What I trust Jane, is the local news. I see no evidence of an extra tick, and plausible reasons why the evidence you have provided may be misleading.
Increased volatility in the BGS -runaway leaders many retreats
- Thread starter Jane Turner
- Start date
What I trust Jane, is the local news. I see no evidence of an extra tick, and plausible reasons why the evidence you have provided may be misleading.
I'm currently docked at Ejeta City in T'iensei, in a Dolphin (in case you track local traffic).
I see a war for system control has just ended, it doesn't say how many days won (as is normal).
Looking at the inara page for this system it looks like it isn't updated every day, but this just ended war appears to have started (gone pending) on the 27th June, and ended today which does line up with your thinking that only two actual fighting days happened, but inara also says the war result was 4:0.
This is actual evidence rather than just asking someone to trust you Jane
So what you have found here is a bug, and not universal behaviour that happened across the whole game map. It is possible of course that the two examples I gave were the only ones that happened as expected, we cannot rule that out.
I see a war for system control has just ended, it doesn't say how many days won (as is normal).
Looking at the inara page for this system it looks like it isn't updated every day, but this just ended war appears to have started (gone pending) on the 27th June, and ended today which does line up with your thinking that only two actual fighting days happened, but inara also says the war result was 4:0.
This is actual evidence rather than just asking someone to trust you Jane
So what you have found here is a bug, and not universal behaviour that happened across the whole game map. It is possible of course that the two examples I gave were the only ones that happened as expected, we cannot rule that out.
I'm unable to see any evidence of a double tick in the systems I monitor. I did have unexpectedly large movement in a single system but this could easily be explained by a random passerby dropping data or whichever. The conflicts I am monitoring all had expected results, although to be fair none were in a 2-0 situation. I have no reason to suspect Jane is incorrect about a specific system, but I don't see evidence of a double tick everywhere.
Jane Turner
Volunteer Moderator
I don't recall suggesting it was universal, that was your assumption... just that a war that I personally fought in on [0-0] 28th, [1-0] 29th and last night went from [2:0] (initially checked in the faction update) to 4:0 between around midnight last night, and this morning. This was one of 5 conflicts out of 60 I am currently tracking that has ended a day earlier than expected. I'm capable of making the occasional error in 1500 faction/systems that I'm tracking - but our bot backed me up on this one. This is days won.... updated every 10 mins.
You suggested it here:
That's where you suggested it Jane, and my assumption that you implied it was universal was a reasonable one to make, and one I had pretty solid evidence against. I presented my evidence, I then also spent some time trying to verify yours when you could have done so yourself it seems.
You have found a bug, or possibly new intended behaviour. Not a double-tick, in effect or otherwise because that would apply to all systems. By happy coincidence one of the wars in Helios also started on the 27th and currently stands at 2:0.
Jane Turner
Volunteer Moderator
some strange effects of states ticking out of sync with influence and multiply may be to blame, otherwise it might be that you are already under the minium number of factions to trigger retreat in a system
we have 7 factions in the system counting ours, so I imagine it will be another problem that is causing it not to retreat.
this is the system -> https://inara.cz/galaxy-starsystem/6829/
How long have you been in the system for? There is a minimum of about 10 days after expansion in which retreat can't start.
Jane Turner
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed not
our faction expanded on the 22 june, so then it will be this that is happening. thank you we'll wait for tomorrow's tick.
we thought it was 7 days up after an expansion so we could retreat it
thank you all.
Retreats usually take 7 days from initiation (1 day pending, 6 active) which is probably where the confusion comes from. Even without the expansion cooldown state your faction has not been in a retreat state long enough yet.
For a quick overview of the size of the shakeup the 3.7 patch caused...
Over double the previous weekly peak, and over four times as much as a typical peak, in terms of retreats.
Ignoring the early expansion-heavy days (when a lot of systems were added with 2 or 3 factions for near-unavoidable early expansions) over twice the recent peak in terms of expansions, too.
In general a drop from ~5.6 factions/system to ~5.1 factions/system.
Other noticeable if less dramatic shakeups on the graph:
- 3.3 multistate causes an immediate increase in the number of successful retreats, but in the slightly longer term also boosts expansion rates
- the invasion bug fix in mid-3305 finally lets the average factions/system stabilise
- the addition of the Retreat tax in the 3.6 release (January 3306) boosts the retreat rate over the expansion rate for the first time in quite a while
Over double the previous weekly peak, and over four times as much as a typical peak, in terms of retreats.
Ignoring the early expansion-heavy days (when a lot of systems were added with 2 or 3 factions for near-unavoidable early expansions) over twice the recent peak in terms of expansions, too.
In general a drop from ~5.6 factions/system to ~5.1 factions/system.
Other noticeable if less dramatic shakeups on the graph:
- 3.3 multistate causes an immediate increase in the number of successful retreats, but in the slightly longer term also boosts expansion rates
- the invasion bug fix in mid-3305 finally lets the average factions/system stabilise
- the addition of the Retreat tax in the 3.6 release (January 3306) boosts the retreat rate over the expansion rate for the first time in quite a while
I ran into a weird situation where a faction, that previously owned both assets in a system but was tied in a war for second place, is now in third having evidently lost said war but they still control both assets. There's basically little to no traffic in the system and most likely none on the day the war ended, it's just weird.
There's no anarchies present so I wasn't really paying attention to it too much. Are there any other systems besides the likes of shinrarta where a faction can't lose assets?
There's no anarchies present so I wasn't really paying attention to it too much. Are there any other systems besides the likes of shinrarta where a faction can't lose assets?
Sorry to state the bleedin obvious, but has someone actually checked ? 3rd Party data wont update asset ownership unless someone running some software docks.
Yeah, went there myself and the outpost is still under the control of the losing faction. It's a prison colony if that makes any difference.
If the war ended in a draw, that sounds like normal behavior.
Jane Turner
Volunteer Moderator
That's fabulous Ian
Likely also coupled with one of the newer states that either give passive negative or positive influence.
While traveling last night, I noticed a system with a civil war but the 2 MFs had different INF%. I think I saw this prior to the current BGS oddities too but not sure when this became a thing. I thought INF%s stay equal throughout the conflict. How does one MF get a lead in the conflict?