"Anyone that gets unintentionally disconnected"... yea, maybe once a year this MIGHT happen to someone. I'm not sure it has happened that much even. If you care... log back on quickly. If you are getting logged of that often, don't play in Starbucks or McDonalds.

Kb, I used to disconnect ALL the time (every two jumps at times) and only because of some weird incompatibility between the VO software and my OS - and I have a 300mbps connection. And if you have never experienced an internet outage or a loss of cellular service, KB, you should consider yourself lucky and should go buy some lottery tickets. I'm not saying it happens constantly, but, from my own personal observations, it certainly happens way the fuck more than someone disconnecting to avoid death.

Don't misconstrue my view -- intentionally disconnecting when logging out is a cheap tactic and I have no problem with something being done about it. Just not something that hurts a large swath of innocents.

Keep in mind this actually HELPS players in a hostile area with pirates. With this change, I can wait longer to give them the benefit of the doubt. There is no difference between a player that dies in 30 seconds because the pirate couldn't wait, and a player that dies at 4 minutes because he was disconnected.

The player that is actually playing gets to live. That is a very good thing.

Nice try savet, lol. :)

Connection issues are the exception rather than the rule. I would rather focus on the players playing the game than worry about extreme edge cases of someone with connection issues that are likely a result of their own network issues. As you point out, this is a game, so we should focus on the people playing it.

"Those helped:
Maybe 10 players who are annoyed with very few people who are force-quitting their non-capital ships to avoid death."

That's a slight over-simplification. The maximum non-forced logout delay is only 40 seconds (10 initially, plus another 30 after a PM). So this helps against people who simply /logout as well as the ones who intentionally break their connection.


"Those harmed:
Anyone that gets unintentionally disconnected for reasons outside of their control in an area that has hostile or has high potential for hostiles (NPCs or PCs). In a playerbase that is steadily and suredly becoming more and more mobile-only, this is a HUGE concern."

This is a larger oversimplification. There is already a one minute timeout when you get disconnected. People who are in immediately dangerous situations will not be harmed by lengthening the timeout, because they'd have died anyway. The only people harmed by a longer delay are the people who get disconnected in a currently peaceful but potentially hostile location, where the extra minutes would increase the odds of somebody encountering them. And, of course, the people who abuse it.


But hey, if you really dislike the idea of longer timeouts, there are alternative solutions. In particular, simply have it announced in sector-chat when somebody is attempting to logout or when they are 30 seconds away from timing out. This imposes no harm on anybody.

That's a slight over-simplification. The maximum non-forced logout delay is only 40 seconds (10 initially, plus another 30 after a PM). So this helps against people who simply /logout as well as the ones who intentionally break their connection.

Either way -- it's still the same 10 people. Force quitting or normal logging.

There is already a one minute timeout when you get disconnected.

I wasn't aware of this. Notwithstanding some server-related issue that requires a 1 minute timeout (i.e. in case of a reconnection maybe?), this seems unfair. Making it any longer seems even more unfair, especially because the entire point of this thread is about pirates being able to more successfully pirate without taking into consideration any other repercussion of the change.

I appreciate if there are "respectable" pirates who give their prey time to figure out how to type a response or give money, but we all know there are also a good amount of hostile players who have no desire whatsoever for pay and will gleefully look forward to their newblet targets drifting defenselessly after force quitting (thinking they can escape).

It's not Guild Software's problem that you are finding it difficult to engage in a type of gameplay that you yourself designed. Perhaps instead of being sad you can't have more differentiation between someone logging out normally and someone who force-quit, you just shoot people sooner? Say, within 15 seconds if they show no response?

"I appreciate if there are "respectable" pirates who give their prey time to figure out how to type a response or give money, but we all know there are also a good amount of hostile players who have no desire whatsoever for pay and will gleefully look forward to their newblet targets drifting defenselessly after force quitting (thinking they can escape). "

So you're admitting that your objection is because you think people should be able to log out to escape combat?

The pirates and nationalists who shoot people without giving them time to react are going to do so regardless. This suggestion remains beneficial to people who play within game mechanics and still doesn't hinder people who try to cheat death, as they'll be dead anyway.

"It's not Guild Software's problem that you are finding it difficult to engage in a type of gameplay that you yourself designed."

Sure it is. Piracy is an intentional part of the game, not something we're trying to force onto it. This is just as much Guild's problem as any other legitimate play-style that still has issues to resolve.

This last post of yours makes it pretty clear that you don't actually have any legitimate opposition. You're now resorting to attempts at trivializing the issue and other silly misdirection.

It is trivial, Rin. Couple people want something without any concern about the masses it affects.

I offered an alternative that would have no negative impact on those supposed masses. But since there is no reason to oppose that idea, you simply ignored it, resorting to misdirection instead.

Sector notification of logout has repercussions the reach outside of pirating situations. I thought it was a dumb idea and that's why I didn't respond.

Savet is trying to sell this as a way to allow him to be nicer to people when he pirates them. While that may be the case for HIM and maybe a couple other pirates, it opens up a huge arena of unfair and unbalanced risk for the rest of people. How many ways can I say it? lol.

It's situationally beneficial to people who don't like when their targets log off (some pirates, all griefers -- all-in-all a handful of people). And it consequently it poses a larger risk to a much larger portion of the VO population.

A fix for a trivial problem that results in major fallout for the rest of us is wrong.

"Sector notification of logout has repercussions the reach outside of pirating situations."

You failed to list any of those alleged repercussions. How does knowing that somebody is attempting to log out hurt anybody who is not using it in the "stopped by a pirate" scenario?

The real greenwall:

Greenwall keeps ignoring the fact that this change would only help people and has no impact on people who would have died anyway. There is no reason not to set the persistence at a level that allows people to give other players the benefit of the doubt.

Greenwall, in my honest opinion you are greatly exaggerating the "innocent masses" argument. Ive been back in VO a little over a month, In that time I've seen no less then 4 itani capships use the current, relatively short, logout times to avoid losing a trident and several more abuse other bugs to avoid combat (i.e. force logging durning a jump, racing to the ship to dock and abuse the current seeker/trident targeting bugs). I'm not trying to bash on the smurfs here (despite my affiliations) because if its happening that much in one rather limited pool of players owning tridents (just within ITAN and SKV) then it must be a regular occurrence between the entire rest of the population base owning tridents.

As it stands there is virtually ZERO danger for flying around in grey in your cap ship (as there arent large gangs of rags floating floating around every wh just waiting for the next dent to show up). I've heard the argument here that it will "discourage players from flying around in their tridents!" but VO is not meant to be 100% safe for anyone, least off the people who have enough time and know-how to build dents and should be considered the "vets". If merely the idea that you couldnt escape a group attacking you by logging makes you not want to fly.... I hear hello kitty online subscriptions are cheap these days.....

Seragyn

Seragyn, I've basically said I'm ok with increased capship persistency. I'm not OK with increased non-capship persistency when a network connection gets severed.

But again Greenwall, the increase doesn't add to the danger experienced by network disconnects, since the current one minute timeout would already result in their death. Without a compelling reason not to increase the persistence, there has so far been no legitimate reason not to do so. The benefits are well established, so arguing against it without providing some new argument that actually communicates a harm to players isn't helping your cause.

I +1 this because I should not be forced to watch my ship go boom. If I want to log off, I should be able to hit the button without a timer. AND, the person who snagged my ship should get the pk and the loot.

i dont really care one way or the other about non-cap ships... frankly most of the times i disconnect due to internet issues i die anyway.... so wouldnt really affect me. At least we can agree on capships not getting easy outs.... thats all i really care about.