Yes. Had a system with 3 concurrent conflicts. Made it hell trying to find the right czs. There were about 30.
A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim
- Thread starter Walt Kerman
- Start date
Yes. Had a system with 3 concurrent conflicts. Made it hell trying to find the right czs. There were about 30.
Why would you want to shoot your own guys?
They may be criminals.... but they're your criminals
Some systems only have one faction. (Edge cases - doing my head in)
Also @goemon - my gut feeling is that the value of the bounties has SOME effect, but it's like a log of the value. Like 10kCr sold in one hit counts for one click. 100kCr sold in one hit counts two clicks and 1MCr counts for three clicks in the bounty bucket.
Does that match your expectations?
Last edited:
it matches my expectations, but it doesn't match my testing in small population systems, both back in 1.4. as very recently.
back in 1.4. 400K CR and 2,4 mio CR redeems had exactly the same effect (6 times the value!), and recently in 2.3.1 i could see a 4800 (!) cr bounty redeem having the same effect as 100 K CR - 300 k CR bounty redeem, both looking at the same faction and looking at the other factions - that's 20-60 times the value.
of course this might be very different in large population systems, or it might be different when some thresholds via redeems are reached, or it might be different when weighing influence gains against losses, or it might be important for filling and emptying state buckets ... but that's out of reach for me to test, as i do my tests alone (as i want to make sure to know when i messed up).
imho small population systems are only good for testing basic mechanics.
but if the CR-value effect would be more pronounced in the basic mechanics, like i read your idea, i should have seen it in those tests.
generally i work with the assumption, that - due to the number of systems and the number of actions generated by cmdrs - the BGS + and - calculation works very simple. so i wouldn't be surprised when at the end of the day there would be no bounty value playing a role in those calculations for gaining influence via bounty hunting-, and what we are seeing as an effect of it are calculations of total profit transactions made at station x. you know, some patches back you could sell moduls to gain influence.
Logs just seemed so simple and obvious as a way of scaling heavy hitters and noobs into the same playing field.
You know - give some balance to the David vs Goliath conflicts that happen between groups.
The BGS has no effect on system populations. Not yet anyway.
We are yet to test during a war but at the moment it seems relatively stable. Will update you as soon as we have had a war trigger.
I'm not so sure about that. we see system population change, and we see (for exampel) RES sites starting to spawn. we also have new systems populated with every patch.... i don't see somebody at FDEV changing the population numbers manually. my impression from playing at the edges of inhabited space quite a lot is, that (besides obvious thins like CG), CMDR traffic plays a role in that - more people using a system = population grows, higher chance of RES being generated or similar. sometimes planetary bases are upgaded and get additional services.
but even if: populaton growth is only happening during major patches, and the basic values of security can't be changed at all as far as i know (it can be "temporarily" changed by different goverment types) - if nobody comes up with a system chagig its security level from one major patch to another.
Fair enough. But what we are "playing with" here as the BGS isn't having any effect on the population. Wars, famine, outbreak, passenger missions, murder, expansion, investment. None of these affect the population. Which is a pity really. If we had the tools to make population changes, improve stations, colonise and terraform worlds, wouldn't that make the BGS so much more fun to play with?
Last edited:
_trent_
Volunteer Moderator
Seems I learn something new about the BGS (almost) every day. I was always under the impression that the populations were fixed.
fully with you.
the current implementation leads to, if you actively play the BGS, you are better off in almost all cases if nobody uses the systems where you control all assets, which is a bit sad.
Deleted member 38366
D
Having seen NAV Beacons turn into Compromised NAV Beacons in two Systems recently (no Patch) makes me think there are machinations at work to that extent.
The only problem :
- they take place over a very very long time
- they're 100% undocumented
- they're not even accompanied by any local news of local/ruling Faction notes, extremely easy to simply miss them
Hence, when or if they are detected (which can take a while), they're nothing but spurios isolated "anomalies", weird unexpected quirks that to any normal observer might not make any sense at all.
For all I know :
- Population changes were live mid-2016 to late-2016 for what looked like a test-run of a few months, then disabled again (or the requirement increased so much that it basically stopped happening across the board)
- Shipyards and Outfitting can be improved
- Shipyards and Outfitting can deteriorate
- NAV Beacons can turn into Compromised NAV Beacons (presumably also reversed)
However... Who's going to spend benchmarking and probing various inputs at high intensity for months when no results show up and zero feedback is available along the way?
There's absolutely nothing that tells the Player "hey there, you're doing something good that could turn into something surprisingly cool if you keep doing it".
Nothing that could guide along the way or at least transmit "Cold.. Nope... Cold... Colder... No this is bad!.. Wait, warmer... Warmer... Hot! Yes, that's it, keep doing that!".
And with the long timeframes involved with absolutely zero inbetween-feedback - any result remains totally digital. Most of the time : nothing. Should after a long time something happen, it likely even goes unnoticed, since noone expects it anyway.
I've long hoped (already for the past) to see ways to support a Faction other than expand it ad-infinitum, but instead to take care of individual Systems or Outposts/Stations etc. inside them.
But even benchmarks ran in tiny Pop, flyover-type Systems (hoping for maximized effects) for a full week yielded absolutely zero results. No clue nor feedback if the Inputs even were the right ones or the envisioned effects were even possible to achieve.
PS.
We received Compomised NAV Beacons in HIP 60942 and Kandit, after the 3rd wave of smuggling by Players attempting to toss us into lockdown.
3rd wave was picked up almost immediately and was fully & directly countered.
Note : all events took place over a timeframe of approx. 4 months (!) with each wave lasting upto 3 weeks, only the 3rd was shorter at ~1 week duration.
Assessment : prolonged Security bucket (Lockdown) filling apparently can cause NAV Beacons in Low Security Systems to eventually become Compromised.
Can I prove it? Nope... Absolutely anecdotal evidence, it simply happens to be the only logical explanation I could come up with.
---- edit ----
Haha *lol*
Game really is mocking me now. Forget everything I said
Reason :
08 May 2017 : Kandit discovered to have a Compromised NAV Beacon (was : Normal NAV Beacon, our oldest records dated 25 May 2016)
12 May 2017 : HIP 60942 discovered to have a Compromised NAV Beacon as well (was : Normal NAV Beacon, our oldest records dated 10 Oct 2015)
-----------
26 May 2017 (just re-checked out of curiosity) :
New Assessment : Weird quirk. Anomaly. I have no idea.
12 May 2017 : HIP 60942 discovered to have a Compromised NAV Beacon as well (was : Normal NAV Beacon, our oldest records dated 10 Oct 2015)
-----------
26 May 2017 (just re-checked out of curiosity) :
New Assessment : Weird quirk. Anomaly. I have no idea.
Last edited by a moderator:
A short notice on goverment types and market data
Just had a look at market data of a station before a control switch from democracy/ federal to cooperative/ independent.
no effect on supply, demand or prices - besides previously illegal commodities going into production or on the market.
anybody has an exampel where goverment type (not security level or state or powerplay) changed market prices?
Just had a look at market data of a station before a control switch from democracy/ federal to cooperative/ independent.
no effect on supply, demand or prices - besides previously illegal commodities going into production or on the market.
anybody has an exampel where goverment type (not security level or state or powerplay) changed market prices?
I have a feeling that population changes are limited to patches simply because they don't trust the BGS enough to do it all by itself. So, they have a few filters and checks the extremes.
If the populations were static, the whole idea of the BGS would be pointless. The feeling that most players gets that populations can't be changed is probably more down to them expecting their work to have greater impact than it does. Limitations is most likely set on how much a single player can affect these numbers, the same way as you can't boost a faction's home influencer from 10% to 100% just by dumping a billion cr worth of stellar maps at the station.
If the populations were static, the whole idea of the BGS would be pointless. The feeling that most players gets that populations can't be changed is probably more down to them expecting their work to have greater impact than it does. Limitations is most likely set on how much a single player can affect these numbers, the same way as you can't boost a faction's home influencer from 10% to 100% just by dumping a billion cr worth of stellar maps at the station.
So we have a non-native faction in our system that owns one station. We have had them at 1% for around 4 days. They are in War in another system, which we were keeping them there to bring them down to last in our system without them getting into another war and losing their station, that way we get it when they retreat since we are the controlling faction.
What worries me is that here it says the faction can't retreat because it owns a station, but we asked here what happens to the station the faction controls when it retreats out of the system and we got the answer that the controlling faction(us) would get the station.
Can we confirm this one way or the other?
p.s. The reason I'm concerned is we have had them at 1% for 4 days, and I understand War won't let retreat start, but retreat is not even pending.
Thank You!
What worries me is that here it says the faction can't retreat because it owns a station, but we asked here what happens to the station the faction controls when it retreats out of the system and we got the answer that the controlling faction(us) would get the station.
Can we confirm this one way or the other?
p.s. The reason I'm concerned is we have had them at 1% for 4 days, and I understand War won't let retreat start, but retreat is not even pending.
Thank You!
Last edited:
We have also felt things are back to normal. Missions are not being overpowered by bounties anymore. We seem to be getting more feed back from the BGS on our actions. Much more like it was before the 2.3 update.
A non-native faction can retreat if it owns assets or not. When it retreats, the system owner gets the assets.
Retreat won't go pending during a conflict.
Last edited: