+++ as of odyssey update 10, this thread is outdated. +++
see https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/update-10-odyssey-and-horizons.597956/#post-9713547
This thread details the influence effect of trading at a factions market after FC update. It is a follow up to this outdated thread: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/bgs-trading-for-influence.357715/
CMDR DaddaTheButt of Canonn research and me teamed up to revisit trading for influence. Total testsample was 67 trade runs without interference. Thanks to the BGS-Chat of Canonn and Dommaarraa, who blind tested some values.
I have also added a “How to test” for each fancy graph below, so you can see for yourself:
one definition up front:
(influence-) “gain”/”gross”
So, which elements of a trade do affect influence?
Not: Source
There has been some discussion, whether source of a commodity has an influence effect. the idea here is, that buying a commodity from different markets has an effect on influence gain, while buying different commodities from the same market has no influence effect. Well...
fig.1
How to test:
Not: Total profit
There has been some discussion, whether total profit determines influence effect. It does not:
fig.2
- Total profit has no direct influence effect.
How to test:
So, if it is not source nor total profit, what is it?
Profit per ton
Profit per ton is one metric for influence effect. As you can see, profit per ton is pretty straight forward. Inflöuence gain increases, until it caps out ~2000 cr/t.
fig. 3
How to test:
Tonnage
The effect of tonnage (here with >2000 cr/t profit) has an interesting shape:
fig.4
How to test:
If you combine “Profit per ton” and “tonnage”, it explains, why selling smaller batches of different commodities doesn’t yield extra influence. You first have to cap out the tonnage effect.
Effect of Population
This was something i wanted to test since forever. How effects population influence gain by trade. Turns out it doesn’t:
fig.5
Taking this excellent thread of Jane Turner on maximum influence change (which we didn't retest) https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/influence-caps-gains-and-the-wine-analogy.423837/, calculating that maximum influence change for a faction at 0.99% as 36-log2(Population), and calculating with that maximum gain at current influence as above ... - here is the percentage of Max Influence Change for the same trade in two different sized populations:
fig. 6
This surprised us a lot. It leads to the contra-intuitive clue, that you need more trade(s) in small population systems, until you hit the cap.
How to test:
Demand
Demand still has no direct effect on influence gain.
fig. 7
Cave-eat
- small tonnage sells (<50t) have always the same influence effect, or non. Those minimum influence gains are not additive if sold at the same docking. Here is a scatter plot of 1-50t:
fig. 8
Take aways
- The current implementation leads to large trading ships having a function. Basically you should take ~150t of the most proftable commodity, and add a second one, until you reach ~150t again. That means, in a conda you gonna trade 150+150+100t, in a cutter 3x150t+1x210t, and in a T9 4x150t+120t. This also makes surface ports with markets valueable assets.
fig. 9
- For outpost trading, you simply bring the most profitable commodity. I have upped my BGS python from 128T cargo to 160t cargo in reaction to this test.
see https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/update-10-odyssey-and-horizons.597956/#post-9713547
This thread details the influence effect of trading at a factions market after FC update. It is a follow up to this outdated thread: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/bgs-trading-for-influence.357715/
CMDR DaddaTheButt of Canonn research and me teamed up to revisit trading for influence. Total testsample was 67 trade runs without interference. Thanks to the BGS-Chat of Canonn and Dommaarraa, who blind tested some values.
I have also added a “How to test” for each fancy graph below, so you can see for yourself:
- all tests have been conducted in no-traffic systems; tests where traffic was reported were discarded and repeated.
- it’s better to test on low influence levels, as rounding occurs
- it’s complicated to test low influence gains, as rounding occurs
one definition up front:
(influence-) “gain”/”gross”
refers to the gain of influence before the actual influence is taken into account. It allows to compare the effect of an action for a faction e.g. at 35% influence and the same action at 55% influence. i used to call this “raw influence gain” in the outdated thread, but Dadda made a reasoning to call it gross or simply gain, so for now it’s “g”. The original concept is of coatsilver 2015, and was crucial predicting the effect of superpower bounties patch 2017 (https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...-mechanic-and-bountyhunting-after-2-3.346177/) .
For calculating the effect of a faction on a single faction without any other action in system, we went with that well established
n : New_influence_delta
i: Old_Influence
g: gross, gain
n=(i+g)/(100+g)
transformed that’s
g=(100(i+n)-100i)/(100-(i+n))
For calculating the effect of a faction on a single faction without any other action in system, we went with that well established
n : New_influence_delta
i: Old_Influence
g: gross, gain
n=(i+g)/(100+g)
transformed that’s
g=(100(i+n)-100i)/(100-(i+n))
Not: Source
There has been some discussion, whether source of a commodity has an influence effect. the idea here is, that buying a commodity from different markets has an effect on influence gain, while buying different commodities from the same market has no influence effect. Well...
fig.1
- Source has no effect.
- Different commoditioes have an effect, even if bought from the same market.
How to test:
- Buy 2x >150T of the same most profitable commodity from different markets and sell it
- Next tick: Buy the same total tonnage from only 1 source, sell it, compare
- Next tick: Buy two different same profitable commodities from same market, and sell it, compare.
Not: Total profit
There has been some discussion, whether total profit determines influence effect. It does not:
fig.2
- Total profit has no direct influence effect.
How to test:
- Buy 100t of a high profit commodity, sell
- Next Tick: Buy significant more t of a commodity, which you can sell for the same total profit.
- Next Tick: Buy significant more t of a commodity, which you can sell for the same total profit.
So, if it is not source nor total profit, what is it?
Profit per ton
Profit per ton is one metric for influence effect. As you can see, profit per ton is pretty straight forward. Inflöuence gain increases, until it caps out ~2000 cr/t.
fig. 3
How to test:
- Sell the same tonnage of >180t with increasing profit/t each tick
Tonnage
The effect of tonnage (here with >2000 cr/t profit) has an interesting shape:
fig.4
How to test:
- Sell increasing tonnage each tick with >2000 cr/t profit
If you combine “Profit per ton” and “tonnage”, it explains, why selling smaller batches of different commodities doesn’t yield extra influence. You first have to cap out the tonnage effect.
Effect of Population
This was something i wanted to test since forever. How effects population influence gain by trade. Turns out it doesn’t:
fig.5
Taking this excellent thread of Jane Turner on maximum influence change (which we didn't retest) https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/influence-caps-gains-and-the-wine-analogy.423837/, calculating that maximum influence change for a faction at 0.99% as 36-log2(Population), and calculating with that maximum gain at current influence as above ... - here is the percentage of Max Influence Change for the same trade in two different sized populations:
fig. 6
This surprised us a lot. It leads to the contra-intuitive clue, that you need more trade(s) in small population systems, until you hit the cap.
How to test:
- Trade at two different population sized systems the same; compare.
Demand
Demand still has no direct effect on influence gain.
fig. 7
Cave-eat
- small tonnage sells (<50t) have always the same influence effect, or non. Those minimum influence gains are not additive if sold at the same docking. Here is a scatter plot of 1-50t:
fig. 8
Take aways
- The current implementation leads to large trading ships having a function. Basically you should take ~150t of the most proftable commodity, and add a second one, until you reach ~150t again. That means, in a conda you gonna trade 150+150+100t, in a cutter 3x150t+1x210t, and in a T9 4x150t+120t. This also makes surface ports with markets valueable assets.
fig. 9
- For outpost trading, you simply bring the most profitable commodity. I have upped my BGS python from 128T cargo to 160t cargo in reaction to this test.
Last edited:
Sorry to make more work for you.
