A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[_Flin_]

In the most recent War, I gave a typical input (System was entirely unsupported for a very long time, zero Influence movements over many months).
Well, the 1st day saw a surprising -0.8%

Anecdotal evidence without mentioning efforts or traffic.

After going "all in" and getting me Massacre Missions myself (new Mission System spawned them, before 2.2.03 I hardly ever saw them for my Faction) plus abandon a few for the other side :
A +25.2% move within 24hrs...

Multiple influence factors, not accounting for traffic.

I'd say they're quite effective.

So how do you know it wasn't killing the ships? Or the combat bonds? Or the abandoning of missions? Or the 100 credit grinders killing ships of one faction in CZ?

While I do value your input, i'd say there has to be a more thorough experimental setup to really come to the conclusion you are drawing.

Our experiences for armed conflicts show missions having no effect. While I find it logical that massacre missions have an effect, we have not yet proven that they have in 2.2.

You are welcome to try to prove it, but then you'd have to eliminate traffic effect first, then combat bonds, and then account for the ship killing.

- - - Updated - - -

Massacre missions now have the reverse effect actually: they do not advance the influence of your factions, they thrash the other side instead and put it in lockdown.

Same here. Is it the missions? Or just the fact that you kill a lot of ships?

 

[Jane Turner]

re expansion Colonia may be a special case for now ie where there are no possible expansions under any circumstances

 

[_trent_]

Anecdotal evidence without mentioning efforts or traffic.

Same here. Is it the missions? Or just the fact that you kill a lot of ships?

I think it's the missions, but mainly as a logical deduction rather than experimentation.

The reason I think this is that doing a lot of skimmer missions should cause a famine, and massacre ships missions should cause a lockdown. In the systems where many people were using the 'kill skimmers instead of ships' exploit for massacre ship missions, the factions were going into lockdown, not famine. To me that says that the state is being driven by the successful completion of missions, not the destruction of skimmers/ships.

 

[Sentenza]

Same here. Is it the missions? Or just the fact that you kill a lot of ships?

As many others noted before, the effect appears definitely too high for the number of ships you kill.

 

[_Flin_]

I think it's the missions, but mainly as a logical deduction rather than experimentation.

I can only emphasize that logic and game reality are congruent at best, and collide at worst.

BGS without experimentation leads to chasing ghosts or shadows.

The reasoning is valid. We have, however, made the experience that having skimmers killed leads to famine (and civil unrest).

So in the end the question is:
- ship killing?
- combat bonds?
- positive mission influence for you?
- negative mission influence for adversary?

These are the possibke sources for influence movements. Which one it is? Who knows? Our tests point to a combination of combat bonds and ship killing. I am rather positive that the positive mission effect has no effect. I am pretty sure that the negative mission effect does not happen, because we saw begative effects vanishing when entering war.
This, however, was for another type of combat missions. Massacre missions might be different, my experience lets me doubt they are.

- - - Updated - - -

As many others noted before, the effect appears definitely too high for the number of ships you kill.

I dont claim to know the source of the influence movements. I just want to remind of caution and experimental proof instead of hearsay and assumptions.

BGS has away to lure you into thinking how things should be instead of how they actually are.

 

[CMDR Endincite]

BGS has away to lure you into thinking how things should be instead of how they actually are.

Brutally true.

Re: ship killing being the influence lever.
If you mean killing in CZ, it's been tested rather heavily, including by myself in zero traffic. Killing in a CZ without turning in bonds had no effect whatsoever. Murder of course does, so it depends how you go about completing a massacre mission since seemingly any target aligned to the stated faction counts.

 

[_trent_]

I can only emphasize that logic and game reality are congruent at best, and collide at worst.

BGS without experimentation leads to chasing ghosts or shadows.

The reasoning is valid. We have, however, made the experience that having skimmers killed leads to famine (and civil unrest).

So in the end the question is:
- ship killing?
- combat bonds?
- positive mission influence for you?
- negative mission influence for adversary?

These are the possibke sources for influence movements. Which one it is? Who knows? Our tests point to a combination of combat bonds and ship killing. I am rather positive that the positive mission effect has no effect. I am pretty sure that the negative mission effect does not happen, because we saw begative effects vanishing when entering war.
This, however, was for another type of combat missions. Massacre missions might be different, my experience lets me doubt they are.

- - - Updated - - -



I dont claim to know the source of the influence movements. I just want to remind of caution and experimental proof instead of hearsay and assumptions.

BGS has away to lure you into thinking how things should be instead of how they actually are.

Fair enough. But it's not just guesswork, I have tested the missions and can see that doing them properly causes the stated effects. My own speculation is that using an exploit instead of doing them properly also causes the mission effect, which I haven't tested as I consider that rather than BGS.

What I can tell you from experimentation is that skimmer missions definitely can cause a famine, and ship massacre missions definitely can cause a lockdown. I can also say from my own experiments is that killing considerably more skimmers on the surface or ships in CZs doesn't cause a famine or lockdown on their own. I've tried this extensively in a number of almost-zero traffic systems near the fringe of the bubble.

 

[goemon]

Fair enough. But it's not just guesswork, I have tested the missions and can see that doing them properly causes the stated effects. My own speculation is that using an exploit instead of doing them properly also causes the mission effect, which I haven't tested as I consider that rather than BGS.

What I can tell you from experimentation is that skimmer missions definitely can cause a famine, and ship massacre missions definitely can cause a lockdown. I can also say from my own experiments is that killing considerably more skimmers on the surface or ships in CZs doesn't cause a famine or lockdown on their own. I've tried this extensively in a number of almost-zero traffic systems near the fringe of the bubble.

just to make it clear:

- did you see those "effects" in the mission completion screen

OR

- did you run those missions and caused the effects in a no traffic system?

and if the second: did you reproduce the actions you need to complete those missions without taking missions and without any other action?

just to run an exampel:

a) effects of skimmer missions in the mission completion screen: those effects might take place or not.

b) killing skimmers for a mission
actions (some or all):
- kill of skimmers which are alligned to a minor faction
- trespassing fine
- gaining bounty
- cashing in bounties of wanted skimmers (if any)
- seling cargo picked up, legal/illegal
...

from that list you can spot 2 actions which are tested in bringing lockdown with them as well as civil unrest. the effect of lockdown or civil unrest for such missions wouldn't be down to "mission effects", but to actions done to complete the missions.

stating that "skimmer missions cause lockdown" as an exampel would require, that you need none of those actions to cause a lockdown (for exampel), or that those states are triggered much faster, when taking missions - which could be shown by reproducing the actions without a mission as described before.

same goes for "massacre missions cause lockdown". murder causes lockdown... etc. etc.

___

to back up _Flin_ and his call for not drawing conclusions without carefull tests. for a long time people believed, that bountyhunting always helps the controlling faction. it would even make sense! but it isn't the case - as you can easily find by proper testing.

 

[Sentenza]

stating that "skimmer missions cause lockdown" as an exampel would require, that you need none of those actions to cause a lockdown (for exampel), or that those states are triggered much faster, when taking missions - which could be shown by reproducing the actions without a mission as described before.

same goes for "massacre missions cause lockdown". murder causes lockdown... etc. etc.

Mission result explicitly says it causes lockdown. It is part of the general mission effect mechanism introduced in 2.2.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

Anecdotal evidence without mentioning efforts or traffic.

Multiple influence factors, not accounting for traffic.

Hmkay, so what you're saying is that posting here is only allowed with every single Detail given, all Formulas displayed and applied?
If so, I'm outta here. I guess I misunderstood the purpose of this Thread.

 

[Walter2]

re expansion Colonia may be a special case for now ie where there are no possible expansions under any circumstances

I tend to agree, but it could also be a function of the number of available solutions to the problem - just four in this instance, each with at least one criterion for expansion which couldn't be satisfied. Most faction actions conform to the generally accepted norms.

Or it could be the hidden hand of god.

 

[Jane Turner]

I tend to agree, but it could also be a function of the number of available solutions to the problem - just four in this instance, each with at least one criterion for expansion which couldn't be satisfied. Most faction actions conform to the generally accepted norms.

Or it could be the hidden hand of god.

the test would be to find an extralimital main bubble system and pack every system within 30LY with 7 factiions and then expand.... hard work though!

 

[Schlack]

Hmkay, so what you're saying is that posting here is only allowed with every single Detail given, all Formulas displayed and applied?
If so, I'm outta here. I guess I misunderstood the purpose of this Thread.

No, but due to experience with wild theories and heading down blind alleys a certain standard of proof is necessary for any idea or theory to gain credibility. Most especially if the mechanics are reproducible by others - hence the need to eliminate other possible factors when testing.

Nobody should really be declaring any mechanic definitive without it. We all theorize here, and we bounce ideas off each other and gain the value of each others experience and circumstances. In the absence of official documentation there is an obligation on us to be as scientific and accurate as possible. (Theres none of us perfect though!)

You can see from many other threads where half understood mechanics or assumptions on how mechanics should work rather than how they do lead people to frustration or even working directly against themselves. The current Xihe threads are most excellent recent examples of this - with some deliberate misinformation strategically placed by participants. If we want more people to engage with the BGS - and AEDC certainly does - this thread needs to be a repository of good solid information.

 

[goemon]

Mission result explicitly says it causes lockdown. It is part of the general mission effect mechanism introduced in 2.2.

i suggest the following.

take a fetch cargo mission.

wait till faction is in war.

hand in fetched cargo.

see mission effect screen.

... the mission effect screen is showing effects which will never be applied.

so, while i personally do think, that skimmer missions can add to famine, and massacre missions add to lockdown if no active state, my assumption would be on the topic in question, that it isn't necessarily the mission type causing lockdown in this case - but maybe all the actions coming with it (kills (of skimmers) out of CZ - not cashing in bonds --- etc.). bit like why killing system security ships is so effective: murder + fine + crime = 3 triggers in 1 action.

 

[Walter2]

the test would be to find an extralimital main bubble system and pack every system within 30LY with 7 factiions and then expand.... hard work though!

Thank you very much!

One thing I should have mentioned. The expanding faction is Colonia Research Division, but it skipped over a system that contained Colonia Research Department. An interesting twist.

 

[Schlack]

i suggest the following.

take a fetch cargo mission.

wait till faction is in war.

hand in fetched cargo.

see mission effect screen.

... the mission effect screen is showing effects which will never be applied.

so, while i personally do think, that skimmer missions can add to famine, and massacre missions add to lockdown if no active state, my assumption would be on the topic in question, that it isn't necessarily the mission type causing lockdown in this case - but maybe all the actions coming with it (kills (of skimmers) out of CZ - not cashing in bonds --- etc.). bit like why killing system security ships is so effective: murder + fine + crime = 3 triggers in 1 action.

When talking about effects we should probably be very clear about whether we are talking about state effects, influence effects or both. Influence effects may be negated by certain states, but can we be certain that state effects are also negated?

 

[goemon]

Hmkay, so what you're saying is that posting here is only allowed with every single Detail given, all Formulas displayed and applied?
If so, I'm outta here. I guess I misunderstood the purpose of this Thread.

it's not about "being allowed" - but i think the thread does good work on discussing theories.

i give you another exampel.

if system A gets above 75% and pending expansion, but has no system to expand to, it will go into investment (tested).

if system B goes above 75% after expansion from system A is pending, but has also no suitable system to expand to, and than system C gets above 75% -

which of the three systems will expand after investment has ended?

we could discuss several things that would "make sense". we could argue that it is random. we could talk about "our experience".

but without noting down the sequence of systems reaching 75%, and whether they have suitable systems to expand to, we coldn't understand the mechanic of it.

 

[Patau82]

We have noted a concurrent Investment and War State. If I recall correctly a similar circumstance has been noted in this thread previously.

In the war system the CZs are in ceasefire (we are not sure when the conflict began so it may be ending at today's tick). The different info screens are showing different information:

Right hand panel shows the faction in Investment
System map shows the faction at War
Mission menu shows the faction both in investment & at war
Other systems where this faction is located all show investment.

What state dictates effective actions in war system and investment systems is unclear at this stage. It is also unclear whether this is a bug or some mechanism to allow the new investment state as additional/ancillary to existing states. Its a head scratcher!

ah was hoping this had been fixed had it happen to us when investment was first added, seems only one state can appear active at one time
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/269477-Investment-state-has-caused-ceasefire-in-war
war wasn't extended as it was active for opposing faction and we had already gained enough influence to win before it started

 

[goemon]

When talking about effects we should probably be very clear about whether we are talking about state effects, influence effects or both. Influence effects may be negated by certain states, but can we be certain that state effects are also negated?

actually we can't, i think.

"When a state triggers, all other economic state pools are reset to 0 apart from Outbreak and Famine which are halved, unless it is Famine or outbreak when they are all reduced to 0." https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/221826-Dev-Update-(07-01-2016). if that is still true, the state pools (besides famine and outbreak) are 0 at any war/civil war going active.

if that old post is still correct - during war/civil war "player activities can affect the faction’s influence": "only combat missions and actions contribute"

now - during that state (war/civil war) there are state buckets filled, and other states might go pending. i think i have seen it with both lockdown and civil unrest. both can be triggered by combat actions. but i have never seen a faction with boom getting pending during a war/civil war. worth a test!

 

[Patau82]

Walt Kerman I'll do a couple a day for your approval

States. Lockdown no longer blocks Expansion or conflict election states


Hirarchy of states is Government Change states > reloaction states> Disorder states> Economic states> disaster states


Expansion. Currently expansion occurs when a faction is over 75% and there is no Government change state active or pending in their other systems. Expansions will go into the closest system with 6 or fewer factions present within 30 LY. If no such systems exist, then instead of an expansion, the faction enters an investment phase at the end of the expansion period which increases the expansion range to 60LY (? - we've not tested it this is an assumption). If more than one system is over 75% then the expansion will start from the 1st to cross the boundary. Expansions can be directed by choosing the origin system and selectively removing a faction from a target systems where there are 7 factions present. Expnasions may occur from systems that you do not control so long as the >75% influence and no blocking state conditions are met.

max range for expansion is just over 20ly, had an expansion from 20.1ly that didn't fail but anything slightly over that fails and goes into investment state
also if more than one system is over 75% then the expansion will start from the 1st to cross the boundary that will not fail expansion

I've had this happen 3 times now, system A (no expansions possible) hit 75% first then system B (expansion possible) hit 75%, expansion goes pending from system B
finding it very useful as i no longer need to keep influence low in systems with no expansion possibilities as long as the system i want to expand from has expansion possibilities
I currently have 3 systems at 75%, the first two to hit 75% have no expansion possibilities so my next expansion will be from 3rd system to hit 75% which has