Powerplay Dear Sandro - your analysis will be needed on Thursday morning!

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commander Horsma and Commander Rubbernuke!

In general, we try to avoid retroactively changing results, because if we did (and I can't *remember* doing so, but it's not impossible that it has occurred - though if it has happened, you can be sure that it has been driven more by internal factors) there would instant drama that we favour one power over another, which is unhelpful (and which I personally find rather tiresome, knowing that it's not true ).

Don't get me wrong, should a power "die" because of a rule misbehaving, we would certainly not be opposed to saving them. But on smaller scales, considering the vagaries controlling when a bug occurs, what it causes to occur, when it is found, logged, investigated and fixed, it's usually better to take the rough with the smooth rather than potentially get drawn into a mire of time-sapping, controversial tweaks.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Hello Commander Horsma and Commander Rubbernuke!

In general, we try to avoid retroactively changing results, because if we did (and I can't *remember* doing so, but it's not impossible that it has occurred - though if it has happened, you can be sure that it has been driven more by internal factors) there would instant drama that we favour one power over another, which is unhelpful (and which I personally find rather tiresome, knowing that it's not true ).

Don't get me wrong, should a power "die" because of a rule misbehaving, we would certainly not be opposed to saving them. But on smaller scales, considering the vagaries controlling when a bug occurs, what it causes to occur, when it is found, logged, investigated and fixed, it's usually better to take the rough with the smooth rather than potentially get drawn into a mire of time-sapping, controversial tweaks.

Cool, thanks for clearing that up! Hopefully the automated process will not throw up any weird problems.

 

[Martin Schou]

As for the end of the collusion piracy mechanic, I'm all for it if the game gives us tools to combat 5C activity effectively. Both combined will make the game more interesting and return PowerPlay on the path it was actually meant to be played. If you just take away collusion piracy mechanic you'll effectively take powers like Hudson out of the game, the only way for us to fight 5C activities is at the preparation stage as our 5c expansions are carried by armies of grinders and de facto unopposable. Powers with cargo expansions / fewer grinders simply don't have this problem at this magnitude (the exception being AD which were forced to take Chnumar with massive efforts I guess). If we drown in starting CC we just have no way of keeping our prep list controlled, potentially forcing us into loops of turmoiling to fail expansions and to high starting CC balances in following cycles. The only times we used the collusion piracy mechanic in the past were attempts to avoid those situations, it's not our fault your power can't do that (although some would say you have friendly underminers in other powers to achieve similar results).

Just to expand my thinking a bit here. Why is it so much harder for Hudson to control its preps than it is for Mahon? We have a far stronger ecosystem than Hudson, leaving us more vulnerable to having large CC surplusses, yet we are capable of and willing to pump out the required merits to get bad systems off of our list. And the idea that transport sabotage expansions are easier to oppose is laughable. When we ended up with Wolf 412, it barely broke 100% opposition, because it had a 35k opposition trigger. If you are incapable of managing your CC while making sure you've fortified properly, then you're essentially too large to manage. This was the issue that Mahon faced at the end of cycle 44.

As I keep reiterating - you have access to a credit making exploit that can be used to balance your CC, and it is a tool that is not available to all powers. The first issue should be fixed, because there shouldn't be a way to just whisk credits into being, and the second issue is just another example of how the Alliance gets shafted at every turn.

But, if you feel that you cannot possible come out on top of this particular conflict without having access to CC balancing tools that can be used to generate credits for your low level pledges, even though you're two powers against one, then at least have the spine to say so.

 

[unrealization]

If a power comes your way, as a minor faction that would prefer to just do its thing, you either have to accept it or try to bring in another power instead. This severely mechanic forced us to choose "the lesser evil" in Mahon.
Yes, it's a very good simulation of real life where you vote for the politician you dislike the least, but at least in RL the population has the option to revolt and to assassinate its useless leaders. That's something I'd really like to see changed, because unlike what some appear to think, not all of us want to get involved in the silly power struggles of those buffoons shown on the Powerplay screen.

 

[Cmdr Basskicker]

If a power comes your way, as a minor faction that would prefer to just do its thing, you either have to accept it or try to bring in another power instead. This severely mechanic forced us to choose "the lesser evil" in Mahon.
Yes, it's a very good simulation of real life where you vote for the politician you dislike the least, but at least in RL the population has the option to revolt and to assassinate its useless leaders. That's something I'd really like to see changed, because unlike what some appear to think, not all of us want to get involved in the silly power struggles of those buffoons shown on the Powerplay screen.

You don't want to be involved in powerplay? Then don't pledge to a Power. A power exploiting a system does not have direct effects on the BGS of that system. Despite what you have been led to believe.

 

[SHEPR0N]

Just to expand my thinking a bit here. Why is it so much harder for Hudson to control its preps than it is for Mahon? We have a far stronger ecosystem than Hudson, leaving us more vulnerable to having large CC surplusses, yet we are capable of and willing to pump out the required merits to get bad systems off of our list. And the idea that transport sabotage expansions are easier to oppose is laughable. When we ended up with Wolf 412, it barely broke 100% opposition, because it had a 35k opposition trigger. If you are incapable of managing your CC while making sure you've fortified properly, then you're essentially too large to manage. This was the issue that Mahon faced at the end of cycle 44.

Until very recently you didn't have to bother to much about actual intelligent organised opposition against your power when it came to planning CC balances. Other powers have to take the threat of being sniped into account every cycle. I don't think you were necessarily to large to manage when we hit you, maybe you just didn't bother enough preparing yourself against snipes.

If your unwanted expansions are close to your HQ opposition is nearly impossible too, that's right. But with how many grinders pushing the expansion to success have you to cope if you actually face systems far enough so they would be opposable in theory? Our internal opposition doesn't have to bother to push their expansions themselves, our Hudson horde grinders will do that for them. They only have to make sure their systems go to expansion. The ability of a power to keep in check of their internal opposers also depends on the actual strength of their 5th column. If you want to go back to the AD example, it seemed at some point there was really not much the Aisling players could even do. Our problems were never as big as that, but in the not so recent past we had to deal with a weaponized prep against Winters with almost a 100k merits in it too (they had some help from community goal grinders there admittedly), so we choose the cycles we pick such fights carefully.

As I keep reiterating - you have access to a credit making exploit that can be used to balance your CC, and it is a tool that is not available to all powers. The first issue should be fixed, because there shouldn't be a way to just whisk credits into being, and the second issue is just another example of how the Alliance gets shafted at every turn.

But, if you feel that you cannot possible come out on top of this particular conflict without having access to CC balancing tools that can be used to generate credits for your low level pledges, even though you're two powers against one, then at least have the spine to say so.

Well guess it's possible some people use it as a money making tool, I'd be amazed if it's a substantial number though. Honestly for someone just out to make as much money as possible it's not even worthwile, they can just sit in certain remote places for a while and make ridiculous amounts. If you wanted to get up low level pledges with collusion piracy they'd need to have big cargo ships already to actually use the mechanic in any effective form, which you won't find often. We send our new pledges to go undermining with our wings usually, for some reason we nether run out of targets and many of our pilots enjoy shooting stuff way more than watching collector limpets. We never used collusion piracy for such purposes, if you believe me that is your choice in the end.

Again I'd be amazed if you didn't use your own CC balancing tools in form of pilots pledged to other factions undermining you were you wanted, your combat oriented pilots must have had something to do in all those cycles were the Alliance played the game without the rest of us. Also at the moment it's more a case of two powers against four it appears, so a lack of spine is not our main problem maybe

 

[Martin Schou]

A power exploiting a system does not have direct effects on the BGS of that system.

Is that why Felicia Winters bans Imperial Slaves in non-Empire systems? Because I'm pretty sure that's a direct effect on the BGS. Having all Federal aligned minor faction activity influence boosted while having Alliance, Empire and Independent minor faction activity influence reduced is also something that directly affects the BGS of an exploited system.

 

[Roybe]

Hello Commander Horsma and Commander Rubbernuke!

In general, we try to avoid retroactively changing results, because if we did (and I can't *remember* doing so, but it's not impossible that it has occurred - though if it has happened, you can be sure that it has been driven more by internal factors) there would instant drama that we favour one power over another, which is unhelpful (and which I personally find rather tiresome, knowing that it's not true ).

Don't get me wrong, should a power "die" because of a rule misbehaving, we would certainly not be opposed to saving them. But on smaller scales, considering the vagaries controlling when a bug occurs, what it causes to occur, when it is found, logged, investigated and fixed, it's usually better to take the rough with the smooth rather than potentially get drawn into a mire of time-sapping, controversial tweaks.

<silly sarcasm font>
Internally, we all KNOW you hate the Alliance! There are no ranks, no ships, and nothing to attract any player to it...other than a strong sense that they want the underdog to win! Give the Alliance some love already!
</silly sarcasm font>

 

[Cmdr Basskicker]

Is that why Felicia Winters bans Imperial Slaves in non-Empire systems? Because I'm pretty sure that's a direct effect on the BGS. Having all Federal aligned minor faction activity influence boosted while having Alliance, Empire and Independent minor faction activity influence reduced is also something that directly affects the BGS of an exploited system.

Winters does not reduce alliance, independent, and empire influence gains. Only increases federal gains. And what's more, those gains are only going to be apparent if and I stress if someone is working the BGS in that system.

Also slaves are already banned in NULLs home system of LTT 4961, as you know perfectly well. Like I said, despite what NULL has been led to believe (mostly by you and your cronies) being exploited would not have affected them at all as long as they are not pledged to a power.

 

[Apos]

Winters does not reduce alliance, independent, and empire influence gains. Only increases federal gains.

She does decrease Imperial gains. She doesn't decrease Independent and Alliance gains.

However, since she increases Federal gains, she makes random or targetted changed against a faction much more effective as long as there's at least 1 Federal faction within the system.

 

[Cmdr Basskicker]

She does decrease Imperial gains. She doesn't decrease Independent and Alliance gains.

However, since she increases Federal gains, she makes random or targetted changed against a faction much more effective as long as there's at least 1 Federal faction within the system.

Only if someone does a mission or participates in a cw with a federal faction.

Edit: Much more effective is subjective. My understanding is that it is a 10% boost to influence changes. I would hardly call that "much more". Now 100% boost to influence changes to whichever faction I support being rank 5 for Winters is "Much more", IMO.

 

[Apos]

Only if someone does a mission or participates in a cw with a federal faction.

Edit: Much more effective is subjective. My understanding is that it is a 10% boost to influence changes. I would hardly call that "much more". Now 100% boost to influence changes to whichever faction I support being rank 5 for Winters is "Much more", IMO.

There's almost always random mission runners. Especially trade deliveries because they affect both ways, giver and recipient.

And yes, you're just demonstrating that by engulfing their area of space, should you wish as a Rank 5 pledgers, you can destroy them. Unless they join you and have the Rank 5 themselves.

 

[Cmdr Basskicker]

There's almost always random mission runners. Especially trade deliveries because they affect both ways, giver and recipient.

And yes, you're just demonstrating that by engulfing their area of space, should you wish as a Rank 5 pledgers, you can destroy them. Unless they join you and have the Rank 5 themselves.

Destroy them? You have evidence that a Player backed minor faction can be removed from the game through use if the BGS, or are you just fear mongering again? Also, what is to stop Mahon from "destroying" them?

 

[Apos]

Destroy them? You have evidence that a Player backed minor faction can be removed from the game through use if the BGS, or are you just fear mongering again? Also, what is to stop Mahon from "destroying" them?

You are taking the word too literally. I meant removing them from power and keeping them there. Technically you can also remove them from the system and slowly push them away but that would take a long time. Complete removal is not possible as things stand indeed.

Well, what's stopping us is that we don't have the 100% rating 5 bonus for starters, so there is no uneven fight, assuming one breaks out. Other than that, there's the whole culture difference where we actually respect the groups that are both within and out of our space.

 

[Szyslak22]

Also slaves are already banned in NULLs home system of LTT 4961, as you know perfectly well. Like I said, despite what NULL has been led to believe (mostly by you and your cronies) being exploited would not have affected them at all as long as they are not pledged to a power.

Actually, I think Mahon just treated NULL as the independent and intelligent commanders that they are, and respected NULL's decision. A decision that they are perfectly capable of making on their own. Perhaps your philosophy that a power would be able to coerce the decision making process of an independent player group is part of the reason they didn't want to join you.

 

[Cmdr Basskicker]

You are taking the word too literally. I meant removing them from power and keeping them there. Technically you can also remove them from the system and slowly push them away but that would take a long time. Complete removal is not possible as things stand indeed.

Well, what's stopping us is that we don't have the 100% rating 5 bonus for starters, so there is no uneven fight, assuming one breaks out. Other than that, there's the whole culture difference where we actually respect the groups that are both within and out of our space.

Where is the evidence that Winters does not respect minor factions in our space? Do you have some evidence or are we just assuming things again?

Edit: also looks like not a single NULL cmdr has responded to me here. Only members of the AOS and AEDC. So I think I will just leave it here until someone I know to be part of NULL decides to respond.

 

[Apos]

Edit: also looks like not a single NULL cmdr has responded to me here. Only members of the AOS and AEDC. So I think I will just leave it here until someone I know to be part of NULL decides to respond.

There have been plenty of Null commanders commenting on reddit, which you have very much seen yourself. However, as usual, the Winters propaganda brigade is strong.

 

[Cmdr Basskicker]

There have been plenty of Null commanders commenting on reddit, which you have very much seen yourself. However, as usual, the Winters propaganda brigade is strong.

I said responding here, as in here in this thread. Also, Winters has a propoganda brigade? That's news to me. Please, tell me more.

 

[theEmohawk]

Where is the evidence that Winters does not respect minor factions in our space? Do you have some evidence or are we just assuming things again?

Edit: also looks like not a single NULL cmdr has responded to me here. Only members of the AOS and AEDC. So I think I will just leave it here until someone I know to be part of NULL decides to respond.

OK, NULL Commander here (and the last NULL Commander posted 3h ago, sorry we have lives).

In case you missed my post yesterday, I'm a Commander that was in a TS channel on our server listening to the conversation before the DR Crucis prep race.
My view of the conversation on TS was one of the factors that influenced other NULL Commanders to turn to Mahon as the lesser evil. The attitude of the Winters leadership and the utter disrespect shown to us as an independent player group was enough to convince me that you were a group that I neither trusted nor wanted to cooperate with. I would go further and express an opinion about the sky marshal's attitude and demeanor, but on these forums I'd probably be contravening the rules about personal attacks. Your leadership didn't come to discuss a mutually beneficial option, you came to demand that we submit to your demands and several of them made veiled threats about damage to our BGS work.

What Winters really didn't understand is that NULL's philosophy is that our members fly the way they want, as long they aren't pirating other commanders we don't care whether they are Imperial scum, Federation bully boys, Alliance or lean to one of of the insignificant Powers, or indeed have no interest in PP. We've had NULL Commanders at L5 with Imperial Powers helping in the fight because first and foremost they are NULL.

The other thing that sticks in my mind is that the Winters leaders believed that a small player faction was insignificant, and that players playing PP were somehow more important. Well, this little, insignificant player group succeeded in preventing your expansion into our bubble. We wish there was some way to oppose a PP expansion whilst remaining independent, but we had to play with the mechanics available to us.

We are NULL and we want to be free. If we can't be free we will choice to fall within the power bubble of the Alliance of Independent Systems.

 

[Martin Schou]

Winters does not reduce alliance, independent, and empire influence gains. Only increases federal gains. And what's more, those gains are only going to be apparent if and I stress if someone is working the BGS in that system.

Well, make up your mind. You JUST said, and I quote:

A power exploiting a system does not have direct effects on the BGS of that system.

Let's try this again - does a power exploiting a system have direct effects on the background simulation of that system? It's a very simple yes or no question.

Also slaves are already banned in NULLs home system of LTT 4961, as you know perfectly well.

You are the one who made a sweeping general statement on a power's influence on the bgs. Felicia Winters bans Imperial Slaves in her non-Empire systems, which is very much affecting the background simulation.