Mild social pressure as a potential solution to hidden BGS manipulation

Deleted member 38366

D
[...] but what if the community took up the torch? What if we spread the idea that working the BGS in Solo/Private Group was 'cowardly' or sleazy, or at least a cheap shot?

This isn't a Solo vs. Open debate at all...it's an attempt to swing public opinion on one aspect of the game. This is also definitely NOT a case of naming & shaming or harassing players that would choose to work the BGS outside of Open. If anything, it's asking others to shun/denigrate the action, NOT the person. Any thoughts?

Full contradiction between posted intentions. This is classic "Hotel California" and indeed a mode discussion.

What if we instead spread the fact that working the BGS in various Instances, Time Zones, Game Modes and Platforms is fully working as intended and was always designed to do exactly that?
Then maybe that classic "I enjoy a specific Playstyle/Mode/Platform - thus the rest of the entire Universe has to as well" logical fallacy could finally reach the Retirement Home where it belongs...

What the BGS needs instead is some intraday Trend Indicators, both in Faction Influence and Faction buckets.
Nothing more than a simple "Winning" or "Losing" Trend, that's all it needs.

That is the missing key component to prevent daily surprises and get a clue if the own actions were sufficient or not. Or recognize something is wrong and start taking positive Action against it.
This detail of missing BGS Transparency IMHO is the key to giving BGS Groups the right tool to balance their own actions vs. any Opposition.

Other than that, the OP idea is Hotel California, Room #16228.

PS. Old rules of the road in the BGS world :
- if you want to succeed in manipulating the BGS , you got to be able to dish out - but also accept to get hit and overcome any resistance
- it matters not where the resistance came from, you still have to overcome it via BGS means one way or another
- direct PvP is utterly ineffective as a Primary BGS tool... you're wasting precious time and forfeit BGS effectiveness for personal fun. Personal choice, so no room for complaints. Your decision, you pay the potential price.
- far more Information than what meets the eye can be sourced from the Game... but it takes alot of experience and time to track down and benchmark Opposition, if that's your priority.
- efficiency and effectiveness is king, live by that and accept it - or risk going downhill.
- you'll have to revolve around the BGS and its rules, not the way around. Personal preferences don't matter one bit. That's the price any dedicated BGS worker has to pay. No exceptions.

Oh, and right now - as we speak - I'm manipulating the BGS.
Am I a coward for being on the PC Platform? Sure not.
Am I hiding from the -9GMT Time Zone? Nope. I'm a human so I need my sleep.
Am I while playing in Open a coward by hiding from XBOX Players? Don't think so.
Are others hiding or cowards because they don't happen to be on PC - Open - my Timezone - my personal Playtime - my Network Instance? *lol* of course not. That'd be a ridiculous and thoroughly infantile assumption.
(heck I've had plenty of Wingmen and Friends not appearing in my Instance often enough - and they sure as hell didn't "cowardly hide" :D )
Bottom Line : I play my Game, they play theirs - none being the wiser.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think FD should provide PVP for Private Groups and Solo modes. It is a shame that this gameplay is totally missing in Solo mode and it is very hard to find in Private Groups. I bought the game so I could play the way I wanted, in anyy of the modes, and right now I can't have pvp combat in Solo. Please FD fix now.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I think FD should provide PVP for Private Groups and Solo modes. It is a shame that this gameplay is totally missing in Solo mode and it is very hard to find in Private Groups. I bought the game so I could play the way I wanted, in anyy of the modes, and right now I can't have pvp combat in Solo. Please FD fix now.

Working as intended - select the multi-player game mode with no population limit for what you seek....
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I see what you are doing, you are asking me to join Open right? so you can kill my asp scout?

That's one option - the other is to create a Private Group and seek like-minded players to join it.

PvP is enabled in both multi-player game modes, after all.
 

Goose4291

Banned
Regarding the Fuel Rats home system struggle: I fully understand that FDev have shot down the idea of only having BGS effects earned in 'Open' count, but what if the community took up the torch? What if we spread the idea that working the BGS in Solo/Private Group was 'cowardly' or sleazy, or at least a cheap shot?

The thing I've noticed is, if the attack is against them, an event or a group they like, a lot of the 'all modes are equal crowd' who dwell on this forum are amongst the first to point fingers at 'cowards exploiting the BGS and mode system'.
 
Thanks for all of the comments. It seems like I really touched a nerve with several people, to the point of both myself and my idea being misrepresented. That's fine; and I should have anticipated it. Me restating it now isn't going to change any of that, so I'll just let it be. It was nothing that I was wed to, it was merely a random thought I had while watching an Obsidian Ant video while sipping coffee one morning.

I do like the idea of 'positive social pressure', and hopefully I won't get jumped on for saying so. There are almost as many opinions as there are people playing the game, and a rich interplay of those ideas is what helps good (or at least popular) ones to spread, and lesser ones die on the vine. I'm fine with the decidedly negative feedback my idea received, and am not going away butt-hurt or anything. This is still the best damned game I've ever played (hell, I thought that back in Beta in 2014), and am looking forward to many more years flying. o7 all!
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
It seems like I really touched a nerve with several people, to the point of both myself and my idea being misrepresented.

More that all players bought or backed a game with no requirement to engage in PvP and some of those who do prefer PvP have been trying to persuade Frontier to remove content from players who don't for as long as the game design has been published.

While the OP is not an attempt to remove content from Solo / PGs, it is an attempt to "normalise" a pejorative view of players who choose to engage in BGS activities in modes other than Open. That in itself attempts to suggest that there is something "wrong" about affecting the BGS in modes other than Open.

If there was something "wrong" about affecting the BGS in modes other than Open then I'd expect that Frontier would not have included it in their design for the game in the first place....

To quote a Dev on the topic of the BGS and the modes:

Is there planned to be any defense against the possibility that player created minor factions could be destroyed with no possible recourse through Private Groups or Solo play?
From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices. While we are aware that some players disagree, this hasn't changed for us.
Michael

That was over three years ago - and Frontier's rather clear stance on the three game modes and single shared galaxy state would not seem to have changed in that time, especially given the double restatement of what the BGS *is* in the BGS and Scenarios stream and recap thread:

https://youtu.be/VCy1ZYjLvdQ?t=872

ABW: "But more importantly than that, it represents how player's actions represent the world around them. We're talking about actions from players no matter what platform, or mode they're on"
AW: "Yeah"
Adam & Will nodding
ABW: "It's all part of one shared galaxy, which is something amazing, in the same way we're doing things with exploration [...] every one is part of Elite is part of the same shared world"
Will: "Yes"
ABW: "And that I think is a really special part of our game"

BGS (Background Simulation) Changes

The Background Simulation (BGS) is a representation of how the actions of all players, no matter on which platform or mode, impact the galaxy. The factions that inhabit these system battle for influence over the population and control of the starports, installations and outposts. Player actions can push these factions into various states; such as economy, security, health and influence. With concerted effort players can help grow a faction's economy, destroy its security status, or help win a war.

We're still waiting for the announcement of the decision on the Open only Powerplay Flash Topics from May this year - there is the possibility that Powerplay may become the game's meaningful PvP feature (i.e. unable to be affected by players in Solo and Private Groups) - we'll see, in time, whether either of those possibilities transpires.
 
Last edited:
Mild social pressure as a potential solution to hidden BGS manipulation

The problem with your whole view is your use of the terms 'hidden' and 'manipulation'. You use the terms pejoratively as though someone is doing something 'wrong' or 'against the rules'.

Clearly they are not.

The BGS is working exactly as designed.


Claims that BGS changes are unfair or hidden because they are undertaken in another mode are simply nonsense. All of the tools to influence the BGS are available to all players on all sides of any BGS conflict. That is the critical characteristic of the BGS.

Just because the only answer some players have to any situation is to 'SHOOT IT' is not a reason to remove interesting and involving strategy, tactics and game play from the wider community.

I refute your original quote and replace it with my own...

Brutal social pressure not to cave to a few unimaginative trolls who fail to understand the game they are playing and think only with their trigger fingers
 

Goose4291

Banned
More that all players bought or backed a game with no requirement to engage in PvP and some of those who do prefer PvP have been trying to persuade Frontier to remove content from players who don't for as long as the game design has been published.

While the OP is not an attempt to remove content from Solo / PGs, it is an attempt to "normalise" a pejorative view of players who choose to engage in BGS activities in modes other than Open. That in itself attempts to suggest that there is something "wrong" about affecting the BGS in modes other than Open.

If there was something "wrong" about affecting the BGS in modes other than Open then I'd expect that Frontier would not have included it in their design for the game in the first place....

To quote a Dev on the topic of the BGS and the modes:



That was over three years ago - and Frontier's rather clear stance on the three game modes and single shared galaxy state would not seem to have changed in that time, especially given the double restatement of what the BGS *is* in the BGS and Scenarios stream and recap thread:

https://youtu.be/VCy1ZYjLvdQ?t=872





We're still waiting for the announcement of the decision on the Open only Powerplay Flash Topics from May this year - there is the possibility that Powerplay may become the game's meaningful PvP feature (i.e. unable to be affected by players in Solo and Private Groups) - we'll see, in time, whether either of those possibilities transpires.

Master_Replicas_HAL_9000_Replica_002.0.jpg
 
Regarding the Fuel Rats home system struggle: I fully understand that FDev have shot down the idea of only having BGS effects earned in 'Open' count, but what if the community took up the torch? What if we spread the idea that working the BGS in Solo/Private Group was 'cowardly' or sleazy, or at least a cheap shot?

How about No?

Sounds like you're another Open Only pundit who wants to dictate how others play the game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The thing I've noticed is, if the attack is against them, an event or a group they like, a lot of the 'all modes are equal crowd' who dwell on this forum are amongst the first to point fingers at 'cowards exploiting the BGS and mode system'.

I'd be curious to see some examples of this. It doesn't make sense that the "all modes equal crowd" would be complaining about BGS activity in other mode/s. The only way that would make any sense would be if they wanted to blow the opposition up in a direct confrontation. Which as I said ... doesn't make sense given the position they espouse.
 
I'd be curious to see some examples of this. It doesn't make sense that the "all modes equal crowd" would be complaining about BGS activity in other mode/s. The only way that would make any sense would be if they wanted to blow the opposition up in a direct confrontation. Which as I said ... doesn't make sense given the position they espouse.

I've not seen it. I believe the poster is trolling.

But as all things there is no organised 'open only' pressure group, nor is there one voice in the 'all modes are equal' crowd. Lots of people have varying views. Tarring all members with a similar brush and then denegrating them all based on the views of a minority subset is a common gamble when yur position has little evidence.
 

Goose4291

Banned
I'd be curious to see some examples of this. It doesn't make sense that the "all modes equal crowd" would be complaining about BGS activity in other mode/s. The only way that would make any sense would be if they wanted to blow the opposition up in a direct confrontation. Which as I said ... doesn't make sense given the position they espouse.

You just need to read through the myriad of recent Lave/AEDC threads, or any other incident where we've had group on group where one of the forum consensus preferred parties is involved to see that it exists both on here and elsewhere (i.e. FB Groups, reddit, other social media) to see it's existence.

I'm not linking specific posts because (i) I've got better things to do with my time than spend twenty minutes trawling down the back of the internet sofa so people can do the usual 'I see no ships' response, and (ii) because last time I did that I ended up eating a ban for 'harassment'/'naming/shaming' or something similar.


I love you goose.

GVPRTQo.gif
 
You just need to read through the myriad of recent Lave/AEDC threads, or any other incident where we've had group on group where one of the forum consensus preferred parties is involved to see that it exists both on here and elsewhere (i.e. FB Groups, reddit, other social media) to see it's existence.

Nice try.

What you saw in Lave/AEDC was the involved parties wondering HOW it happened so quickly because of the scale of the shift and the evidence demonstrated that bots were at work. There was no formal call from any of the groups involved that the effects they had witnessed should not be allowable because they were conducted in Open. The calls were to prevent it from happening because it was being done with bots which are already against the terms of service published by Frontier.

In the part of my post you ignored i clearly said:
But as all things there is no organised 'open only' pressure group, nor is there one voice in the 'all modes are equal' crowd. Lots of people have varying views. Tarring all members with a similar brush and then denegrating them all based on the views of a minority subset is a common gamble when yur position has little evidence.

You may see individuals from both sides of the arguments making all sorts personal claims. That does not mean they are representative of the wider group.

Cherry picking your evidence to suit your argument whilst ignoring other evidence that does not, is classic misrepresentation, and isn't fooling anyone.
 
Not really, as the person in question tried to engage with me like I was specifically talking to them, and then tried to strawman my point into being about Botting and 'official group statements', rather than individuals and their expressing opinions.

Except that you are specifically claiming that individual comments by people is representative of a 'group' and using that to denegratel the entire group.

The facts remain, there has been no call from any of the groups involved in the examples that you quote, that playing the BGS in solo or PG is in anyway wrong. What they have consistently expressed is the inability to understand what is happening due to both the scale and the linear progression of the changes. Which has since been proven to be driven by Bots which by the definition of FDevs terms of service IS cheating.

Your continued use of pejorative language towards those who simply don't agree with you is petulant and childish.
 
Last edited:
I love spontaneous PvP and nothing gives you that quite like a BGS war.

But while PvP is super fun and a cool challenge, it doesn’t really win BGS wars.

So while I’m charging around in Open having a blast, I do feel guilty that I’m not doing the real hard grind.
If you’re in an actual high stakes war for a contested asset, you need to get out of the kiddie pool of splashing about in Open and just knuckle down to grinding kills and cash-ins.


OP talks about not “being ready” for Open when he started - but you can frame that as “Solo gave him the best chance of success / survival and he took it”
 
Back
Top Bottom