A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

can't talk about powerplay, but on the other aspects:

the base value of system security is fixed per system, but can be affected by goverment type, as well temporarily by state effects. dictatorship add to security level, but if the system has a very low base value, or is temporarily reduced further, you'll get a low security dictatorship (ithaka is a well-known exampel, and also proof, that dictatorships don't always close black markets).

Thanks for answering.

But what do u mean with very low base value? The CC income? Its an lossmaking Control System. But has a population of 11milion. High Tek.

So if i understand u right, the HIGH SECURITY level wont be changed by switching from gov.type. Dictorship to Feudal. In this hightech system (VAKA).

What you have answered to me, is that possible to read in patchnotes or manual from Frontier itself?
 
Last edited:
To raise an incidental point from your example, knocking 10% off the leader would result in A on 39%, B on 49%, C on 10.8% and D on 1.2%. Couldn't this mean that B has leapfrogged the required threshold to trigger a conflict with A?

Does anyone know the maximum differentials needed to start a conflict, knowing that there seems to be a "snap" feature applied to numbers that are close?

There isn't.

The situation here gets murky from the tests I have done - but what is needed is that leapfrog effect to happen.

Instead, what should occur is on the next cycle tick Faction A would be at 44.5%, B @ 44.5%, C @ 10.8% and D @ 1.2%.

Since A and B crossed, it will average the influence between the two, provided they actually could start a conflict on that tick - otherwise you end up like you assume and they have to do it again.
 
Thanks for answering.

But what do u mean with very low base value? The CC income? Its an lossmaking Control System. But has a population of 11milion. High Tek.

So if i understand u right, the HIGH SECURITY level wont be changed by switching from gov.type. Dictorship to Feudal. In this hightech system (VAKA).

What you have answered to me, is that possible to read in patchnotes or manual from Frontier itself?

The current iteration of Powerplay is a cluster of biowaste ya know...

You have to count the population of the Control and all its Exploited systems together for that profitable value.

That is where it gets murky because of overlaps with other control systems potentially already exploiting some and reducing the potential CC from the area.

There also is the issue of the overhead that makes it a loss-maker. Each Powerplay faction eventually hits a wall with size and distance where it doesn't matter how many are there and it will remain a loss maker.

The only option is to go into turmoil and loose it.

Hence, why I said the current iteration of Powerplay is a cluster of biowaste...



On to your desire to alter security... you cannot with that DP faction. None of his Exploitation impact under Stats will alter any of that relevant stuff.

Instead DP gets you increased consumption and production of high value goods, and increased cost in Imperial markets, and a reduced cost in other Federal/Alliance/Independent markets.

Oh, and legalizing Imperial Slaves in Control Systems, and reducing Imperial Ship prices by 10% there.
 
The current iteration of Powerplay is a cluster of biowaste ya know...

You have to count the population of the Control and all its Exploited systems together for that profitable value.

That is where it gets murky because of overlaps with other control systems potentially already exploiting some and reducing the potential CC from the area.

There also is the issue of the overhead that makes it a loss-maker. Each Powerplay faction eventually hits a wall with size and distance where it doesn't matter how many are there and it will remain a loss maker.

The only option is to go into turmoil and loose it.

Hence, why I said the current iteration of Powerplay is a cluster of biowaste...



On to your desire to alter security... you cannot with that DP faction. None of his Exploitation impact under Stats will alter any of that relevant stuff.

Instead DP gets you increased consumption and production of high value goods, and increased cost in Imperial markets, and a reduced cost in other Federal/Alliance/Independent markets.

Oh, and legalizing Imperial Slaves in Control Systems, and reducing Imperial Ship prices by 10% there.

Hello Starwolfe,

thx for answering. First english is not my birth language and pls let me recap your answer, so that i have understood it well.

Changing govermenttype in VAKA, from dictorship to Feudal, will not change the Security Level in that system. This has nothing todo with the Powerplay mechanic Because DP is strong with Patronage/Feudal Gov. (As can be read in the game) Correct?

System security level is fixed in each system? And these can not be altered by doing a lots of crimes? Correct?
 
Hello Starwolfe,

thx for answering. First english is not my birth language and pls let me recap your answer, so that i have understood it well.

Changing govermenttype in VAKA, from dictorship to Feudal, will not change the Security Level in that system. This has nothing todo with the Powerplay mechanic Because DP is strong with Patronage/Feudal Gov. (As can be read in the game) Correct?

System security level is fixed in each system? And these can not be altered by doing a lots of crimes? Correct?

As far as i know and have seen for this situation, Yes.


Some other factions such as Hudson can alter Security, but not DP.
 
Thanks for answering.

But what do u mean with very low base value?

I'm referring to what the first post of this thread describes as "hidden values". the backgroundsimulation has quite some of those. for exampel "tech level", which defines with the station economy whitch moduls can be available in outfitting. tech level can be increased temporarily by states like boom and most visible by investment. in effect, you'll find moduls in outfitting during those states, which you can't buy outside of those states.

same applies to security level. there is a fixed security level per system, goverment type and states can add to it or reduce it.

so,
So if i understand u right, the HIGH SECURITY level wont be changed by switching from gov.type. Dictorship to Feudal. In this hightech system (VAKA).

no, it is the opposite. changing the controlling faction CAN change the security level. but there is no way to tell whether it really WILL do that before doing it.

eddb.io gives 25 high security feudal systems, 350 medium security feudal systems, and 580 low security feudal systems.
it gives 560 high security dictatorship systems, 950 medium security dictatorships, and 380 low security dictatorships.

coming from those numbers i think it is safe to say, that changing the goverment from dictatorship to feudal will reduce the security, but it might not be enough to get from high security to medium security.

___

there is no manual to the backgroundsimulation by frontier, and they have declined writing one. the BGS is meant to be a blackbox, some people like it, some don't. your best chance to get into it is

1. reading the opening post in this thread
2. watching the two livestreams on the BGS
3. scouring the patchnotes for changes
4. running your own tests and sharing and discussing them here.

I'd be very interested to hear what changing the goverment of the system in question will do to the security level!
 
Thank you for your answer Goemon,

In the past, the controll system had a base CC. And in the past the income CCs was changed, when the system changed from gov.type. Has this been changed in the powerplay mechanics?

Is a Dictorship a reason, why there are never massacre mission, for that faction?
I heard hat Feudal has a bonus against Lockdown?

Anybody heard or read about this?
 
Last edited:
Re: Powerplay
Yeah it's a bit of a mess. If those of us in "coordinator" roles hadn't kept precise spreadsheets tracking when everything was gained, we'd have little idea which Control Systems were held first, and thus which should be getting the CC from overlapped exploited system X. There's exactly no way to tell ingame that, say, Carverda is an original ALD Control System (i.e. from day one) and another isn't.

In the past, the controll system had a base CC. And in the past the income CCs was changed, when the system changed from gov.type. Has this been changed in the powerplay mechanics?

CC income never - not ever - changed by change of gov't. Fort trigger only. The CC values for system populations, from 4cc for the lowest to 11 at the highest, have remained constant.
 
Last edited:
Re: Powerplay
Yeah it's a bit of a mess. If those of us in "coordinator" roles hadn't kept precise spreadsheets tracking when everything was gained, we'd have little idea which Control Systems were held first, and thus which should be getting the CC from overlapped exploited system X. There's exactly no way to tell ingame that, say, Carverda is an original ALD Control System (i.e. from day one) and another isn't.



CC income never - not ever - changed by change of gov't. Fort trigger only. The CC values for system populations, from 4cc for the lowest to 11 at the highest, have remained constant.

thank you Cmdr Endincite
 
thank you Cmdr Endincite

Anytime. Powerplay & BGS mechanics are the very bane of my existence, and yet I can't stop being interested.

Walt's/Mercs'/TBC's example in making this thread (and precursors) was a good one, I think. Share data/observations and we'll all be better off.
Being a competition, such sharing took a long while in PP.
 
Last edited:

raeat

Banned
Every time I look into the Power Play forums, there is whining about how players are hurting their Power. How exactly is that happening? The so-called 5th Column methods? Sure, but what other options are there. You can set up a government type that the Power doesn't like, but it is almost impossible to tell if that matters even in the slightest. For some bizarre reason our devs simply cannot imagine that there are players who want nothing to do with Power Play or the Powers therein - or treat them, as I do, as tyrannies to be kept out.

So, the Power Play players sound to me like people who want to auto-win with no work at all and no chance of losing. Meanwhile, I'm just an independent democrat trying to Empire-proof my home and surrounding systems. I don't want miscellaneous anonymous lawless goons and mercs "policing" corruption where I live. That's not law and order and that method only leads to more corruption as criminals get legitimacy and influence.

But, if the 5th Column actions are the only thing we can do, expect it to be done. Or else add some mechanic that allows us to fight the Powers without being a member of another Power. Why the hell wasn't that thought of to begin with?
 
Every time I look into the Power Play forums, there is whining about how players are hurting their Power. How exactly is that happening? The so-called 5th Column methods? Sure, but what other options are there. You can set up a government type that the Power doesn't like, but it is almost impossible to tell if that matters even in the slightest. For some bizarre reason our devs simply cannot imagine that there are players who want nothing to do with Power Play or the Powers therein - or treat them, as I do, as tyrannies to be kept out.

So, the Power Play players sound to me like people who want to auto-win with no work at all and no chance of losing. Meanwhile, I'm just an independent democrat trying to Empire-proof my home and surrounding systems. I don't want miscellaneous anonymous lawless goons and mercs "policing" corruption where I live. That's not law and order and that method only leads to more corruption as criminals get legitimacy and influence.

But, if the 5th Column actions are the only thing we can do, expect it to be done. Or else add some mechanic that allows us to fight the Powers without being a member of another Power. Why the hell wasn't that thought of to begin with?

It's...complicated.
-Yes, there are rather a ton of people who whine...about everything, really. No way around that. The most common general feeling that has instigated Powerplayers over these two years has been a feeling of abandonment. Patches went by for over a year with little change, and when they came those changes were to make Powerplay more stagnant, ostensibly so as to grant more time for them to properly...do whatever they're going to do with it.

-5C (the deliberate harm of an organization you ostensibly belong to) is an overused term. Most often people are simply referring to people who either don't know, or don't care, that expansion into just any system can be harmful. There are static costs to each Control System, and if the population isn't high enough those costs outweigh the base income, creating a deficit. Deficits make Powers more vulnerable to undermining in a general sense. Until actual 5C became a heavily used thing (it's much less effective now), Powers were being damaged left and right by people simply in it for their own credit balance, or not understanding how to help. That the information ingame was not sufficient to tell people what helped and what didn't...well, that's a valid and ongoing complaint. We understand Powerplay now because of a few industrious e.g. software engineers and generally smart folks who could monitor everything and figure it out, not because of FDev.

-Vis a vis non-Powerplay player groups, this has quite the checkered history. If someone preps a system that exploits your home, that need only be a few individuals belonging to a Power, not the organized mass of the Power itself.
For instance ALD had issues repeatedly with TIIQ as people would prep Brestla, their home. We explained over and over that a) we have no control over what gets prepped, and have to work extremely hard to prevent preps we don't want, and b) we absolutely never wanted Brestla (it's worthless as a control system - causes a deficit). Countless hours were spent by industrious individuals working to prevent that from happening as it was prepped over and over. That they chose to repeatedly RP-spin that into a sort of attack...how to respond? I think we did well to remove the Control System exploiting Brestla as soon as we did. It required an enormous expenditure of effort to put it on the list to be removed, while our enemies would rather us lose valuable control systems.

A method by which non-Powers could fight Powers was suggested by FDev less than 2 months after Powerplay started, along with a list of other suggestions. Close to none of the suggestions has ever been implemented, so I can tell you that as angry as the lack of those mechanics might make you, it angers Powerplayers even more so.
 
Last edited:
But, if the 5th Column actions are the only thing we can do, expect it to be done. Or else add some mechanic that allows us to fight the Powers without being a member of another Power. Why the hell wasn't that thought of to begin with?

PP was added as a separate layer above the BGS and the major powers.
This seems to have been the laziest way to implement PP, with the goal of not effecting anything to do with the BGS directly, thus letting players who don't want to touch PP to not have to.

Everyone knows this doesn't actually work in reality.

There are 11 powers but they are (nearly) completely separate from the Alliance, the Empire and the Federation, but they just aren't viewed that way by the players.
And it's not the players fault.
 
PP was added as a separate layer above the BGS and the major powers.
This seems to have been the laziest way to implement PP, with the goal of not effecting anything to do with the BGS directly, thus letting players who don't want to touch PP to not have to.

Everyone knows this doesn't actually work in reality.

There are 11 powers but they are (nearly) completely separate from the Alliance, the Empire and the Federation, but they just aren't viewed that way by the players.
And it's not the players fault.

it was a cost effective way of building a framework on top of the minor factions - i anticpate beyond some slight 2.3 tweaks including yet unknown mechanics of megaships there wont be much change to the tug of war with minor factions in already static systems and the odd one added here and there with CGs and asteroid bases

Actually its possible until we get all planets being able to be landed upon that the background simulation wont change at all for a few years. Still its an exciting mechanic
 
Just to clarify post 2.3, will bounty transactions (hand ins) still trump number of BH CRs in effecting civil unrest/lockdown buckets?
 
Actually its possible until we get all planets being able to be landed upon that the background simulation wont change at all for a few years. Still its an exciting mechanic

That makes sense. Bases on airless worlds don't quite count as colonies. But once we can land on and affect earthlike planets, then proper colonization mechanics can be implemented.
 
The state table doesn't show anything for 'retreat' as far as actions taken and their effect. So, if you're in retreat in one system, and you're also in other systems, are there any restrictions of actions for influence in those other systems?

Meaning, does retreat in one system equate to 'none' in other systems? Or are there actions that are ignored/buffed in those other systems?
 

raeat

Banned
It's...complicated.

-Vis a vis non-Powerplay player groups, this has quite the checkered history. If someone preps a system that exploits your home, that need only be a few individuals belonging to a Power, not the organized mass of the Power itself.

Pleased to meet you, O adversary of mine. ;)

I do recall doing some work for Aisling Duval (for the shields of course), and it was pretty obvious people were doing prep and such just to get the necessary merits for the payout (guilty as charged). So, a system prepping might very well be, as often as not, about farming merits.
 
Last edited:
Got another war related question - to wit, is there a way to tell when a war is going to end?

I was under the impression that if a faction gets a lead of 5% influence over another in war, it wins the war. This happened recently in a faction I've been helping two days ago, but the war is still going on. In fact, the lead is shrinking as I write this.

The faction status in the Starport Services news window reports the (maybe) winning faction as "looking forward to an economic boom" (backed up by "Boom" being listed as a pending state in the mission window), and Booms have a countdown of two days. Can someone tell me if this means the war will be over soon?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom