This^^.
Day 64 of a broken background sim
- Thread starter Schlack
- Start date
This^^.
I'm trying to be realistic. They pushed out a barely working FSS shortly before the holidays in the middle of December with tons of bugs that are still unfixed, a handful of things to discover for explorers, a broken update to the BGS system, dropped ice planets and fleet carriers, and implemented a new lighting system that is half working at best.
Complete silence about the BGS and lighting system, they won't even comment if it's working as intended.
Maybe they are working on an ED refresh (needed for ice planets, atmospheric landings) and have given up on fixing the broken stuff in the current game.
Last edited:
Day 65 of a broken background sim.
We had another wonderful experience yesterday where our effort went to the opposition in a war and where exploration data helped a faction that doesn't even hold an asset.
To put this in PvP terms, it would be as if your expected killshot kills yourself, puts a bounty on you, and transports you to a distant prison facility.
To put this into exploration terms, it would be as if when scanning your previously scanned items are deleted and you are transported to a fully explored area of the galaxy.
To put this in PP terms, well actually you guys have troubles of your own!
@FDEV some communication that goes beyond "were looking into it" and something far more realistic that "were happy with the balancing" is necessary. We need to know what fixes are proposed and some kind of indicative time-frame. You need to tell us what to avoid so we dont keep smashing our heads on this brick wall.
We love the game, the BGS gives us the reason, motivation and framework to play. Please give us our game back.
We had another wonderful experience yesterday where our effort went to the opposition in a war and where exploration data helped a faction that doesn't even hold an asset.
To put this in PvP terms, it would be as if your expected killshot kills yourself, puts a bounty on you, and transports you to a distant prison facility.
To put this into exploration terms, it would be as if when scanning your previously scanned items are deleted and you are transported to a fully explored area of the galaxy.
To put this in PP terms, well actually you guys have troubles of your own!
@FDEV some communication that goes beyond "were looking into it" and something far more realistic that "were happy with the balancing" is necessary. We need to know what fixes are proposed and some kind of indicative time-frame. You need to tell us what to avoid so we dont keep smashing our heads on this brick wall.
We love the game, the BGS gives us the reason, motivation and framework to play. Please give us our game back.
I am expecting a 3.3.1 beginning of march so we ll see (my guess).
The thing is that Ed is not a BGS developer, he's just passing on messages from those that are working on it. Their continued use of the word 'influence' when influence is locked during wars, is highly disturbing. We need to understand what the metrics are, what gives what amount of that metric, in terms of mission types, scenario wins and straightforward bond transactions (with minimum and maximum effect).
Is that too difficult? Is it not known? That's the scary part.
Main issue for understanding is to know inputs versus expected outcome. Today, I could test 100 times the same things in different systems and having 64 different results. We don't know the different outcome that we have if they are a bug or working as intended (tm).
FD policy to keep us in the dark from the start is like shooting them in their own foot when they are a lot of bugs...
Agreed.
If they still held to their original position of "BGS is for Background, you are not supposed to play it so we will keep it black box", then they would behaving consistently.
However, that position is no longer valid. They have accepted that playing the BGS is a valid form of game play, and have introduced things to support it.
So tell us how you expect it to work, and we can report things that are broken, and suggest improvements.
I am waiting with baited breath for them to fix the bugs, so I can rip this new BGS a new one. No point yet, despite the fact that fixing the bugs would not make it any less used toilet paper.
True. The only thing we can do is pointing out which parts work or under which circumstances they work (assuming everything else isn't working). Problem is, we can't do that either because people will hit you with the White Knight hammer as soon as you even mention the absence of bugs in certain cirumstances.
I am not entirely serious by the way.
Last edited:
Please note we are the mugs and they 'C up.
Yep, and less dramatically, in Colonia https://cdb.sotl.org.uk/systems/1/history
In 3.2 and previously, Jaques Station got masses of exploration transactions from people just passing through, meaning that unless "war elsewhere" interfered, they were consistently on top of the system. It was also a popular bounty hunting system and as the controlling faction Jaques was well-placed to benefit.
Since 3.3 they've been gradually dropping influence, while People of Colonia who don't own any stations at all have been stabilising a lot higher, and Colonia Council have been moving quite a bit ahead. Fortunately the system is locked so this hasn't resulted in a conflict.
Some of this may well be intentional rebalancing - but there is also pretty cleaarly something going wrong where large quantities of exploration data are concerned.
(Tinfoil: this week's slightly odd CG was designed specifically to allow some collection of data related to this issue)
That's highly disturbing. Tank you own faction by submitting a CG.
It was a random CG, we never asked for it.
"Thank you caller. Your bug has been registered and you are now in a queue. Your queue number is 974 we are current working our way through bug number 73. For the information of others Powerplay bugs are numbered consecutively from 175 to 687. We will get back to you once we can accurately estimate the solution timescales, meanwhile continue to enjoy our game. THANK YOU!"
Last edited: