Aye, but first you got get commander like myself and yourself break the Pattern of going in gun-blazing or boosting the heck out of there whenever we see and empty frame on our radar.
Well yeah I have to say that to me first outrightly hostile move is interdiction itself, there is no way I should power down ship after that, it is escape or fight.
If I'm doing my job right, BGS wise, then the odds are good that you'll either be working for the faction of my choice, or against the faction of my choice.
Indeed. It's like a random outcome.
It's not random, though. Individual Commanders may be unpredictable, but they're fairly predictable as a group. Far too many players are primarily interested in grinding credits and reputation, and if you manipulate a faction's state, then you also manipulate the types of missions they offer.
In general I think we see that people who say "I want to PvP you in Open because otherwise you're messing with my BGS while hiding in Solo" don't actually have a clue how the BGS works. There are a couple of notable knowledgeable exceptions in this forum, but for most PvP enthusiasts pushing this agenda, "BGS" is some kind of magic incantation which might get them the Open-only paradise they crave. The truth is that if I'm working against your chosen faction in whatever mode, blowing up my ship will hardly ever gain you long-term benefit. The only thing that can really tilt the scales is to get on with it and work for "your" faction.It's not random, though. Individual Commanders may be unpredictable, but they're fairly predictable as a group. Far too many players are primarily interested in grinding credits and reputation, and if you manipulate a faction's state, then you also manipulate the types of missions they offer.
Before I headed out to deep space exploring post 3.3, I amused myself by either supporting the brave freedom fighters that resisted the Evil Galactic Federation, or helping to spread the true light of freedom, prosperity, and culture throughout Human space. I did it along the Hudson/ALD border to support my chosen power, since I don't enjoy combat farming or ABA cargo runs.
Despite only playing around three hours a week on average, my strategy was effective. I would see posts on DD about how a Federation hot spot would dry up, or that someone discovered a new Imperial Hotspot. More surprising to me was the change in state of the Hudson/ALD border, which I've been monitoring via Inara. Apparently, my little one-woman campaign against the Federation kept Hudson's BGS team busy stamping out the brushfires I'd ignite. Either that, or a lot of anti-Hudson/pro-ALD BGS players also decided to quit for greener pastures at the same time I did.
edit:
It's also why I find posts from PvPers who believe they can "defend" a faction they support via PvP so amusing. "Defending" a controlling faction via PvP is functionally identical to attacking a controlling faction via PvP. If the attackers are in any way competent, then they're focusing as much on manipulating faction states as they are influence. The only way you can manipulate a faction's state is by working for them, which also gives them influence... in the short term.
Which is why I felt free to do my BGS work in Open. If I made it to my destination, then the faction I'm attacking gained a little short-term influence (easily mitigated by helping the faction(s) I'm supporting) at the cost of a long-term unfavorable faction state. If I got killed by a PvPer "defending" their faction, then the faction I'm attacking both loses influence, and moves closer to an unfavorable faction state. It's a heads I win, tails you lose worse scenario.
Yeah. Last October, before I embraced the YARR, there was one anarchy system within 50ly of where I was based. Now there are five, not including that one. Four of them were systems that were directly flipped by myself. The other one appears to be a new player group and I should head over and say hi sometime since I honestly thought I was the only active anarchist in the area.It's not random, though. Individual Commanders may be unpredictable, but they're fairly predictable as a group. Far too many players are primarily interested in grinding credits and reputation, and if you manipulate a faction's state, then you also manipulate the types of missions they offer.
Before I headed out to deep space exploring post 3.3, I amused myself by either supporting the brave freedom fighters that resisted the Evil Galactic Federation, or helping to spread the true light of freedom, prosperity, and culture throughout Human space. I did it along the Hudson/ALD border to support my chosen power, since I don't enjoy combat farming or ABA cargo runs.
Despite only playing around three hours a week on average, my strategy was effective. I would see posts on DD about how a Federation hot spot would dry up, or that someone discovered a new Imperial Hotspot. More surprising to me was the change in state of the Hudson/ALD border, which I've been monitoring via Inara. Apparently, my little one-woman campaign against the Federation kept Hudson's BGS team busy stamping out the brushfires I'd ignite. Either that, or a lot of anti-Hudson/pro-ALD BGS players also decided to quit for greener pastures at the same time I did.
edit:
It's also why I find posts from PvPers who believe they can "defend" a faction they support via PvP so amusing. "Defending" a controlling faction via PvP is functionally identical attacking a controlling faction via PvP. If the attackers are in any way competent, then they're focusing as much on manipulating faction states as they are influence. The only way you can manipulate a faction's state is by working for them, which also gives them influence... in the short term.
Which is why I felt free to do my BGS work in Open. If I made it to my destination, then the faction I'm attacking gained a little short-term influence (easily mitigated by helping the faction(s) I'm supporting) at the cost of a long-term unfavorable faction state. If I got killed by a PvPer "defending" their faction, then the faction I'm attacking both loses influence, and moves closer to an unfavorable faction state. It's a heads I win, tails you lose worse scenario.
Well, I agree, but I've never seen anyone saying something like that. What I see more often then not, is that people take ganking for PVP.
I don’t know. I feel like I see a new, “X is attacking our faction, and they’re doing it in solo, so we can’t defend our faction” thread every week.Well, I agree, but I've never seen anyone saying something like that. What I see more often then not, is that people take ganking for PVP.
We work the BGS for our system in open, so others have a chance to keep us from doing that. Hasn't happened till now, but there's hope
Well, with "doing something about it" I actually tried to point to the game play that it might bring forth. Of course PVP itself isn't going to solve all the BGS problems you get presented by the work of other party, of course you have to counter that with work as well. It would just make the game more exciting and less scripted I think.
