Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Moved to Lore and Roleplay, where this thread belongs....
Open BGS in Colonia
- Thread starter Pristine_Bump
- Start date
Yes and no.
In BGS terms, which is what this part of the forum is about, if it keeps going like this it will be over in at most two months. One month is more likely on current trends.
In an overall animosity sense, this can and will go on forever. I don't see any likelihood of a treaty in this one and there are plenty of conflicts in the bubble that have gone on for the full lifetime of the game.
What I was talking about was pure BGS terms
And sorry Robert, I was trying to keep this purely BGS related...obviously not well enough
and SEPP (~EN) 0,28 mio points with i don't know how many pilots.
that's more like it!
a few points:
1. yes, a retreat is hard to manage, more so if opposed. but the tactic on display's charme in this thread you were referring to as "staggering lack of BGS understanding" is, as far as i understand, not depending on retreats to happen or not. as long as EN don't manage to retreat all other factions from all the systems they are in (which is only a theoretical possibility), there are proxy wars promised (which might happen or not, whoever leaves first). so, retreating one side over the last months is neither a win or loss. it hopefully is a reason for roleplaying fun (we have removed the anarchy pirates from a system! now pirates from a cooperative spawn!).
2. the idea of splitting assets between factions and bind controlling factions into conflicts to block a system control conflict to happen is a good one (we basically use assets to bind 2nd and 3rd into conflicts if necessary - nothing is harder to manage than a system with only one asset holder imho) - but it is no answer imho to the challenge to manage conflicts in all other systems. might be that the one side will "never" win back the shipyard, but that does not resolve the wars in all other systems. And all those wars need to be managed, if the other side circles through them - you can't wait for it simply ending by a draw.
3. you lay out the asset splitting tactic as "low maintenance"-mode (which it probably might be). but it speaks itself of trying to reduce the management load. if i'd be on the other side, i'd read that as a good sign (they don't have the ongoing ressources!).
think the idea here is by blocking one side from gaining control of the shipyard, they'll give up at some point. They might or might not.
The tactic laid out in this thread basically is: we don't play your game, you can gain the station and system, we will run havoc everywhere else where you are concerned. sounds to me like a typical underdog/asymmetric warfare tactic. What's the alternative for them?
4. none of your post adresses the collateral damage Ian D brought up, for exampel 2+ wars in Ceous. Will Civitas Dei also manage that conflict?
5. i think the whole discussion got a new level now - but i think it is important to take away, that there is no winning condition defined in the BGS. Which means - no conflict between players can be resolved by BGS.
Well yes of course they are moving to assymetric warfare. I just don't see how that is going to work out. They are obviously outnumbered or they would have been able to avoid the retreats and would not need to rely on PR to get recruits. So the tactic now is to spread themselves thin and move to guerilla warfare? I just don't see how that will work. Most likely outcome imo is that it's the guerillas who get tired first because they don't have much effect. Prove me wrong I guess. Happy to be wrong, but I've been in that situation in this game. It gets boring fast.
On the general point of there is no winning in the BGS and what Ian is saying, sure, I completely agree. I do not think the animosity/emnity side of this will ever end and in that sense it will NEVER be over. However, in pure BGS terms, this is a walk-over.
What I was trying to point out with my original post is that if Reapers think that this BGS strategy will reap dividends (no pun intended), my advice is to rethink it. They have been outplayed in the BGS and guerilla tactics are not great in the BGS. I really do not see how this current strategy on display will sustain this conflict for the long term in any meaningful BGS sense. Time will tell I guess
On the general point of there is no winning in the BGS and what Ian is saying, sure, I completely agree. I do not think the animosity/emnity side of this will ever end and in that sense it will NEVER be over. However, in pure BGS terms, this is a walk-over.
What I was trying to point out with my original post is that if Reapers think that this BGS strategy will reap dividends (no pun intended), my advice is to rethink it. They have been outplayed in the BGS and guerilla tactics are not great in the BGS. I really do not see how this current strategy on display will sustain this conflict for the long term in any meaningful BGS sense. Time will tell I guess
Ratkatcher retorts:
Obviously....
Thank you for your observation, we never noticed...
Ok so Mr. Ratcatcher,
Do you think that guerilla tactics are going to work given the BGS scenarios I have outlined?
Explainer, i really would like you to put up more of BGS fight. This conflict has so much potential but what you are offering is garbage. Take the fight to them PROPERLY. PR alone didn't cut it before. It won't cut it in future. Spreading yourselves thin will not work since you could not make it work when you were concentrated into one system before. There are other ways.
Do you think that guerilla tactics are going to work given the BGS scenarios I have outlined?
Explainer, i really would like you to put up more of BGS fight. This conflict has so much potential but what you are offering is garbage. Take the fight to them PROPERLY. PR alone didn't cut it before. It won't cut it in future. Spreading yourselves thin will not work since you could not make it work when you were concentrated into one system before. There are other ways.
Dunno, I'm not exactly doing much BGS stuff as it is boring as heck... Ask someone involved...
I was pointing out that your comment was utterly hilarious... A squadron with less than a dozen active players against exactly how many, hundreds? Seems a bit like that "sledgehammer meet nut" scenario to me - and I don't waste my time on anything that bores me, not at my age!
ETA: Don't let my comment prevent you from posting the stuff you are so involved with, someone will come along who is active or interested with whom you can measure against...
Last edited:
Fair enough. Forgive me, I assumed you were part of Reapers given your reply.
I doubt it's hundreds. One competent BGS player can maintain 20 systems without opposition easily. Ten competent BGS players can maintain hundreds of systems with opposition. Reapers have said they have 7-10 players. Given the data, I suspect the opposition has around 20-30. If they really have hundreds, this is not even a discussion. They would never lose.
In fact, if they had hundreds, the entire galaxy had better watch out. I think any BGS group in the game would kill for 100 competent BGS players
I doubt it's hundreds. One competent BGS player can maintain 20 systems without opposition easily. Ten competent BGS players can maintain hundreds of systems with opposition. Reapers have said they have 7-10 players. Given the data, I suspect the opposition has around 20-30. If they really have hundreds, this is not even a discussion. They would never lose.
In fact, if they had hundreds, the entire galaxy had better watch out. I think any BGS group in the game would kill for 100 competent BGS players
Who says they're spreading themselves thin?
One of my accounts, Ratkatcher, is certainly in the squadron - so you are not incorrect.
The 100's comment wasn't referring to that number of competent BGS players - but it is common knowledge that the AAA have been guided by an acknowledged expert, Jane Turner, so there potentially could be 100's of 'grunts' following explicit instructions...
My response above covers all 4 accounts I play - if something is boring it won't be done by me in any guise
No forgiveness required.
Last edited:
Do we look like folk with a plan?
You look like folk with a bad plan
please share a good plan for this scenario! i'm most interested! (pristine_bump made this thread to do bgs in open!)
what would you do?
Thats good
Yeah, often when i interview a new crew member they mention it .But the way they tell it, they won the battle of Lugh.
Well, tough nut to crack but I'll give it a go. They are not in the best starting position. Outnumbered, need BGS coaching, facing multiple enemies.
For starters, their entire campaign has been built around that shipyard so retaking it as a service to the community, based on their PR, would be paramount. What they need is numbers. Decent BGS players willing to stay the course and fight for that shipyard. Without the numbers on their side to actually win that they don't stand a chance.
In terms of taking the fight to the enemy, spreading out and attacking everyone at once is a bad idea given they are outnumbered. If it was me, I would concentrate all of my forces into a specific target. Hammer that target relentlessly until you achieve your goal and then move on to the next target. If you get it, with less numbers, you have a huge PR victory. "We beat them and were outnumbered 3:1 - come fight for winnners" or whatever.
Defend their faction is my main point. Moving to am attacking strategy with low numbers and low likelihood of success is less likely to recruit new players to the cause than fighting a valiant defence. They need to find a way to defend with a minimum of effort while taking any extra effort to attacking. Grind out the small wins and keep the rest equal. That way they lose nothing and maybe gain momentum. Get momentum and maybe they can get a big win.
In BGS terms, they are up against it now. 2 weeks ago this was still all open, but now, this is a really big job.
Either that or sue for peace. Try to salvage something (doubt it will happen and would be a sad ending).
You know, thinking about it, if there is any lesson to learn from this whole situation it is this:
Don't make too many enemies at the same time. Eventually they'll gang up on you.
Don't make too many enemies at the same time. Eventually they'll gang up on you.