A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[Shizuka]

When a state goes pending, it's going to happen. There is a 3 day countdown and during that time I could get it to 13.2 Vs 1 so that when the war starts it's already won but then I will still have to wait out the minimum 3 days of war.

I see, thanks!

We should have a BGS Sub Forum!

 

[Szyslak22]

FYI, I have just had 2 factions go pending war at 7.1% each.

I also have a system where 2 factions have been at 6.8% for 3 days now and no pending war.

Very interesting, thanks. As you know, it's hard to prove the no pending conflict part, because they could be in active or pending conflict elsewhere. But if both factions have an active economic state for a few days after equalizing, then it could be proof that the influence is too low.

 

[CMDR pollycough]

Very interesting, thanks. As you know, it's hard to prove the no pending conflict part, because they could be in active or pending conflict elsewhere. But if both factions have an active economic state for a few days after equalizing, then it could be proof that the influence is too low.

If you can give me the quickest way to cause a bust for the non native and a boom for the native faction, I will spark them. No real estate between them. These 2 have been in and out of war for 2 months now. When 2.1 hit they were at 12.5 each and reduced by 0.8/0.9 per tick until ending at 6.8 each where they have been since.

 

[Pro Cambarus]

When a state goes pending, it's going to happen. There is a 3 day countdown and during that time I could get it to 13.2 Vs 1 so that when the war starts it's already won but then I will still have to wait out the minimum 3 days of war.

When did it exactly happen, because I'm fairly confident that it was not it the last couple of days or after last update. If it was then the BGS is even more erratic and lacks uniformity even more than I expected.

 

[Walter2]

Population doesn't have any effect on the duration of the expansion state, from what I've seen. jimbeau's examples agree with what we've observed so far. Conflict can interrupt active expansion state and release the expansion. If you don't interrupt the expansion state with a conflict, it will run for the full duration. This appears to be 5 - 7 days. At the end of the expansion state the faction will expand.

I've been wondering about the 15% hit that we've been told a faction will take when in expansion and I think I've found it.

We boosted a faction to 79.9% and left it to its own devices. In the last 4 days since the expansion started it's regularly lost 2.5%, which rather implies the expansion will occur on the 6th day when the total lost will be 15% - if the pattern continues.

I imagine most groups will be pushing their faction one way or another during the expansion period so this regular deduction probably gets hidden by other pressures.

 

[jimbeau1571]

So, it took 5 days for expansion to go from pending to active for me, that was 3 days ago. Still in expansion, and anticipating it hitting day 5. Thing is, this is a population of 400m, so I'm starting to wonder if population size has anything to do with how long these things take.

I'd be interested to know the populations of those two systems which expanded Jimbeau.

Sorry for the delay in replying, been away for a few days.

First system is pop 3750
Second system is pop 2.2Million

 

[CMDR pollycough]

When did it exactly happen, because I'm fairly confident that it was not it the last couple of days or after last update. If it was then the BGS is even more erratic and lacks uniformity even more than I expected.

The pending war happened 17/6 @7.1 Each.

I've been wondering about the 15% hit that we've been told a faction will take when in expansion and I think I've found it.

We boosted a faction to 79.9% and left it to its own devices. In the last 4 days since the expansion started it's regularly lost 2.5%, which rather implies the expansion will occur on the 6th day when the total lost will be 15% - if the pattern continues.

I imagine most groups will be pushing their faction one way or another during the expansion period so this regular deduction probably gets hidden by other pressures.

In one of the systems I am monitoring, The controlling faction went into expansion on 12/6 @75.7%, It arrived in it's new system on the 18th with 7.8% and dropped to 60.8% in it's spawn system.

 

[Walter2]

In one of the systems I am monitoring, The controlling faction went into expansion on 12/6 @75.7%, It arrived in it's new system on the 18th with 7.8% and dropped to 60.8% in it's spawn system.

14.9% is good enough for me!

I quite like this new mechanic - it gives greater control and stops the endless cycle of expansion that had to be interrupted by working against your own faction to bring it under control.

I also like the 'expansion to nearest' feature. In the relatively underpopulated region where we work, it's now possible to predict the expansion target with some certainty - very few local systems have more than 5 factions.

 

[Szyslak22]

I agree, it's kinda nice. Certainly less stressful.

We just had an expansion that skipped the nearest system because it already had 7 factions. So that functionality appears to be working as described.

 

[Deathwatch]

Are we completely adamant that during a war no systems can make any influence gains other than the war system.

Also with the lack of mission balance or mission spawns in war systems and other, some factions get no missions for the war while the other they are fighting gets loads.

 

[LAYNOR LUNA LAGOONA]

Hi there,


i was wondering, is that mission ofr hte expansion really work?

you know, when you decide to do a mission to expand in a system and not another?

We recently tested it. it doesn't seem to affect the direction ???

 

[MottiKhan]

Hi there,


i was wondering, is that mission ofr hte expansion really work?

you know, when you decide to do a mission to expand in a system and not another?

We recently tested it. it doesn't seem to affect the direction ???

There has been no known influence of missions on expansion targets.

 

[CMDR pollycough]

FYI, A system I have been monitoring has 2 lower factions in perpetual war. After the last update they eventually ended and then 3 days later started again and have been reducing to the point where today they are at 2.2% each.

 

[Szyslak22]

Are we completely adamant that during a war no systems can make any influence gains other than the war system.

Also with the lack of mission balance or mission spawns in war systems and other, some factions get no missions for the war while the other they are fighting gets loads.

They can still make gains in other systems, but only with combat activities (or by making another faction lose influence). Trade, exploration, non-combat missions seem to do nothing positive. And yes, I've noticed quite an imbalance of combat missions offered in some conflicts. It seems to be in the favor of the faction owning the best asset at stake, but that could just be biased observation or randomness.

 

[tomalus]

Help, in Lembava, two minor factions are at war for days now, and somehow two other factions not involved in the war are changing influence every day despite not being involved in war... Wasnt influence suppose to be locked to only factions at war? BGS is one of the worst cryptic parts of ED and we need 1 person from FDEV just explaining it to people every day.

 

[Walter2]

I've been wondering about the 15% hit that we've been told a faction will take when in expansion and I think I've found it.

We boosted a faction to 79.9% and left it to its own devices. In the last 4 days since the expansion started it's regularly lost 2.5%, which rather implies the expansion will occur on the 6th day when the total lost will be 15% - if the pattern continues.

I imagine most groups will be pushing their faction one way or another during the expansion period so this regular deduction probably gets hidden by other pressures.

Our faction jumped into the new system two days earlier than expected and lost only 10% at the jumping off point. But they did land in the predicted system.

Are we completely adamant that during a war no systems can make any influence gains other than the war system.

Since 2.1 went live we have seen factions change ratings in response to actions outside a conflict. Another faction coming into or leaving the system redistributes the points - and possibly other actions also - but the effect on any two factions in conflict seems to be equalised so that neither party benefits. So far FD has been reluctant to comment.

Certainly, violent missions on behalf of one or other faction in conflict should change the distribution.

 

[goemon]

Help, in Lembava, two minor factions are at war for days now, and somehow two other factions not involved in the war are changing influence every day despite not being involved in war... Wasnt influence suppose to be locked to only factions at war? BGS is one of the worst cryptic parts of ED and we need 1 person from FDEV just explaining it to people every day.

influence gain/losses are locked between the two factions at war (e.g.: they can gain/loose influence only from the other one, and all influence losses of other factions are retributed the normal way), but factions not at war can gain/loose influence like normal (with effects of their state).

exampel: you have factions A,B,C,D. A is in war with B. you run combat missions for A, A increases its influence for 4%, which are only taken from faction B. you also run a lot of missions for faction D. D increases its influence for 10%. those 10% are taken from teh other faction in relation to their influence.

look at it like a cake. it is every tick about how the cake is shared between all factions in system. but factions at war are fighting about one slice of the cake, and who gets the most of it.

___

the backgroundsimulation is a blackbox by design. some like that, other don't, but FDEVs last statement on this (during BGS livestream) was they don't plan to change that. most we know about the backgroundsimulation we know due to the hard work of groups and single commanders to understand the blackbox.

 

[tomalus]

influence gain/losses are locked between the two factions at war (e.g.: they can gain/loose influence only from the other one, and all influence losses of other factions are retributed the normal way), but factions not at war can gain/loose influence like normal (with effects of their state).

exampel: you have factions A,B,C,D. A is in war with B. you run combat missions for A, A increases its influence for 4%, which are only taken from faction B. you also run a lot of missions for faction D. D increases its influence for 10%. those 10% are taken from teh other faction in relation to their influence.

look at it like a cake. it is every tick about how the cake is shared between all factions in system. but factions at war are fighting about one slice of the cake, and who gets the most of it.

Thanks for clarification, and one more thing can my minor faction wich is 40% trigger a civil war with another faction wich is at 43% while those other two factions have their war or can there be only one war active in any system?

 

[Szyslak22]

influence gain/losses are locked between the two factions at war (e.g.: they can gain/loose influence only from the other one, and all influence losses of other factions are retributed the normal way), but factions not at war can gain/loose influence like normal (with effects of their state).

exampel: you have factions A,B,C,D. A is in war with B. you run combat missions for A, A increases its influence for 4%, which are only taken from faction B. you also run a lot of missions for faction D. D increases its influence for 10%. those 10% are taken from teh other faction in relation to their influence.

look at it like a cake. it is every tick about how the cake is shared between all factions in system. but factions at war are fighting about one slice of the cake, and who gets the most of it.

That's how it was working in 2.0, but since 2.1 the influence is not locked between factions in conflict. FD has yet to respond about whether this is a bug or an intended change.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Thanks for clarification, and one more thing can my minor faction wich is 40% trigger a civil war with another faction wich is at 43% while those other two factions have their war or can there be only one war active in any system?

There can be multiple conflicts in one system. So yes, you could start another civil war as long as neither of the factions are in conflict in another system.

 

[goemon]

That's how it was working in 2.0, but since 2.1 the influence is not locked between factions in conflict. FD has yet to respond about whether this is a bug or an intended change.

what i see atm:

- factions in conflict loose influence, if nothing is done. that influence is given to other factions in relation to their influence.

- factions in conflict gain influence of all factions in system.

correct?