A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[Fire Dragon]

Because the pending period had finished. Once the state has gone pending (75% needed for pending for Expansion), you can then expand regardless of what % you are at when the expansion starts. Be that as much as 99% or as little as 1%, although those figures are rather unlikely!

Once a state goes pending, its going to happen. At some point.
In Conflict states, once pending you can push it through the 5% or 3% needed prior to it going active and have it won without having to use the CZ.

When I said expanding, I should have been clearer. We went into pending expansion tonight, at 74.4%

Is the % calculated on going, through out the day, so it could have been over 75 at some point in the day to trigger it but we would never have known?

Also we went over 60% (73%) to trigger the war yesterday, and apparently we never went into pending war, just stayed in boom, then into p. expansion today. Weird

 

[Gemai]

When I said expanding, I should have been clearer. We went into pending expansion tonight, at 74.4%

Is the % calculated on going, through out the day, so it could have been over 75 at some point in the day to trigger it but we would never have known?

Since we don't know the order of all BGS actions going on - Hyperexpansion etc. patched out now - there is a distinct possibility you were above 75% during a % check for states, yes.

 

[jimbeau1571]

This really looks like yet another map bug to me.

If it did, I expect PP players would have noticed.

Gemai,

Our alliance faction sometimes shows up as federation - imagine the shame of it! the Galmap, and the info upon jump are notoriously bugged.

I'm with these on this. Galmap bug. I still have the odd occasion where the state is a day behind in comparison to the system map and actual system state when in it.
And who cares what it is doing to the PP, we are here for the BGS, the true game.

 

[Gemai]

we are here for the BGS, the true game.

Now if SOMEONE would bring FD to realize that I would jump. But yeah, as I mentioned before, I see this 'feature' (bug in disguise) as a nice potential roleplay mechanic for those hardcore players.

 

[Schlack]

Regarding going conflict pending while in active conflict I should have mentioned that it was with a different faction. We have both election active and war pending for a full tick.

The known effect was going pending again with the same faction immediately. This bgs behaviour has not been observed before by us at least.

 

[goemon]

The law (or not) of the controlling faction applies for the system. However, there is a space near the assets controlled by other factions where their law applies. This can result in confusion where a wanted pirate can interdict you but if you end up in the small bubble of space around another faction's asset, the pirate can show as clean.

We were actually talking about the new phenomenon (bug/feature) of subduing other factions on the galaxy map which might affect PP if left unchecked and would offer weird strategic options to lower triggers. It has nothing to do with in system laws between singular assets Limoncello.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ckground-Sim?p=4809365&viewfull=1#post4809365

i think, limoncello is spot on.

from very early onwards you could get space as "anarchy" between controlled space of several minor factions. if control is splitted by too many minor faction, parts of the space, including deepspace, some planets etc. show as anarchy.

i had that back in 1.3. when i expanded my than-time minor faction into a new system. 2 outposts, controlled by 2 different, non-anarchy factions, and most of the system was anarchy.

interesting that this is now also showing via galmap.

but you are jumping to anarchy space.

how big are the controlzones around/between bodies? how does that ownership work exactly?

if i'm back in the bubble, I'll look out for more exampels, but i'm positive, that you won't find a system which desn't show anarchy, but a different goverment than the controlling faction.

that space has of course nearby to no effect, because around station local law applies.

 

[Gemai]

i think, limoncello is spot on.

from very early onwards you could get space as "anarchy" between controlled space of several minor factions. if control is splitted by too many minor faction, parts of the space, including deepspace, some planets etc. show as anarchy.

i had that back in 1.3. when i expanded my than-time minor faction into a new system. 2 outposts, controlled by 2 different, non-anarchy factions, and most of the system was anarchy.

interesting that this is now also showing via galmap.

but you are jumping to anarchy space.

how big are the controlzones around/between bodies? how does that ownership work exactly?

if i'm back in the bubble, I'll look out for more exampels, but i'm positive, that you won't find a system which desn't show anarchy, but a different goverment than the controlling faction.

that space has of course nearby to no effect, because around station local law applies.

All items in the system of Wonga are OWNED by the Theocracy. It is NOT the same. The other faction isn't even present there. Please acquaint yourself with the topic discussed here Goemon. We do not talk about inner system law changes but galactic map effects on other systems entirely.

- - - Updated - - -

Regarding going conflict pending while in active conflict I should have mentioned that it was with a different faction. We have both election active and war pending for a full tick.

The known effect was going pending again with the same faction immediately. This bgs behaviour has not been observed before by us at least.

I meant the former. The latter is just them going into war due to the win day mechanic. If the secondary factions is behind the other but pushes on a 3+ war day to victory (5+%) it gets caught by the other trying to overtake them, the asset changes hands but the war pends again. It is another version of the calculation order messing things up. You still win.
This never happens if you are in lead one day before victory as your victory push never passes the enemy. I observed this in Kureserians.

Another version of renewed conflict is a ceasefire in which the post war day sees both locked. So if you push faction A, B gets the same % gain and the next day they pend again. The ceasefire clause is also odd. Observed in Tucanae DQ-Y C5 between Laka Flak and Off World Collective 2 times.

The last one is the one I talked about Dav said "was working as intended" that you can pend any new conflict anywhere on the loss/win day of a prior conflict. However the day afterwards - if nothing was triggered - you are immune. In case of elections even 2 day. These "cooldown" periods offer a total inconsistency to the BGS I said I want removed.

Again Dav said "working as intended". Free after Jimbeau: FD gives two .

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Because the pending period had finished. Once the state has gone pending (75% needed for pending for Expansion), you can then expand regardless of what % you are at when the expansion starts. Be that as much as 99% or as little as 1%, although those figures are rather unlikely!

Expansions can fail. If it's due to not having any systems within 30ly, the state will go to Investment. But I'm fairly certain that the expansion can also fail because the influence drops too far.
There may be otner factors that I hadn't noticed for failing an expansion. But I have had them fail for both reasons. Also had an investment fail, and there were definitely systems close enough fro this to have worked.

 

[goemon]

All items in the system of Wonga are OWNED by the Theocracy. It is NOT the same. The other faction isn't even present there. Please acquaint yourself with the topic discussed here Goemon. We do not talk about inner system law changes but galactic map effects on other systems entirely.

no, i'm talking exactly about that case. RSM isn't the strongest faction in wonga, and you have 4 factions very close to each other. i'm positive, when you fly through the system, you'll have parts controlled by RSM ... probably RSM space will be around wonga A1 and A2. give it a try. it is anarchy because non of the faction is strong enough to control that space.

you can have changing jurisdiction in systems, it can be partly controlled, that is nothing new.

new is, that galaxy map reflects that.

your exampel would be more of a thing, if it wouldn't be anarchy. even Mintaka where i'm currently are, is an "Anarchy" - and it has 0 population and is 800 ly from sol.

 

[SaliVader]

Oh well, I don't really see the use of this mechanic outside of Powerplay anyway.

 

[Gemai]

no, i'm talking exactly about that case. RSM isn't the strongest faction in wonga, and you have 4 factions very close to each other. i'm positive, when you fly through the system, you'll have parts controlled by RSM ... probably RSM space will be around wonga A1 and A2. give it a try. it is anarchy because non of the faction is strong enough to control that space.

And clearly this explains why ToC systems (1672 and Synuefe GU-D) turned Communist with no Communists present... in one even the top % leader. Or how Khemaraui who rules both the colonies with top % is a communist, again with no communists in system.

CLEARLY it is local % related... not. If you look at the entirety of evidence, it is clearly another matter entirely Goemon.

 

[jimbeau1571]

Expansions can fail. If it's due to not having any systems within 30ly, the state will go to Investment. But I'm fairly certain that the expansion can also fail because the influence drops too far.
There may be otner factors that I hadn't noticed for failing an expansion. But I have had them fail for both reasons. Also had an investment fail, and there were definitely systems close enough fro this to have worked.

Would the drop be have to be beyond a point of 59% remaining, as a 15% cost of Expansion (assuming the full term and reduction happens as per FD) could be in effect to drop it to 60%.

 

[SaliVader]

Expansions can fail. If it's due to not having any systems within 30ly, the state will go to Investment. But I'm fairly certain that the expansion can also fail because the influence drops too far.
There may be otner factors that I hadn't noticed for failing an expansion. But I have had them fail for both reasons. Also had an investment fail, and there were definitely systems close enough fro this to have worked.

I'm sure the expansion range is actually 25lys. My faction went into investment and then expanded to a system 25.56 lys away. Unless the expansion range is a cube and not a sphere as some people were speculating a few pages back.

 

[Ben Ryder]

I have tried following this thread recentlt but Im having difficulty. Can some one please explain what subduction has to do with it. Isnt subduction something to do with geology? Can someone explain what Gemai is syaing in fairly everyday english for fairly dumb folk like me. I do not know what hyperexpansion means in this context nor subduction. To a simple chap like me those words sound like nonsense jargon words. I find hard to follow Gemai because the language is inaccessible.

Gemai, I think I have observed something similar (erm I think) with fortification trigger changes. I have concluded (subject to change) that it is partly where fixes have been hard coded in to to the map for one reason or another over the last year to quickly patch a system reported as displaying badly. Time has moved on and the quick fix is visible here and there in odd ways.

I there is one ssyetm that I have played with in teh BGS for 70 weeks and it displayed as an Anarchy even though it was cautally changeing hands frequently between deomcracy and dictatorship. There's another PP spehre which had fortification trigger drop surprising ly early and then I realsied that i had overlaps with other control system bubbles and the maths was taking in to account who owned the contested systems first and applying ownership to one not both for eeh purpose of triger calculations. I thin you ae perhaps facing a combination of both with your wonga thingy. Sorry about my typing, I have bad hands.

 

[Gemai]

A Hyperexpansion (Double Expansion) was something that appeared with 2.1 and could happen if a conflict state managed to cut off an ongoing expansion twice due to "unfavorable" calculation conditions in the BGS mechanic. The same mistake that causes the third day war repeat bug after it was won if you were in place 2 before the victory. So one faction could effectively get 2 systems in one expansion.

I might have misused the moniker here, but I meant the action of bringing someone under your thumb from subdue, so maybe subjection is better. Let's change to that term.
It describes the odd phenomenon of a system having another galactic map government and illegal goods calculation by that, than it actually has. This only happens to faction in multi systems if part of their assets are controlled by other governments in those systems. It never happens to one-system-factions. It might share similarities with your phenomenon, but I doubt it is the same. It however is extremely similar to the PI phenomenon in Cubeo. The fact galactic map and system government differed before - by FD design too - means that there are two things at work here. Maybe they fell out of synchonicity or FD had a plan. For now we know it changes the galactic display and some minor effects.
And it makes for hilarious roleplay if you subject another faction and color the map WITHOUT owning the systems or even being present.

 

[goemon]

And clearly this explains why ToC systems (1672 and Synuefe GU-D) turned Communist with no Communists present...

ToC are communists, so there are communists present. i can't follow you.

EDIT: ha, interesting.

eddb: Time of Chaos /Independent/Communism
system map of vesuvit: time of chaos anarchy independent

sounds like a bug with the minor faction goverment. would be interesting, what the system map of Synuefe GU-D d13-78 says about time of chaos goverment.

 

[Schlack]

A Hyperexpansion (Double Expansion) was something that appeared with 2.1 and could happen if a conflict state managed to cut off an ongoing expansion twice due to "unfavorable" calculation conditions in the BGS mechanic. The same mistake that causes the third day war repeat bug after it was won if you were in place 2 before the victory. So one faction could effectively get 2 systems in one expansion.

I might have misused the moniker here, but I meant the action of bringing someone under your thumb from subdue, so maybe subjection is better. Let's change to that term.
It describes the odd phenomenon of a system having another galactic map government and illegal goods calculation by that, than it actually has. This only happens to faction in multi systems if part of their assets are controlled by other governments in those systems. It never happens to one-system-factions. It might share similarities with your phenomenon, but I doubt it is the same. It however is extremely similar to the PI phenomenon in Cubeo. The fact galactic map and system government differed before - by FD design too - means that there are two things at work here. Maybe they fell out of synchonicity or FD had a plan. For now we know it changes the galactic display and some minor effects.
And it makes for hilarious roleplay if you subject another faction and color the map WITHOUT owning the systems or even being present.

This is a mechanic that hasn't been mentioned by any BGS group, or PP group working the BGS. It has never been mentioned in any FD documentation on powerplay. It has never featured in any patch notes, live stream, Dev comment. There are no bug reports describing anything similar happening. It is a theory of such significance that would have to be matched by a similarly significant level of evidence to have any credibility.

William of Ockham. Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is a principle from philosophy. Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the simpler one is usually better. Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation is.

This would appear to be a display bug on the galmap and system map. This bug is well documented and known. It was acknowledged by Michael Brookes as a bug caused by a caching issue. Indeed he claimed that is was fixed many many times before it actually was (and obviously is still somewhat bugged).

Please either bug report it or gather and present convincing evidence. The BGS is a black enough box for us to examine without the introduction of speculative theory.

 

[Patau82]

I'm sure the expansion range is actually 25lys. My faction went into investment and then expanded to a system 25.56 lys away. Unless the expansion range is a cube and not a sphere as some people were speculating a few pages back.

Just above 20ly is the normal expansion range, expansion range after investment is at least 30ly but think its more
Need to check maia area as i think alliance expanded there from well over 30ly

 

[Gemai]

ToC are communists, so there are communists present. i can't follow you.

EDIT: ha, interesting.

eddb: Time of Chaos /Independent/Communism
system map of vesuvit: time of chaos anarchy independent

sounds like a bug with the minor faction goverment. would be interesting, what the system map of Synuefe GU-D d13-78 says about time of chaos goverment.

ToC was always a piracy faction. As Khemaraui was a dictatorship and RSM a Theocracy. In all cases all their belongings were subjected on the galaxy map by their recent conquerors.
No one ever said this is not a bug Schlack, it most definetly is, albeit with minor potential consequence aside of PP and finding BGS flip targets (Anti-Piracy etc.). It is a nice gimmick for roleplayers to use if they feel inclined, but makes little consequence for many a border player... or those prideful enough to not see their faction colour-flipped.

If this is the same caching issue from the past is also another question, for that one would need to see old screenshots and compare the situation. It might be the same mistake... or it might be a new anomaly of FDs consisted record of breaking the BGS with some new additions...

I also only described what it does. I did not apply unnecessary info Schlack. PI really had FD make them distinct between Patronage in system and Confederacy in PP and galaxy before. This messed up the in system law and sales. The same happens in HIP 1672 with the black market. This is no theory, just the EXTENT of a bug. You can keep your razor. In case of PI that was by FDs PMF implementation design. The similarities of the effect are just uncanny.

I will tell MB then, that his old patch seems to have fallen off with 2.2.01. If it is a new wound of the BGS, he can patch it up all the same.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Would the drop be have to be beyond a point of 59% remaining, as a 15% cost of Expansion (assuming the full term and reduction happens as per FD) could be in effect to drop it to 60%.

I think that's what happened. Our members were off doing CGs and other things and the influence slipped. We had recently had a double expansion, like what Gemai described, so weren't too worried whether this one worked or not. I'm hoping we don't get another one with the latest tick, as things are getting difficult to control.

It would be nice if there was an easy way of limiting the growth in a system. I usually just do a few missions for the other factions, but RP wise this feels wrong.