A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[Schlack]

Hey Goeman, Sandy answered your questions on the BGS feedback stream. (around 27m) When I say answered, it was a little garbled and not definitive. He thinks that destinations mission effects include influence effects, and if they don't they should. Likewise he thinks paying off bounties at IF will also have a state effect.

Testing required! I hope its only limited to state effects.

 

[jimbeau1571]

Hey Goeman, Sandy answered your questions on the BGS feedback stream. (around 27m) When I say answered, it was a little garbled and not definitive. He thinks that destinations mission effects include influence effects, and if they don't they should. Likewise he thinks paying off bounties at IF will also have a state effect.

Testing required! I hope its only limited to state effects.

BGS feedback stream .... where do i find this?

 

[Gemai]

Mission GOAL influence is moronic, at least if FD doesn't allow us to see the recipient. They should realize that.

In reality you wouldn't transport a gun if you knew it was into the hands of a terrorist or your enemy. And you would damn well ask first.

 

[jimbeau1571]

Mission GOAL influence is moronic, at least if FD doesn't allow us to see the recipient. They should realize that.

In reality you wouldn't transport a gun if you knew it was into the hands of a terrorist or your enemy. And you would damn well ask first.

Some would, they don't care who receives them they just want the money.
Some don't want to know, the less they know the better.

 

[Gemai]

And then many would ask to not hurt their friends, family or country.... or in Elite Dangerous term system/faction. Because the people who put money before all are not over 50%. Otherwise we would live on a pile of rubble.

 

[Schlack]

BGS feedback stream .... where do i find this?

Sorry forgot to post the link

[video=youtube;SpNdveuUxa0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpNdveuUxa0[/video]

 

[jimbeau1571]

Cheers.

 

[smiths121]

Hello Clever People,

I did a fair bit of BGS work (badly) up until 1.4, so I hope this is just my ignorance.

We expanded into a very small system 900 population, with a single station as the control station. We had a war with a faction that owned no stations that ended on the tick yesterday (about 4pm my time).
We had won the war and got ourselves into 2nd place, ready to challenge the controlling faction. We also went into Boom, which meant there was enough missions to have a go.

At the tick yesterday controlling faction 33%, we were 28% (there are some decimals). We did missions, and at the tick to day 33202-09-23 @ 4pm, we moved to 38% and the controlling faction moved to 29.4% ans we moved to 38.7%.

I would have expected either Election, or possibly some sort of war to become pending. It is Fed Corp verses Fed Corp. Given our large influence gain, I would have expected any of the conflicts to pretty much have been won before they start.

I looked around, albeit with a poor map of this area (this is our first system at 23 LY, so 2 jumps for most ships to get there, not well mapped), and I could not see the controlling faction in a conflict state.
Other things I think can block.

We have Election, War or Civil War pending somewhere, I cannot see influence levels that suggest this.

Any thoughts about other causes, or has the behaviour for starting a conflict changed.

Thanks for your help

Simon

 

[Sentenza]

So, this is the result of a mission. Apparently there is a status effect on the destination faction but not an influence effect.

Now there is only one problem... the destination faction is NOT stated anywhere when taking a mission!!!

 

[jimbeau1571]

Hello Clever People,

I did a fair bit of BGS work (badly) up until 1.4, so I hope this is just my ignorance.

We expanded into a very small system 900 population, with a single station as the control station. We had a war with a faction that owned no stations that ended on the tick yesterday (about 4pm my time).
We had won the war and got ourselves into 2nd place, ready to challenge the controlling faction. We also went into Boom, which meant there was enough missions to have a go.

At the tick yesterday controlling faction 33%, we were 28% (there are some decimals). We did missions, and at the tick to day 33202-09-23 @ 4pm, we moved to 38% and the controlling faction moved to 29.4% ans we moved to 38.7%.

I would have expected either Election, or possibly some sort of war to become pending. It is Fed Corp verses Fed Corp. Given our large influence gain, I would have expected any of the conflicts to pretty much have been won before they start.

I looked around, albeit with a poor map of this area (this is our first system at 23 LY, so 2 jumps for most ships to get there, not well mapped), and I could not see the controlling faction in a conflict state.
Other things I think can block.

We have Election, War or Civil War pending somewhere, I cannot see influence levels that suggest this.

Any thoughts about other causes, or has the behaviour for starting a conflict changed.

Thanks for your help

Simon

Looks like yours or the other faction is in conflict elsewhere and I'm 90% certain it is the other faction, as we have found since 2.1 that increasing a factions % while in conflict in another system is albeit impossible. Best you start scanning all the systems close by.

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

So, this is the result of a mission. Apparently there is a status effect on the destination faction but not an influence effect.

Now there is only one problem... the destination faction is NOT stated anywhere when taking a mission!!!

I honsetly don't understand the reason behind a status effect but no influence effect. Afterall, status is a result of Inf % in half the cases.

Or does status actually mean Rep ... in which case it doesnt really matter who the recipient is.

 

[Sentenza]

I honsetly don't understand the reason behind a status effect but no influence effect. Afterall, status is a result of Inf % in half the cases.

Or does status actually mean Rep ... in which case it doesnt really matter who the recipient is.

No the rep bar shows no change, from the result there is only a status effect on the destination faction. We could live with that, if it was known in advance!

 

[jimbeau1571]

No the rep bar shows no change, from the result there is only a status effect on the destination faction. We could live with that, if it was known in advance!

So we will be back to where we were in 2.0 then , at least at the patch before 2.1 dropped.

 

[Sentenza]

It get worse this is the result of a passenger mission. As you see, we now have BOTH an influence and status effect on the target faction:

Interesting point - the mission was transporting refugees, and the effect is violence and unrest at the destination. This is not random because two refugee missions produced the same result. I sense a political statement here...

 

[Gemai]

I sure hope FD reads this thread...

No seriously, they have to TELL US who we deliver this stuff to. I don't want to abort a mission at its destination because of that. The rest is fine.

Unlike you though, Sentenza, I thing the result above is correct for most societies. There are always some who don't like foreigners, even in a socialist government. So it can create unrest. The "description" could need more differentiation though. Maybe call it "the influx of foreigners into the systems of [FACTION] could create social unrest."

 

[jimbeau1571]

It just goes to prove an further enforce mine (and I am sure yours too) belief that one half the FD team doesn't have the slightest clue as to what the other is doing and what it is implementing half the time.
There are too many examples of Livestreams now of 'thats not my remit' or 'I couldn't possibly say as thats not my department'.

Hell, you can even open bug/trouble tickets and then have to tell them how it works.

I'm not shocked or surprised at all.

 

[Ben Ryder]

Seem liek a lot of folk want o know who the are delivering stuff to. Sounds a bit odd.

A post man gets an address and delivers to that address.

A delivery man gets an address and deliverts to that address.

IF I wanted to send a gun to someone or a bag of sugar and the delivery man said ' I aint delivering unless I knwo their political leanings' I say 'jog on' and hire someone else.

If you went down to the post office with a package and they asked you 'please tell me the recipients political feelings on X' I wold tell them where to stuff it.

It's just reall strange that people are insisting the MUST know.

Joe Smith
28 the Glades
Hangar 12
Political follower of Big Time Corp.
Nj21 4x12

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

IF I wanted to send a gun to someone or a bag of sugar and the delivery man said ' I aint delivering unless I knwo their political leanings' I say 'jog on' and hire someone else.

If you went down to the post office with a package and they asked you 'please tell me the recipients political feelings on X' I wold tell them where to stuff it.

We aren't working for the Post Office just delivering messages. We are often smuggling guns and drugs. I sometimes like to know that my guns are going to the right terrorist group, other times I don't care.

 

[Sentenza]

It just goes to prove an further enforce mine (and I am sure yours too) belief that one half the FD team doesn't have the slightest clue as to what the other is doing and what it is implementing half the time.
There are too many examples of Livestreams now of 'thats not my remit' or 'I couldn't possibly say as thats not my department'.

Hell, you can even open bug/trouble tickets and then have to tell them how it works.

I'm not shocked or surprised at all.

This is rather normal in large project, no way someone working on a part can know it all. There is usually someone higher up whose job is precisely to know it all. That guy can sometimes be named Michael

 

[Sentenza]

Seem liek a lot of folk want o know who the are delivering stuff to. Sounds a bit odd.

A post man gets an address and delivers to that address.

A delivery man gets an address and deliverts to that address.

IF I wanted to send a gun to someone or a bag of sugar and the delivery man said ' I aint delivering unless I knwo their political leanings' I say 'jog on' and hire someone else.

If you went down to the post office with a package and they asked you 'please tell me the recipients political feelings on X' I wold tell them where to stuff it.

It's just reall strange that people are insisting the MUST know.

Joe Smith
28 the Glades
Hangar 12
Political follower of Big Time Corp.
Nj21 4x12

Then why should you know the effect of your actions AT ALL? Because this is a game, that's why. You do something to achieve something, like pushing your faction. If some of your actions can have a negative unwanted effect, you most definitely want to know before you do them.

 

[Sentenza]

There is another BGS change coming. Apparently now PP powers have more BGS effect than before - for example, I have observerd black markets pop up in most (but not all - the relation with faction type is still unclear) in Zemina Torval space. This can have a significant effect as faction that were immune to smuggling now will be vulnerable.