Powerplay @Frontier Developments: Request for some clarity.

[Sorry, this won't be of interest to many players I think. Deep(ish) reaches of mechanics. Those who don't like Powerplay: we've heard. No need to reiterate]


I suppose prima facie I'd direct this at CMDR Dav (Stott), though there may be someone more directly involved. Simply put, he's given the best answers to such questions in the past ;-)

The individual oddities I'll mention have been reported as bugs, but that never led to a thorough explanation as far as I know.


Faction Type Prevalence vs. Control System Triggers.


Alright, in a few months it'll be two years we've been at Powerplay. A month later, it'll have been two years since our player group dedicated itself to flipping system governments to benefit our Power. So please, some clarity is finally needed on trigger bonus/penalty mechanics.

Having 50% of exploited systems within a Control System's sphere governed by faction types listed as beneficial to that Power, lowers the Control System's fortification trigger. That much is widely known. There are situational issues that come up, however, which would seem to function as modifiers to the 50% requirement. The problem is, we've (my own group in concert with several Imperial Powerplay-involved 'BGS' groups) monitored examples where a certain status appeared to matter, and where it did not. Easier to provide example cases:

1. We have evidence to support Contested systems not being counted into the total exploited count for trigger purposes. So a requirement of 9/18 would be modified to 8/16 if two systems were contested. There are, however, a smaller set of examples where contested systems remain counted toward the total. Quite difficult to report either case as a bug, since we don't know which outcome is the intended one.

2. Systems within the radius of two Control Systems of the same Power present similar confusions. Most often, they appear to count toward only the total exploited count of whichever exploited them first - the elder party, as it were. We have a few notable examples of systems appearing to count toward both spheres, however. The trigger for both reduced to 50% after the sole flip of one shared system.

3. The Control System itself presents a similar conundrum, where sometimes it appears to be counted toward the total and other times not.

Many have simply given up trying to narrow this down. That is uh...not my way. Please shed some light before more of my hair greys.
 
Interesting question.
(You probably have already), but do you have some specific-case data bundled up ready to pass on to help pinpoint the cause(s)?
 
Interesting question.
(You probably have already), but do you have some specific-case data bundled up ready to pass on to help pinpoint the cause(s)?

The case information is currently rather diffuse, and much of it historical (e.g. a seemingly undeserved bonus at the time is now deserved unequivocally, because we never stop working at it). If we knew the intended mechanic in detail, I'm sure we could produce some relevant examples. Rather the point of the post. Very few of us are information professionals inclined to keep permanent records of such oddities, but those records can usually be dug up.
 
Last edited:
Is this about Powerplay? Is the Powerplay subforum broken?

edit: thread has been moved from DD and now my post looks odd ;)
 
Last edited:
Good questions. I'd wish that the powers section of the galaxy map could be improved also, at least show a list of which systems are in a control sphere along with basic info per system in the list about its controlling faction and contested status. It's annoying enough finagling the 3D map around counting and finding the names of the systems. If something like this was implemented it could perhaps help with the curious players seeing this control sphere info consider powerplay more than the perfunctory involvement to acquire prismatics and other pp modules.
 
Last edited:
1. We have evidence to support Contested systems not being counted into the total exploited count for trigger purposes. So a requirement of 9/18 would be modified to 8/16 if two systems were contested. There are, however, a smaller set of examples where contested systems remain counted toward the total. Quite difficult to report either case as a bug, since we don't know which outcome is the intended one.

In my experience contested systems are counted in the total number of exploited systems.

I'd much prefer there was a logic to the government types, since spreading these specific types has become (probably unintended) a large priority of the powers.

Sirius players spreading Corporations, makes sense.
Hudson spreading Feudal and Patronage and Aisling spreading non Imperial (could be federation and alliance, not just independent) governments is just a terrible game mechanic.
 
In my experience contested systems are counted in the total number of exploited systems.

Indeed it was quite late when we started really noticing this, likely after a few 'deliberate contestation' campaigns against us. It made *some* sense to us given what contestation does to systems in terms of Powerplay, but attempts to find examples have shown little consistency.

One issue I didn't mention (because there's no question if it's WAI) is when incorrect galmap government data leads to undeserved bonuses. This has happened a fair bit lately, so it's possible that some false positives of the above sort were actually the result of such an error.

Again, it's tough to report bugs without very clearly knowing how the mechanic is intended to work. I'm one to assume simpler rules, but they are not always so as Powerplayers are well aware.
 
Last edited:
Hello! I've been speaking to Dav about this... and I'm putting together a tiny bit of a response for you. It'll be when I'm back in the office on Monday if that's okay?

Ed
 
Hello! I've been speaking to Dav about this... and I'm putting together a tiny bit of a response for you. It'll be when I'm back in the office on Monday if that's okay?

Ed

I'm excited.

In my experience contested systems are counted in the total number of exploited systems.


I'd much prefer there was a logic to the government types, since spreading these specific types has become (probably unintended) a large priority of the powers.


Sirius players spreading Corporations, makes sense.
Hudson spreading Feudal and Patronage and Aisling spreading non Imperial (could be federation and alliance, not just independent) governments is just a terrible game mechanic.


I believe they are not counted for the denominator but are counted for the numerator if they are contested by a friendly power or a power with a similar/shared control ethos (i.e., feudals in contesting systems are favorable for both Grom and Patreus, and patronages in systems contested between Torval and Patreus are favorable for Patreus).

Interesting question.
(You probably have already), but do you have some specific-case data bundled up ready to pass on to help pinpoint the cause(s)?

Patreus has a master sheet that we use to track all this. I can think of several examples off-hand but would prefer not to publicly list them for obvious reasons. We track this stuff closely and the above is the only way I've been able to reconcile superficial inconsistencies. There is some complex stuff going on, to be sure.
 
Last edited:
I like to see more PP activity like this from FDev. It is a small subsection, but everyone left participating (at least in organized groups) is pretty passionate about it in general.

Hope it leads to more content/better mechanics.
 
I believe they are not counted for the denominator but are counted for the numerator if they are contested by a friendly power or a power with a similar/shared control ethos (i.e., feudals in contesting systems are favorable for both Grom and Patreus, and patronages in systems contested between Torval and Patreus are favorable for Patreus).

Wirnako was the first system we lowered the trigger on and we did that a long time ago, so I'm not sure of the exact details, but I believe the contested systems are with Antal, and we do share 2 favorable government types with them, cooperative and communist.
 
<looking forward to a reply from FD> [yesnod]

BTW, here is what the manual says (and what most of us around here have either failed to read correctly or begun to doubt due to in-game observation):

PowerPlay manual p9:

FORTIFY ETHOS

Like expansion, each power has an ethos that dictates the methods it uses to fortify a system, which are particularly effective against some government types and ineffective against others.

  • If the control system’s government type is vulnerable to the power’s ethos the fortify success trigger is reduced.
  • If the government type is resistant to the power’s ethos the fortify success trigger is increased.
  • If over 50% of exploited systems have a vulnerable government type to the power’s ethos the success trigger is further reduced by a significant amount.
  • If over 50% of exploited systems have a resistant government type to the power’s ethos the success trigger is further increased by a significant amount.

Effects of ethos versus government type are only computed at the end of a cycle. Any changes to government types controlling systems will only apply during the following cycle.
 
Last edited:
Hi CMDR Endincite,

Can you checked for the presence of unpopulated systems which have a controlling minor faction in these problematic bubbles? An unpopulated system is not allowed to have a minor faction (confirmed by Dav on his last live stream), but we have one in Mahon space (CM Draconis).

SysMap of CM Draconis: http://imgur.com/gSn3k2g

You can see in this support incident that I speculated that CM Draconis was responsible for our Opala bubble not having a lowered trigger.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/321475-CM-Draconis-has-both-zero-population-and-a-minor-faction


Otherwise, I think we belive that:

The Control System itself is not included in the trigger calculation check.
A Contested system is included in the trigger calculation check for all Control Systems that exploit it.

(Interesting other fact about CM Draconis. The player journal reports that the Allegiance of the faction that controls there (which should be one of Fed/Emp/Alliance/Ind) is 'PlayerPilots'!)
 
1. @NavyBee Those first two points in the manual are redacted, confirmed by FDev early 2016 or possibly late '15 - Q&A livestream of some sort iirc. Flipping the control system alone doesn't work, though there was plenty of evidence that it did until 1.4.x/ late 2015. Otherwise it's the standard known stuff, this post is more about what modifies that 50%/if anything is supposed to modify it given all the exceptions (or bugs, I guess we'll find out) we see.

2. @texasp8
Yeah we heard about that issue and checked pretty meticulously for such systems. Afaik none were found (in ALD - I believe Torval did), and in any case the exceptions I mentioned have been too widespread.

Not counting the Patreus data Misaniovent mentioned above, I have one solid example of the control system definitely counting toward 50%, that is to say 4 exploited + the control system changed the trigger for a sphere of 10 (Facece + 9 exploited). I'm sure there's others but most of the group is asleep.
Various people have put forward more convoluted possible rules for control systems specifically, but the evidence isn't sufficient to make them more than speculation imo.

Honestly I believe we have more examples of spheres where the contested systems didn't count than of those in which they did, so I don't have much to say there but /shrug. LTT 2667 is the most recent example of one that needed a contested system flipped for the reduction, which to us was an exception. We have historically had rather a tremendous problem, and thus experience, with contestation, both early on by our neighbors and later deliberately by enemies.

The player journal reports that the Allegiance of the faction that controls there (which should be one of Fed/Emp/Alliance/Ind) is 'PlayerPilots'!)

Wow..that must've been quite the "wth is that!?" moment.
 
Last edited:
Not counting the Patreus data Misaniovent mentioned above, I have one solid example of the control system definitely counting toward 50%, that is to say 4 exploited + the control system changed the trigger for a sphere of 10 (Facece + 9 exploited). I'm sure there's others but most of the group is asleep.
From what I've seen 50% of the systems having a favourabel government isn't enough to lower the triggers, we have had 50% a few times and it did nothing, we have had to go over 50%.
I', not sure if we flipped the controlling system itself, or just exploited systems.

When this happened fairly early in PP we concluded that the halving fort triggers only worked for Patronage/Feudal or Corporations government types, since they were also the only ones who had any halved triggers.
 
Back
Top Bottom