A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[TheoZ]

Hey guys, I browsed through a lot of pages in this thread but didn't find what I was looking for, so here is my question to the BGS specialists:


Does rare trading affect effectively any influence change in a boom-state minor faction? Or is it considered to be a normal commodity in terms of influence change?

Thanks.

 

[goemon]

Hey guys, I browsed through a lot of pages in this thread but didn't find what I was looking for, so here is my question to the BGS specialists:


Does rare trading affect effectively any influence change in a boom-state minor faction? Or is it considered to be a normal commodity in terms of influence change?

Thanks.

no extra. after the just solved 1T-bug (you can read up on the last pages), i think nobody can give you an answer, in which relation number of tons and profit and demand are measured atm. reputation is connected to profit. so my guess would be: if you have a good source of rare goods in an acceptable distance, it might have a similar effect as buldktrading. obviously this is only referring to people not flying bulktraders like t9/anaconda/cutter . I'd suggest going the high value goods road there. (estimating the math: rare commodities profit cap out at 16-25 k/profit/t, and most of them come in smaller amounts, while you should be able to find a commodity with 1000-1500+ cr/t/profit, so trading the boom away only looking at profit will always be better with 100+ t cargo space).

 

[Abil Midena]

So, I didn't get to do as much as I wanted to tonight. I did one simple 100t cargo run at 200cr/t profit in a system which is generally very low traffic (300k ls to the station, and it's just a single tiny outpost), and a run of 100t cargo at 515cr/t to a 4mil pop system.

Results are inconclusive. I gained 2% influence in the small system with 200cr/t profit, lost 1% in the 4m pop system. The 4m system is more frequented, though not much. It's all quite inconclusive. It's hard for me to test at the moment, I'm on a very strict timeline trying to kick a war off right now, as my time is about to become quite limited.

If i can sneak in some better tests with higher volumes, I'll let you know what I can find.

Thanks man, do what you can.

I just felt before the 1t thing, that trading was not a way to cause inf changes. I feel like we're back to that state. Maybe there is a pop level cut off where trading makes little/no sense as a method to cause inf change. This is most important in systems where your faction has low inf and the BGS doesn't feel like giving you any missions to do.

 

[TheoZ]

no extra. after the just solved 1T-bug (you can read up on the last pages), i think nobody can give you an answer, in which relation number of tons and profit and demand are measured atm. reputation is connected to profit. so my guess would be: if you have a good source of rare goods in an acceptable distance, it might have a similar effect as buldktrading. obviously this is only referring to people not flying bulktraders like t9/anaconda/cutter . I'd suggest going the high value goods road there. (estimating the math: rare commodities profit cap out at 16-25 k/profit/t, and most of them come in smaller amounts, while you should be able to find a commodity with 1000-1500+ cr/t/profit, so trading the boom away only looking at profit will always be better with 100+ t cargo space).

Oh thanks for your response.....Hey, could you talk to the Fdevs so that they let us know of the side server changes, and give us some more info concerning the current mechanics of the BGS...I know that there were some basic guidelines given around a month ago, but they seemed to be very "basic" (very helpful too, no offence, but still basic) stuff.

 

[goemon]

Oh thanks for your response.....Hey, could you talk to the Fdevs so that they let us know of the side server changes, and give us some more info concerning the current mechanics of the BGS...I know that there were some basic guidelines given around a month ago, but they seemed to be very "basic" (very helpful too, no offence, but still basic) stuff.

we as volunterring moderators don't have any special channels to the developers. we are players as everyone else here. i personally do believe, FDEV like the bgs as a blackbox. we will see what 2.1. brings in clarity.

 

[CMDR pollycough]

Good day.
How far apart do you have to keep 2 rivals to avoid any chance of a war? How equal is equal?.
Also is there a sliding scale somewhere that could give me an idea how different population figures effect things?.

 

[Jmanis]

Thanks man, do what you can.

I just felt before the 1t thing, that trading was not a way to cause inf changes. I feel like we're back to that state. Maybe there is a pop level cut off where trading makes little/no sense as a method to cause inf change. This is most important in systems where your faction has low inf and the BGS doesn't feel like giving you any missions to do.

The biggest problem I have right now is the most ideal systems to test in are those with only outposts (low population = more noticable effects), so I can't duck off and get a Clipper on the cheap to do the same job because it's large.

Ideally I'd want to try testing a small pop system with 500t of goods, 1000t preferred. I still think the black market might have the most damaging effect at the moment,, but yeah, it'd be preferred if normal trading got "boosted"

 

[Belthize]

The biggest problem I have right now is the most ideal systems to test in are those with only outposts (low population = more noticable effects), so I can't duck off and get a Clipper on the cheap to do the same job because it's large.

Ideally I'd want to try testing a small pop system with 500t of goods, 1000t preferred. I still think the black market might have the most damaging effect at the moment,, but yeah, it'd be preferred if normal trading got "boosted"

Yep. I have a system right next to my adopted one with two small orbital science type stations. System pop is about 10K and there's zero traffic. I'm the only person who ever visits it. It's a perfect laboratory.

I agree that trade as it is (and was for single bulk trades) is a bit low in terms of influence impact compared to other actions. On the other hand the 1ton transaction thing made it hands down, not even close, the most effective influence change mechanism if you had 100T or more capacity. A T9 could really swing a few million pop system if you had the patience to sit and click. Hopefully they'll turn the trade dial from '1' to '3' or something.

I'm *very* suspicious that exploration data worked and possibly still works the same way as the one ton trades did. Turning in one page at a time vs all the pages at once will give more influence. It is (or was if they changed it when they fixed trades) transaction based too.

I got a tad frustrated by the whole thing so I've headed out to the Rift for a week or two. I'm going to bring back the Thargoid fleet and see what they can do to system influence

 

[Perseus]

Sorry if this info is buried in the thread but I hope someone can answer:
Is the Boom state interrupted by a war? In particular, if the Boom was initiated in another system and the war is started in another (expanded) system.
Also, how are Booms stopped or made to end? My understanding is the faction in Boom has an amount to spend but I was hoping there might be a way to end the state with missions or actions.

 

[goemon]

Sorry if this info is buried in the thread but I hope someone can answer:
Is the Boom state interrupted by a war? In particular, if the Boom was initiated in another system and the war is started in another (expanded) system.
Also, how are Booms stopped or made to end? My understanding is the faction in Boom has an amount to spend but I was hoping there might be a way to end the state with missions or actions.

- yes, a war/civil war/election in any system will interrupt any boom of that faction elsewhere. just have in mind, it also interrupts any expansion. triggering a war is a very good tool to get rid of boom

- most missions to prolong the boom, if we believe in what ui is showing. so basically you can "trade out" the boom (there are people in this thread claiming, this is hard to proof, though, and they are right!), e.g. by buying and selling high value goods/ lots of profits etc. also delivering to seeking luxuries i assume.

 

[Perseus]

- yes, a war/civil war/election in any system will interrupt any boom of that faction elsewhere. just have in ming, it also interrupts any expansion. triggering a war is a very good tool to get rid of boom
- most missions to prolong the boom, if we believe in what ui is showing. so basically you can "trade out" the boom (there are people in this thread claiming, this is hard to proof, though, and they are right!), e.g. by buying and selling high value goods/ lots of profits etc. also delivering to seeking luxuries i assume.

Thank you!

 

[jimbeau1571]

- yes, a war/civil war/election in any system will interrupt any boom of that faction elsewhere. just have in ming, it also interrupts any expansion. triggering a war is a very good tool to get rid of boom
- most missions to prolong the boom, if we believe in what ui is showing. so basically you can "trade out" the boom (there are people in this thread claiming, this is hard to proof, though, and they are right!), e.g. by buying and selling high value goods/ lots of profits etc. also delivering to seeking luxuries i assume.

So doing trade type missions prolongs a Boom?

 

[goemon]

So doing trade type missions prolongs a Boom?

in most cases, i think yes (hard to test. but 80% of all trading missions, including mining missions, contract deliveries etc. have an arrow up for boom even during a boom).

 

[goemon]

i'm at the very moment setting up a BGS tracking google form (which i will share here as a template, if some player/groups want to use it).

am i right in the assumption, that you can have only 1 revovering state, and only 2 pending states per minor faction per system (at least shown?)?

 

[jimbeau1571]

This 'Boom' money pot just makes no sense to me, and the mechanics of it I don't think we have fully understood as yet.

Here's my confusion/lack of understanding:

You've got this pot to fill, of unknown value (therefore we have no real idea if what we assume to be happening is true, as we can't possibly relate it to anything).
Now this pot is tied to the faction, not the Cmdr. So therefore in order to fill that pot, the faction needs to be making the profits, not the Cmdr.
So by buying and selling high value goods you might not actually be filling the pot ie ... market sells a good at 5000/t (its highest value selling item), buys in a good at 12000/t (its highest value buying item). You trade on that at 200t at a time. So you payout 1,000,000, but then receive 2,400,000 in the return transaction. So the Faction actually makes a net loss. Now if missions do prolong the Boom (given the up arrow as was mentioned), then this would be correct. As the faction is paying out money, not receiving it. Another net loss.
So I would propose the best way to fill the pot would be to just buy from a market, and possibly just the highest valued good even if that means you the Cmdr make a loss. Or at least buy high value goods from the market, and sell the lowest valued goods, regardless of demand. But then that assumes that the goods demanded has no influence. And if that is so, then why the hell list them on the system page.

Or is it just a case of buying/selling is merely a value. Thatwould mean its just purely a transaction pot and not a profits pot, and using the example above would mean a transaction of 3,400,000. But once again not knowing the size of the pot, how the hell are you meant to know how much is needed and what is right?

Edit: Given the recent discussion about 1t transactions, a transaction pot may just be the correct line of thinking.

 

[goemon]

Edit: Given the recent discussion about 1t transactions, a transaction pot may just be the correct line of thinking.

this, or a transaction*value*x pot. in that case buying high value goods, and selling high value goods would take away from the pot (i think it's emptying the pot, not filing it --- but this doesn't really make a difference).

 

[jimbeau1571]

this, or a transaction*value*x pot. in that case buying high value goods, and selling high value goods would take away from the pot (i think it's emptying the pot, not filing it --- but this doesn't really make a difference).

I think you may misunderstand what I was meaning by 'transaction pot'.
The pot size is 50,000,000 for example.
You buy 200t at 2,000,000. Pot now 48,000,000
You go and sell that elsewhere, then return with another 200t of stuff, 1 good or 20t different goods, makes no odds. You sell that stuff at 4,000,000.
If a profit pot, the pot now stands at 52,000,000. If a transaction pot, it now stands at 44,000,000.

Now that is 2 different ball parks entirely!

 

[Hermodt]

[...]
am i right in the assumption, that you can have only 1 revovering state, and only 2 pending states per minor faction per system (at least shown?)?

I allready saw 2 recovering and 4 pending states at once. Even more should be possible.

 

[Perseus]

Another question, if I may?
If a War state is pending (it is now), can I start to effect/change influence values prior to commencement of hostilities without changing the WAR PENDING state? Basically, I think once a (conflict) state is pending then no actions can prevent it but influence values can still be changed.

Am I right to think this?

 

[Szyslak22]

Another question, if I may?
If a War state is pending (it is now), can I start to effect/change influence values prior to commencement of hostilities without changing the WAR PENDING state? Basically, I think once a (conflict) state is pending then no actions can prevent it but influence values can still be changed.

Am I right to think this?

Yes, you have it correct.