EVE Search - Solution To "Log" Tactics

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Solution To "Log" Tactics

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
S3VYN	Posted - 2005.01.20 18:57:00 - [1] My alliance has recently been plagued with individuals using "log" tactics to accomplish their goals. I've seen where many have voiced their discontent with the ability of a player to "log" to avoid combat so I'm offering a solution that I think would work. 1. Create a setting in the alliance control panel called "parking fee." This setting would allow the alliance administrator to set a fee that would be required for individuals to be allowed to "park" their ship (log off) while in claimed territory. 2. The setting would work similar to the way the station docking settings work, allowing different levels to be applied based on standings. 3. If someone who was marked to be charged pressed the [ESC] button and clicked the [QUIT] button they would be prompted that they must either pay the requested fee, eject from their ship (therefore leaving it open to be scanned and found) or relocate to unclaimed or disputed territory. Now I realize that people would do things such as killing the process to get around this, but killing a process takes more time and knowledge to do and would be more easily traced (player X is accused of "log exploiting" and a GM can see that the player has 1 "disconnect" every week but 15 on the day and in the system they are accused of exploiting in). Also note that pods would not be considered for being charged. That way if someone is willing to run a fleet into enemy territory with plans of using it later they either have to pay the person who "claims" the territory, put up their own POS to dispute the territory or leave their ships "running silent" in space where they are likely to be scanned, found and confiscated. I think this change would make sense from every notable perspective of A) intended gameplay; B) fair gameplay and C) storyline relevance. ------------------------------------- // The views expressed by this poster are not the views of the poster's corporation, alliance, planet or television network... but they should be.
Soros	Posted - 2005.01.20 19:03:00 - [2] Signed Soros (Firmus Ixion/ the council) -= Soros =- = Firmux Ixion =
Nez Perces	Posted - 2005.01.20 19:07:00 - [3] Signed.. something needs to be done about this its ruining the game
Antonius	Posted - 2005.01.20 19:11:00 - [4] Signed
J'Freak Too	Posted - 2005.01.20 19:18:00 - [5] Edited by: J'Freak Too on 20/01/2005 19:19:03 Yup, something needs to be done. But really it's not an easy fix. What about network disconnects? what about people that power down their pc? What about people that disconnect their networks or do an IP release while logged in? It's real hard to tell the good guys from the bad without a web cam checking on what they are doing. I doubt they will go to that length. WouldnÆt it be better to have a sensor array module on POS's that would be able to show all logged players and parked ships in a system, and provide BM's of their locations. That way you can be waiting for the undesirable pilots at their return point on and donkey punch them then. It's a bit unfair to force corrective measures on players that have legitimate network or computer problems. PS: yes we really need to get something done about this.... If they are not available already, I would slso love to have factory modules for POS's
Ebil Piwate	Posted - 2005.01.20 19:51:00 - [6] due to connection issues.. and to legitimate resons of leaving.. you cant expect a person to stay online 23/7 until he leaves or dies.... how ever loggin to aviod a fight is a bad thing .. so this is my 2ó remove the warp out and cloak... create a logout cloak .. a item thats small and expensive( at least 500k) when logging out the player is asked if he wishes to cloak ( at the spot hes in) ...if not cloaked then he just sits there just as if he was in the game .. capable of bieng podded just like normal .... if cloaked hes invisible till relogon .. on relog the cloak is destroyed... in the case of network disconects or other questionable disconnects automaticaly apply the cloak and move them 500 km .. close enough that there not unfindable.. far enought that if it was a legitimate crash there not gona get slaughtered unfairly .. also add a time to the crashed cloaks ie relogin in within 3minutes.. and the cloak is saved... charging to park in space isnt realistic in the sense that some raiders are legitamly fighting .. and they shouldnt have to be online 23/7 to avoid parking fees... and what happens if you crash or d/t comes .. NOBODY would enter sovern space if it was 100m parking fee .. the risk of crashing or d/t would make it to unrealistic... or theyed move all the money to there alts .. and have 0 in wallet .. then what?
Gritt Pebbledasher	Posted - 2005.01.20 20:08:00 - [7] Edited by: Gritt Pebbledasher on 20/01/2005 20:08:22 It may seem very zen - the art of fighting while not fighting - but really it's extremely annoying as it means an engagement that takes 5 minutes to resolve may take 5 hours not playing to bring about which is an insane ú/entertainment situation. Who can do that regularly? And yet that is the entry price for playing in an Alliance. I like ebil's idea - how many people would trade a med-slot for that cloak? Without any nearby stations, it would certainly mix things up a bit. Equally, I would suggest that whatever is done about this irritating issue, regardless of the disconnect reason, you should still flag neutral to npcs from the moment that you go offline. That will save a lot of grief on those 'bad server days' - or if not at least apply a 2x or 3x insurance multiplier in those situations. But do address the issue before it arises.
xenorx	Posted - 2005.01.20 20:10:00 - [8] I fully agree. It is a good idea. However, it will be difficult to enforce on lone players. As stated above it would be to easy to just unplug the connection or turn off the computer to get around it. Claiming that it was a CTD. It would be much easier to enforce on a group though. It would be very difficult for a group of 5-50 players to just log off a combat fleet in a system and claim they just CTD. I dont know what the official stand is from CCP on these tactics. Personally, I view them as an exploit. They are using the game mechanics in an unintended way to gain an unfair advantage over a group of other players. Like I said before it is impossible for that many players to CTD at one time unless a node dies or the whole server goes down. CCP could enforce that very easy. Just my 2 isks worth
Mrissa Easeah	Posted - 2005.01.20 20:13:00 - [9] Semi-signed ... the original proposal has some problems with the built in workaround, game balance, CTD and other issues. It won't solve the problem, but its a good sign of wanting to work at the issue, which I wholly agree needs to be addressed. Originally by: J'Freak Too Wouldn’t it be better to have a sensor array module on POS's that would be able to show all logged players and parked ships in a system, and provide BM's of their locations. I actually made a suggestion along these lines awhile earlier ... make 1 POS's in a system with this 'sensor array' addon give 'warp to' options for anything in that system. This would go far to explain how CONCORD does it in Empire space, and give a bone to the concept of 'Sovereignty', but with the cost of the module/fuel/upkeep it would require. This would add an element of control to the whole 'sovereignty' issue, as well as discourage random attackers from the logging tactic. Fly there at your own risk if you have buggy CTD's ... but that's the rule -everywhere-, already, say, if you CTD in a belt with warpjamming NPC's for instance. Disconnect Cloaks might work, but seem a bit too cludgey to me, both with coding and rationale. With gates, the gates themselves are what cloaks your ship, storyline. Cloaking because you've disconnected, from the viewpoint of the people fighting that ship, breaks continuity (wtf?! that Geddon has a cloak? Wait, no, it doesn't, we scanned it, but it cloaked anyway.). At least with the current warpin/warpout element, the ship dissappears 'off camera' perse', keeping continuity.
S3VYN	Posted - 2005.01.20 20:24:00 - [10] Edited by: S3VYN on 20/01/2005 20:27:56 I stated plainly that the only time the fee prompt should be applied is when a player hits the [ESC] button and clicks [CANCEL] and is in sovereign space IN a ship other than a pod. However the POS module makes good sense as well. The charge would have to be attached to a GUI event, not attached to an activity monitoring thread... The big problems are A) When players move entire fleets and log at a safespot (these folks would work around the change I recommended by CTRL+ALT+DELETE and then killing the process, but not if their ships were left in space...); and B) People who log while being attacked (those people are in "OH SHT" mode and are not going to take the time to do anything other than hit [ESC] and [QUIT]). So my solution is designed to stop those two issues. People having true-to-life CTD's, network problems, node crashes etc are excluded from the changes I recommended because they aren't hitting [ESC] and then [QUIT]. Instead their ship will warp to a "safe" spot while they get reconnected or whatever. Then it's a race for the defenders to find them and the attackers to get back online and get their ship out of harm's way. Like Mrissa said, they shouldn't be in claimed enemy territory if they aren't prepared to pay the piper. As it stands, entire fleets are able to move far into sovereign space where they can lie dormant until needed. If you are comparing to real-life these are "sleeper cells" that we hear so much about. They aren't immediately obvious but they CAN be found and decimated if someone dedicates the time and resources (scanner probes). ------------------------------------- // The views expressed by this poster are not the views of the poster's corporation, alliance, planet or television network... but they should* be.
Mindlles	Posted - 2005.01.20 20:29:00 - [11] Well may be able to logg off, But ship doesnt disipear in controlled space. If a alliance have the space controlled whit a "pos" it will not let ships logg out.. Well to be honest, just DO someting.. Couse i losing intrest every day becouse of this... Stoped playing hte game for 7 months way back now, becouse of the same reason..
galadran	Posted - 2005.01.20 21:06:00 - [12] signed
Ebil Piwate	Posted - 2005.01.20 21:20:00 - [13] the idea was NO slot useage .. just a 1m3 item in your cargo ...small simple doesnt effect any setups.. just makes it expensive to avoid fights... and if you make it like reuglar cloak .. <2000m3 decloaks... then people wont log just anywhere to avoid getting killed.. and will have to rely on getting away in a normal game aproved way..
PhasmaNL	Posted - 2005.01.20 22:54:00 - [14] This is a difficult problem. I don't know if the above solutions would work, but one thing is clear: something needs to be done! So: Signed! (Whichever solution turns out best.) ----------- FIX Diplomat, FIX Councillor & Arcane Industries [ARIN] CEO
K1th	Posted - 2005.01.20 23:04:00 - [15] signed. --------------------------
Dayan Rabalyn	Posted - 2005.01.20 23:13:00 - [16] Don't know which idea will work the best but definetly agree that something needs to be done to resolve the situaion, so on that note...... signed
Lady Angelina	Posted - 2005.01.20 23:15:00 - [17] i like the idea of a log fee but the problem still arrises of ppl transfering all their isk to an alt before moving to the place they want to log in. Unless if u cant afford the log fee u remain in space. also there would have to be a cap on the amount to be charged. as in u cant charge 100m to log in someones space but as for the rest of the idea i am all for it. SIGNED!!!! -------------------------------------------- I'm meant to put something cool in here right?
Antimus	Posted - 2005.01.20 23:17:00 - [18] something really does need to be done about this CCP signed
Easy Target	Posted - 2005.01.20 23:47:00 - [19] underlying problem: u cant force someone to play a GAME... Playing eve... Hey, Easy, would u mind going to pick your sister up. hey i`m sorry, but logging here will cost me 5 million/10 million/20 million whatever... What if someone doesnt have the money?? and are camped in the system?? They have to pop the matchsticks and wait till it is clear?? or die?? Log off tactics arent good for the game... But: If u implement a log on fix, if u crash, u are hit by it... If u implement a log off fix, u are hit by the above... U cant force someone to play a game they dont want to play... End of... What about advanced scanner drones that detect a cloaked/logged off ship... it cant attack it.. but it tells u where it is.. or where "they" are... Easy Target ----------------------------------------------- No i'm not good... but i have never claimed to be -------------------- Moments of genius
Traukin	Posted - 2005.01.21 00:15:00 - [20] I fully agree that something needs to be done about this. Here is my suggestion: Firstly a quick (I'm shutting down now) message from the client when a person shuts down the game should be put in place. This then gives us the ability for the server to make decisions about how to handle things. If a person does quit under their own power(intentionally) the servers will know this. If the player is in space where he does not belong then his ship remains where he leaves it. If the player is in an area of space that is not contested and he is not under battle conditions then he could be warped out of the game the way it is done now. If the player is in battle conditions and does quit then handle it the same as if they are disconnected as I describe below. If the client is disconnected by any other means (crashes or network problems or alt-ctl-del) then the server will not receive this (I'm shutting down now) message. When a person is disconnected from the server while they are under battle situations they (along with the current rules that are already in place as far as length of time before they warp etc.) are warped out to a safespot. This safespot should be within reasonable scanner probe ranges so they could be found. However they only stay in that spot for (lets say) 3 hours. Enough time to be found if they truly are logging to avoid being podded. If they truly did crash or otherwise get disconnected then they should be able to get logged back in before they can be found with probes. After that 3 hour time period they are then warped out of the game the way it is done now. The way things are handled when fighting NPC's seems to be fine the way it currently is. Maybe set it so that NPC's can't destroy hull if the client is not responding. Shields and armor are gone and whatever hull was gone before the client quit responding but the player can't be destroyed by npc's if the client has crashed. This is not going to handle the (my motherboard fried while I was playing) type situations but it should handle a large majority of the situaions that aren't being handled currently. Lasing our treasures here ....... and chasing our pleasures there.
Ebil Piwate	Posted - 2005.01.21 00:36:00 - [21] if there is a scanner for cloaks then cloak penalies for recloak and sensor cal would have to be shortend considerably to keep them worth anything.. but a skill and mod combo for finding cloaked/logged ships would be cool ... say per level it gets faster/more accurate high slot similar to cloak for power/cpu needs .. lvl1 gives you jump spot of inside 1000km each lvl 50% reduction .... targets cloaked ships ... lvl1 targets cloaked ships < 500km .. in 2000% normal targeting speed and 50% reduction in penalty per lvl ... cloaks get boots to recloak .. 5? sec recloak ... 2-5s sensor recalibration .. CAN cloak while locked....speed maybe 20% less penelty for all cloak models ..
cristan	Posted - 2005.01.21 02:32:00 - [22] Signed.... Anyone who has a low standing with the alliance should not be in occupied space and therefore get charged when logging/disconected. Anyone who has nuetral or good standing with alliance should only be in occupied space on alliance say so. So if they log in space they would not get charged! Simple. I agree with S3VYN's original post!
S3VYN	Posted - 2005.01.21 02:32:00 - [23] I think the POS Scanner module some folks are talking about could be cool. But I think that you CAN force someone to either safespot and log off (paying a fee, no risk involved), eject from their ship and leave it safespotted and able to be located by someone with time/skills/resources to do so and log in their pod (not paying a fee but taking some risk) or experience a crash (their ship warps to a "safe" spot where it is locatable but difficult to find, no fee, no risk as it takes the enemy a minimum of 20 minutes to find your ship, plenty of time to get back online if it was an earnest crash). Note that this is all in claimed space, nowhere else. It also takes into account that the space is not disputed and that you are in negative standings with those claiming the space. So, realistically, you are on enemy territory and shouldn't be there if you aren't willing to lose whatever you brought with you. If you habitually are required to log off in a particular system where an enemy has set up a POS your corporation may also set one up there, marking the system as disputed and unclaimed. Then anyone could log off there with no charge. The "can't force you to play" argument doesn't work because of agent missions. Agent missions have a time limit. Basically, if you accept a mission and something comes up and you can't play for the alotted time you are penalized, regardless of your intentions. Should be the same with invading someone's "claimed" territory (IE, a location where you have the information available to know that you are not welcomed there). As it stands there are groups who move in entire fleets, ship by ship, and then leave them logged off in a system deep within "claimed" territory. Then, they log on a single scout and see how many enemy pilots are in the system. If there are a lot, the scout disappears and comes back 20 minutes later. Now, if the fleet which "lives" in the territory moves next door for 20 minutes, magically a fleet of 20-30 ships (10-15 battleships) appears in the system they just left and starts shooting haulers, attacking a station, whatever. If the fleet which "owns" the territory jumps back in to confront the threat, the insurgent fleet all of a sudden disappears again. It's a problem, I offered a solution that I think would work but there are many people out there smarter than me who could make other recommendations. I'd like to see those as well if anyone cares to make them. ------------------------------------- // The views expressed by this poster are not the views of the poster's corporation, alliance, planet or television network... but they should be.
Selpy	Posted - 2005.01.21 04:15:00 - [24] I think there could be a few thing's that could be done to stop these tactic's being used 1) use the aggro system ...the aggressor is tagged like in low sec...if they try to log off..thier ship remain's. 2) portalble cloak in cargo (really like this idea) 3) make a mod for advanced scanner's to find logged off ships and bookmark them. anything else and you'll find people who won't agree for many reason's, especially if it involves thier hard earned isk. But I do think a balance is well deserved here, remember when the gate's put you by planet's, and pirates would camp those JIP's, the GM's delt with that quickly, think this major exploit should have the same care, since it's the majority of EVE that's not using it, seem's evil thing's in EVE will manipulate anything to thier benifit [SIGNED] ( DO SOMETHING CCP )
Kagutsuchi	Posted - 2005.01.21 05:28:00 - [25] Edited by: Kagutsuchi on 21/01/2005 05:28:45 The only ones whining about S3VYN's idea's are the ones that use this lame, game killing exploit (Tactic ) Genuine arguments and opinions aside, I respect those, I see no reason why this excellent idea should not be seriously considered as an option to at least help resolve the current problem. SIGNED.... Technically i bet it would be a challenge to integrate.. but no doubt everyone will agree, a worthy challenge! Please fix this issue A freind by your side is like an army at your back.
Piaff	Posted - 2005.01.21 06:44:00 - [26] Signed. I also agree with Mindlles. PvP is getting boring when it is like this.
Crzycnck2	Posted - 2005.01.21 07:27:00 - [27] Signed This is a lame tactic and should be addressed. It makes this game very frustrating if when you finally get into position with an equal force to combat the hostiles only for them to SS and then log off. This makes it a time wasted game. I have lost count the number of times when I have gone to get my combat ship and gone 12 jumps to where the "Fun" is only to get there and find that the enemy has logged off. Can you say a wasted 2 hrs or more as you have to stay in system for a bit incase they log back on. I digress, there have been a lot of good ideas here. I just hope that CCP actually listens and does something FIX FTW
Schroni	Posted - 2005.01.21 12:42:00 - [28] imo, the only thing that needs to be done is: if you're warp scrambled, and you log off or ctd. your ship doesn't warp out. not after 2 minutes, not after 30, not after a day. end of story... --- SNIGG Forums my videos
Piscis	Posted - 2005.01.21 13:27:00 - [29] Why not simply make it so that if a user is warp scrambled, they don't disappear? that solves everything... If someone is not scrambled and warps, then they simply warp off and cloak and disappear as normal. Makes no odds. If you argue that it's just as bad, it's the same as them warping between safe spots. You're never going to find them with sensor probes, and they're just gonna keep bouncing round... The only thing I'd say is maybe have a new option "number of pilots logged off in space" (both friendly and non-friendly)
RollinDutchMasters	Posted - 2005.01.21 16:40:00 - [30] Originally by: Schroni imo, the only thing that needs to be done is: if you're warp scrambled, and you log off or ctd. your ship doesn't warp out. not after 2 minutes, not after 30, not after a day. end of story... Yes. This is the only change that needs to be made. I'd suggust that if youre scrambled by NPCs only, the 2 minute timer remain, simply to avoid the mass whining that would ensue otherwise. In PvP, the logoff timer to escape needs to go. Restricting the ability of people to logoff in 0.0 space is just stupid though. I routinely operate in hostile space, alone. From time to time, I even have to log off EVE to do something else. What you people basically want are changes to the game mechanics to hurt people who are operating in your claimed space, instead of doing something like competent combat operations. Originally by: Sochin CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.