Anyone else feel like the BGS has become a full time job?

[Marra Morgan]

I like it more this way.
It just wasn't right, that 2 players were able to control 30 systems or some other bigger groups sucking up 50+ systems. Than they were at war in 1 system and suddenly 49+ systems came completely to a halt without progress. This crippled the whole BGS in my opinion.

Now that player groups can't hold so much assets like before anymore, there is more free space for other groups and players and also the BGS is much more dynamic. Sometimes lesser is more

Yep, agreed - the principle of the new design is sound. We'd just like it all to work!

 

[Ian Doncaster]

They won't. If only because retreat trigger is either bugged or working differently now.

I wonder if the instant mass retreats of Beta - if a faction had the misfortune to be in an influence-suppressing War when the changeover happened - have meant they've turned Retreat off for a short while to let a new equilibrium settle out and not penalise factions just for bad timing.

 

[lollo1572]

Well, first of all, FDEVs have to fix this BGS!!! Many players groups are experiencing bug in conflicts (war or elections). There is an open thread for this. Said that, IMO groups with lots of Systems have to prevent conflicts (expecially the unnecessary ones!) playing with influences!!!! Me and my group did it before 3.3 too! ;-)

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

I like it more this way.
It just wasn't right, that 2 players were able to control 30 systems or some other bigger groups sucking up 50+ systems. Than they were at war in 1 system and suddenly 49+ systems came completely to a halt without progress. This crippled the whole BGS in my opinion.

Now that player groups can't hold so much assets like before anymore, there is more free space for other groups and players and also the BGS is much more dynamic. Sometimes lesser is more

You are right. I do understand why it's been changed.

I'm mostly grumbling because I'm in the "small group with lots of assets" camp, so we are getting hit hard. Currently 2 wars and 2 elections. Plus systems not in war still think that they are (just like they did pre 3.3). I suspect this whole faction-at-war state is what is negating our efforts in the elections.

The changes are pretty buggy, which I know is pretty standard for FD BGS changes.

 

[Jmanis]

First the bugs need to go.
Then it takes a few weeks to find out what the new equilibrium and game play looks like.
Then it is time for judgment.

First conflicts aren't even over.

Pretty much this.

When it works, the new system is pretty great, but the bugs aren't helping matters. I too am a "small group in almost 20 systems"... but as a comparison point to this time last month:

---Controlling---	20/11/18
A:	26.7 (26.6)
B:	40.0 (20.7)
C:	31.5 (50.8)
D:	32 (36)
E:	37.6 (16.9)
F:	51.5 (19.0)
G:	26.9 (27.8)
H:	31.9 (37.0)
I:	23.2 (60.0)
---Non-controlling---
J:	21.0 (21.6)
K:	60.4 (34.2)
L:	12.2 (13.2)
M:	7.6 (8.2)
N:	6.6 (10.1
O:	27.7 (10.0)
P:	25.9 (34.1)
Q:	15.1 (13.5)

---Controlling---
A:	49
B:	45
C:	67
D:	54
E:	58
F:	36
G:	50
H:	63
I:	Defeat
---Non-controlling---
J:	67
K:	15
L:	29
M:	Draw
N:	Total Defeat
O:	Victory
P:	15
Q:	19
R:	2

It's just an overall improvement. Those two defeats are potentially buggy elections.

 

[Lucius-Darcia]

You are right. I do understand why it's been changed.

I'm mostly grumbling because I'm in the "small group with lots of assets" camp, so we are getting hit hard. Currently 2 wars and 2 elections. Plus systems not in war still think that they are (just like they did pre 3.3). I suspect this whole faction-at-war state is what is negating our efforts in the elections.

The changes are pretty buggy, which I know is pretty standard for FD BGS changes.

Yes i am too in this area. "We" are one and a half player with 12 systems atm and i'm really intrested how this will work out in the next time. Especially since i wanna go to DW2 expedition and have just a noob-twink left in the bubble. Than there will be 2x a half cmdr for our systems and assets

 

[Jane Turner]

the issue is not so much the amount of conflict, but the number of systems in which nothing is possible to achieve due to the amount of influence tied up in conflicts for 10 days

 

[Strangepork]

I expect that we will all have to get used to the new "normal" - which may be that player groups are capable of managing significantly fewer systems than previously (large numbers only previously being possible due to effective use of the arguably OP faction blocking states).

Less, 'power to the people', yeah?

 

[Morded]

My BGS work hasn't become a full time job, it's a treadmill. Doing lots of missions, data sales and bounties leads to influence falling. Did nothing yesterday, saw an increase today. From my experience since the patch, there isn't any more BGSing. Hopefully its just bugs, but who knows. I quit PvP when engineers sucked all the fun out, quit PP when the bots and 5c sucked the fun out, I'm gonna have to find a new space career again.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

In my opinion, system dependent states (as opposed to faction dependent) is the way it always should have been. But as I've said before, I don't think that the BGS was designed for players to actually "play" it, and subsequent development has been the result of players finding their own game where there was once none defined.

 

[Jmanis]

In my opinion, system dependent states (as opposed to faction dependent) is the way it always should have been. But as I've said before, I don't think that the BGS was designed for players to actually "play" it, and subsequent development has been the result of players finding their own game where there was once none defined.

<insert jmanis' usual spiel about the purpose of the bgs>

I see it a bit like gambling on elections. Gambling on the outcome isn't the reason elections are run, but there's nothing stopping people doing it. If something makes it harder, too bad, so sad.

 

[Morded]

In my opinion, system dependent states (as opposed to faction dependent) is the way it always should have been. But as I've said before, I don't think that the BGS was designed for players to actually "play" it, and subsequent development has been the result of players finding their own game where there was once none defined.

That's true. The downside is it cuts out a lot of long standing gameplay without putting anything back in. More things will happen in individual systems, but I'm not sure it makes much difference when there was already a thousand of everything happening somewhere in the bubble. Being involved in something wider than the gunsights is great fun. I think PowerPlay is intended to be what BGSing was, but it's unfortunately a tedious exploited expensive mess. Aside from just not making sense, like hauling a bazillion tons of paperwork as if there isn't email and printers. We have 3d printers on our ships. I just realised PowerPlay would probably become a lot more work, what with not being able to manage the 50% of friendly factions in a control sphere thing. I guess we'll have to see after the point update, or if Fdev says anything.

 

[Jmanis]

That's true. The downside is it cuts out a lot of long standing gameplay without putting anything back in. More things will happen in individual systems, but I'm not sure it makes much difference when there was already a thousand of everything happening somewhere in the bubble. Being involved in something wider than the gunsights is great fun. I think PowerPlay is intended to be what BGSing was, but it's unfortunately a tedious exploited expensive mess. Aside from just not making sense, like hauling a bazillion tons of paperwork as if there isn't email and printers. We have 3d printers on our ships. I just realised PowerPlay would probably become a lot more work, what with not being able to manage the 50% of friendly factions in a control sphere thing. I guess we'll have to see after the point update, or if Fdev says anything.

Yup. PP should've had missions and varied activities to earn merits... not one activity per power per effect.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

That's true. The downside is it cuts out a lot of long standing gameplay without putting anything back in.

I'm seeing some interesting effects on trade good prices for stations with multiple simultaneous states - it looks like the state effects are multiplied together, though I'll need a lot more data to be able to analyse what's actually happening there. There are some serious new opportunities for traders, miners and pirates, anyway.

 

[the100thmonkey]

The "design" for my faction was always one to exploit passive activity, and now that conflicts don't hurt everything and lock state, it's paying off (with war active, other systems that would normally have dropped to =~30% are thriving around 50-60%)

But when conflict happens, it does need more effort than usual, but that's fine.

"It's paying off" implies design; what's actually happening is that you got lucky.

I opened the launcher tonight, logged in, looked at yet another election/war for my faction and thought "you know what, I have better things to do than this crap", especially when the faction status reports are broken in the stupidest way possible.

I just closed the game.

I like my job. It has a clear purpose; the pointless, strategy-free work we have to do now to even tread water in the BGS is just that: pointless.

It's a real shame, since the other changes made to the game are really great. I'd have more fun trolling other PMFs instead of promoting my own faction. That's really the kind of gameplay the BGS changes have enabled. Unfortunately, it's exactly the kind of gameplay I have zero interest in.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

the issue is not so much the amount of conflict, but the number of systems in which nothing is possible to achieve due to the amount of influence tied up in conflicts for 10 days

Add to that the fact that you are forced to spend half those 10 days at least doing something in those systems, or risk losing a pointless conflict and the influence that goes with it.

 

[Jane Turner]

Add to that the fact that you are forced to spend half those 10 days at least doing something in those systems, or risk losing a pointless conflict and the influence that goes with it.

>26,000 FACTIONS have at least one conflict state..... and as an example, one of our "protector" factions installed as the pawn to save the king, actually has 10 just now.....

 

[FrogsFriend]

Well, my faction is looking pretty easy to manage right now. All the wars down below are keeping the influence stable everywhere... of course that could all change when the wars end and we see what the result of all those unsupported conflicts is

 

[Jmanis]

"It's paying off" implies design; what's actually happening is that you got lucky.

You know what? I get you're salty right now... I get there's bugs everywhere and I get the "BGS Vets" are running around screaming that the sky is falling. I even get that some of the bugs which are irregular may just be "not happening" to us.

But respectfully, don't just flippantly trash the four years of strategy we've applied to make *consistent* progress into almost 20 systems, including holding off three different Powerplay groups which is punching well above our weight of just a dozen players, the same progress we're making *right now* notwithstanding the current issues.

End of the day, we're still really enjoying the game *and* making progress *despite the bugs*, where it sounds like you're just at the end of your tether. Just because the game sucks for you and you can't make sense of it, doesn't make it the case for others, and certainly doesn't make it "luck".

 

[the100thmonkey]

certainly doesn't make it "luck".

That's just not true - your strategy was decided years before the gameplay changes were even mooted. You simply can't call it anything but luck when a decision you made four years ago is benefitting from a gameplay change now. It's certainly not strategy.

You manage a faction with, I'm willing to bet, no one actively working against it. Good for you. I'm glad you're still enjoying the BGS. Just one or two players could make your life hell.