player would be wise to not engage in activities whereby a disconnect penalty would be accessed.
Ask this question. Statistically, what are the odds that you will crash at the instant most opportune for your player character? I would suggest those odds are astronomical.
|
Fswd
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:40:00 -
[29]
Originally by: eLLioTT wave Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 12/04/2007 13:48:59 Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 12/04/2007 13:47:28 CCP I believe you have tied your GM's hands on this one.
Fair enough you can't always tell an intentional logoff from a genuine disconnection..... on very rare occasion.
What about when someone logs off, then logs on a different char 2 seconds later? while their original char was being shot at - precisely at the time they logged off??
There is no doubt, there is no uncertainty, there is no excuse CCP.
I will anonymously quote a GM recently, please remove this excerpt if it is against rules: "I perfectly understand how frustrating your situation is as I am playing the game and agree that such a tactic is indeed shameful, but I remain unable to take any action as we canŠt make any distinction between normal log outs and connection drops."
Now I believe the GM knows exactly what is going on, but that it is CCP policy tying his hands in this matter.
CCP please untie their hands and stop this madness.
IMMEDIATE ACTION TO RESOLVE EXPLOIT: Allow GM's to ban / heavily punish players who log off and log on a second character to avoid getting the first character killed in combat. This is easy.
SECONDARY ACTION TO TAKE IN FUTURE AFTER CAREFUL PLANNING: Enforce policy that GM's investigate and ban/punish every genuine log off that is reported where the offender did so to avoid dying.
That is all, thank you and fly safe!
-eLLioTT
Whine --- So I flame and troll when the occasion calls for it. So what are you gonna do about it? |
Quutar
Caldari Auraxian Irregulars The Sundering
|
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:44:00 -
[30]
as an experiment I did the following
on one of my accounts I have multiple characters.
char A on that account fires off a cyno... now stuck in space for 10 minutes. I observe this char with my main (quutar)
I log off this second account. Char A then disappears from local... but the ship and cyno field remain (for the full ten minutes btw). I assume if I attacked the ship, the pod would then warp off and could be probed? did not try this
BUT...
on the same account as Char A I then log in Char B... and guess what... Char A is still in front of my main. Char A did not immediately disappear when I logged in a second character on that account. Hell, I brought char b over and had both characters on the same grid.
when the cyno expired Char A warped off, and dispared after 30-60 second.
Not finding research slots in Empire Space? Try Quutar Research Services. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |