Doomed anarchies

Obi Wan Naboo

Obi Wan Naboo
Any plans to finally fix anarchies and stop their inevitable extinction ?

With up to 1/3 of every mission in every system constantly targeting anarchies and dragging them down, there are none left that ain't supported by a player minor faction and those are struggling to survive. Yet nothing happens and anarchies remain the designated villains with no tools to regain any ground.

Just let me post this statistic of how absurd the situation has become:

There are 15,721 anarchy minor factions (second most) in the galaxy and they control 410 systems (dead last).
There are 174 theocracy minor factions (dead last) in the galaxy and they control 421 systems.

Remove all negative effects from missions targeting anarchies for starters, than give anarchies something to work with. No (regular) bounties, no donations, no decent missions, no system security, no defense whatsoever against being slaughtered and many more is just too much to overcome.

There is also an open issue regarding this. Feel free to vote it up and comment:

webapp

issues.frontierstore.net issues.frontierstore.net
 
Last edited:

Dillon Fallon

Dillon Fallon
There was a time where I thought that changes to the game had made this easier, but at the moment it's a chore against random traffic.

I'm happy being the horrible criminal confined to a criminal system, but it's a headache trying to maintain it. I once remember it being said that anarchies are the place you're supposed to hide out if you're constantly with bounties and notoriety. How, if there aren't any?

I'm perfectly capable of managing in lawful systems, but that's not the point of playing the game as a criminal.
 
Last edited:

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
Just stop supporting them, get into wars, to lose, to strip them all of both space and ground assets, then sit back and wait for the wailing when 'lawful' players cannot murder with impunity...

Wouldn't bother me any longer, I don't use anarchy assets to slake my desire to murder anyway!
 

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
Lex Rottie said:
its hard to just ignore your own player faction. I get your logic though.
Click to expand...
Indeed it is - pretty much the same as one's adopted faction. It is simply that even just maintaining the status quo is a continuing battle with those who come to 'kill the criminals' from missions or just because they are averse to a bounty or notoriety...

I did my bit for a couple of years, but players just can't resist the easy kills or the urge to remove anarchy...
 

Lex Rottie

Lex Rottie
it is and it isn't as a pmf takes time and dedication to actually get it into the game. Fdev requirements for it are pretty strict possibly to put people off fro doing it even when you think you have it down they come back with a no. That being said this problem should be fixed on Fdev side. The reason it hasn't is that they are not really bothered about a minority part of the player base and are more focused right now on their current xeno narrative. What needs to happen is a separate bounty/hit system for anarchy factions. Its illogical to think that just because a faction is anarchy (lawless) that it would allow for its own members to be murdered repeatedly. Anachry factions are normally criminal organizations. The way fdev has implemented it would suggest they think i could go up to a group of mobsters irl and repeatedly do them in without consequence. Fdev as we all know really does need a logic department at this point because so many game mechanics currently running in the game even apart from the anarchy issue make little sense even from a game point of view.
 

Riverside

Riverside
I recently met a Cmdr who was creating a bit of trouble for the locals, he was pushing anarchy factions & I met a few Cmdrs who had been posted as guards to catch this guy & 'discourage' him. As far as I could tell this involved shooting the guy, blowing him up (fair enough, loses any explo data he may be carrying & causes some missions to fail).

I eventually crossed paths with him, he was working two of the same systems I was & we regularly met in stations where he was waiting for the mission board to refresh. Initially he was extremely wary of me (entirely understandable) but I told him honestly what I was doing & my motivation, and after maybe a week & half a dozen of these random meetings he eventually revealed that he'd chosen these two systems we were both working because they were controlled by a faction related to a specific superpower & he wanted to unseat factions aligned with that superpower. He was trying to do this with Anarchy factions because he wanted to create sources for e-breaches (a community spirited & worthy goal).

Now as it happened I was in a position to unseat that superpower aligned faction with another (powerplay friendly) one in each system, so one of his goals aligned with mine & between us we flipped both systems. I asked him not to go for system control against 'my' factions, and said I would be fine with him asset stripping the (now ex-) superpower aligned faction if he could take them. I also started a war in a non-PP system that would gain the local pirates a dockable ground base. He took over fighting the war & won it, tbh it looked uncontested probably because it wasn't for system control.

See, that's the thing. Flipping a system to anarchy is incredibly hard, even ambient traffic is hard to beat, particularly against a superpower aligned corp or democracy, players who don't really care about the actual system & just fancy a bit of war this session will find a system in a state of war, rock up in their PvE murderboats & pick a random side. But when one side is an anarchy they are much, much more likely to pick the other side, especially if they are superpower aligned (players wanting to rank up with the Feds or Imps, and to a lesser extent gaining their Alioth permit for the Alliance).

But if you just want a dock, or a place that sells e-breaches or whatever, you can do that pretty easily. Maybe not against an aggressive PMF but against most factions in many systems where the controlling faction doesn't own every interesting asset you can do it without much trouble, then after you win the asset if you want stability push the controlling faction up & get that asset owning anarchy back down below 7% & no maintenance is required, they will just sink to 1% & keep their asset unless someone who knows what they are doing specifically targets them.

Maintaining an anarchy system is hard work, they are constantly attacked and ime the kind of player that wants anarchy systems want that for a reason & that reason doesn't make anarchies self-supporting.

It's still a fun challenge to try, and it can still be done (not by me this time). I don't think either the game or the playerbase owes anarchists any favours or requires lawless populated systems either. If it were as easy as working any other faction it would kinda suck the fun out of trying too, for me anyway. YMMV.
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
Dillon Fallon said:
There was a time where I thought that changes to the game had made this easier, but at the moment it's a chore against random traffic.

I'm happy being the horrible criminal confined to a criminal system, but it's a headache trying to maintain it. I once remember it being said that anarchies are the place you're supposed to hide out if you're constantly with bounties and notoriety. How, if there aren't any?

I'm perfectly capable of managing in lawful systems, but that's not the point of playing the game as a criminal.
Click to expand...
Those changes completely missed the core issues at hand, is the short version... because they're core design issues.
 

Banana's_Are_Good_For_You

Banana's_Are_Good_For_You
I don't think they want anarchies to survive in the long term. They see them as something that has its rewards, while in control of a system, but they really don't want it to be sustainable in the long term. So, it's a bit like "hit and run", tactically.where you get in and cause chaos with the massacre missions etc., but it's not enough to hold systems and i think that's deliberate.
Anarchies don't really have the means to become a stable power in their own right and that makes sense, so when a small group.or individual takes a system, it's more an uprising in a specific system, as opposed to what the others do generally.
It's like challenge bgs but to make these opportunities more abundant, maybe there needs to be a different way for anarchic players to make mischief? .
 

DemiserofD

D
In my opinion, Anarchy should be the default state of the universe without player interaction. It should be what happens automatically when different factions fight. For example, if there are two factions that are both at 30% influence, and Anarchy that is at 5% influence, When The War ends, the new influence totals should be something like 25%, 15%, and 15%, immediately putting the Anarchy and the losing faction at War.

Not only does this match up with reality - when there's a civil war, the chances of another civil war happening in the next five years goes up exponentially - it would also turn civilization into something of a constant battle, meaning people would need to pick their battles much more than they currently do.
 

SteveWW57

SteveWW57
Having successfully flipped several systems, it is doable. Keeping them flipped is another matter. However, so long as the anarchy faction controls a station, even if not in control, the station will sell e-breeches and will buy illegal/stolen/prohibited stuff.

Ideally, non anarchy player factions should work to get the anarchy in their system a station if possible.

Steve
 

Frankymole

Frankymole
SteveWW57 said:
Having successfully flipped several systems, it is doable. Keeping them flipped is another matter. However, so long as the anarchy faction controls a station, even if not in control, the station will sell e-breeches and will buy illegal/stolen/prohibited stuff.

Ideally, non anarchy player factions should work to get the anarchy in their system a station if possible.

Steve
Click to expand...
You can get e-breaches from Communist governments though, so the main point of anarchies, at least for stations with shipyards, seems to be in the variety of ship types they sell (at least in Colonia).
 

Eli Jack

Eli Jack
I support two Anarchy systems (down from 19 of which 17 have been lost) and it's a constant battle. I am getting close to the point of quitting the game entirely because of the ease with which player groups or fly-by Cmdrs can take over or mess with Anarchy systems. They sit in the system and constantly destroy settlements and take the power generators resuilting in massive influence loss. FDev made a fundamental error in designating Anarchy systems as 'criminal'. They won't admit it though.

Anarchies should have the same support options i.e. pay for influence as any other systems. They also need far more non criminal activities to be present on the boards. WE ARE NOT CRIMINALS.

I'll give the latest war another shot but if it's lost then that's me out of the game for good and I've been here since 2015.

It's too hard, too time consuming and too soul destroying to continue like this.

Ps If you're interested then pm me for the location of the latest war, due to go live tomorrow.
 

metatheurgist

metatheurgist
SteveWW57 said:
Having successfully flipped several systems, it is doable. Keeping them flipped is another matter. However, so long as the anarchy faction controls a station, even if not in control, the station will sell e-breeches and will buy illegal/stolen/prohibited stuff.

Ideally, non anarchy player factions should work to get the anarchy in their system a station if possible.

Steve
Click to expand...
That's part of the problem right there. DB said we weren't heroes, there would be no princess rescues. Here we have single commanders overturning system lords. SG1 could take a cue. Batman should hang his cape up, he can't even manage one city.
 

Dillon Fallon

Dillon Fallon
metatheurgist said:
That's part of the problem right there. DB said we weren't heroes, there would be no princess rescues. Here we have single commanders overturning system lords. SG1 could take a cue. Batman should hang his cape up, he can't even manage one city.
Click to expand...
The best example of a princess rescue is Riedquat. 600 years of anarchy and civil war which is so entrenched it had formed a part of their economy. A couple of CMDRs come along and fix all that in a few weeks.
 

Screemonster

Screemonster
Dillon Fallon said:
The best example of a princess rescue is Riedquat. 600 years of anarchy and civil war which is so entrenched it had formed a part of their economy. A couple of CMDRs come along and fix all that in a few weeks.
Click to expand...
Riedquat should have been seeded with 7 native anarchy factions from the outset of the game. No room for anyone else to expand in, everyone else locked in a perpetual forever-war over every asset in the system.

Just like it was in the gazette that came with FE2.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
criminal anarchy

I think FD need to make flying about in anarchy systems utterly doodly dangerous. I mean everything is G3 or more, aggressive, full of gangs to make up for the fact it has no security. Trade ships should be like the military transports you see, and that rather than view anarchy systems like pinatas they make the rank and file sweat bullets doing missions there.

Other options include making anarchies more interesting to play for- more ad hoc mysterious stranger like missions, more 'beat these people up', raids etc. Attach an engineer to an anarchy faction, hell, in PP mk 2 make Archon The King of anarchies and pimp his R5 bonus in the periphery systems adjacent to the anarchy.

Its far too easy to punch an anarchy down, because FD set them up to be a punching bag villain of the BGS. Give them teeth, a reason to support them and use them to bring criminality a context in ED via the BGS. As a blood soaked crazy guy an anarchy should be a blind spot outside the Pilots Fed, any superpower etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom