A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[goemon]

I'm surprised no one has brought up how the independent factions have gained a huge defending bonus with the super power bounty hunting spread in 2.3.

If the independent faction controls the system, 100% of the bounties from that system (without using a KWS) goes to the independent faction, ok that hasn't changed from 2.2 and 2.3, but, what has changed is if you want to flip that system to the Federation for example, and a Federation faction owns a station, however there's 3 other Federation factions in that system, if you turn in Federation bounties (gained from bounty hunting in other systems) into the station the Federation faction owns, in 2.3 those Federation bounties are spread between all 4 of those Federation factions, making the independent faction stronger in defending their system.

nope, it isn't working like that.

the 4 federation factions are winning from the indi faction in that case by a large margin, and what is even worse, you are loosing four times.

that effect even gets more pronounced, as it is easier for factions with lower influence to gain influence, than for factions with large influence.

and owning a station has nothing to do with it anymore.

 

[Matzov]

Just adding my voice to the crowd regarding superpower faction bounties. Yes, it makes things a little more dynamic. Yes, it makes sense that aligned factions should get credit. But it will kill independents, and we will be left with just Fed and Imp aligned systems, switching between a handful of factions.

And no, I haven't left out Alliance accidentally. In Mahon controlled space there are vastly more Fed aligned controlling factions than Alliance ones. Fed bounties will be easier to grab, and although Alliance aligned will have more chance to resist - the numbers will do for them in the end.

Its a horrid mechanic all in all.

 

[Shock]

nope, it isn't working like that.

the 4 federation factions are winning from the indi faction in that case by a large margin, and what is even worse, you are loosing four times.

that effect even gets more pronounced, as it is easier for factions with lower influence to gain influence, than for factions with large influence.

and owning a station has nothing to do with it anymore.

Have you actually tested this? If so, what happens in the below situation:

Independent faction 1 owns the system, currently have 40% influence - Hands in 10 x 1 million faction bounties --> 100% influence goes to the independent faction therefore they gain 5% influence (for example)

Federation faction 1 wants to start a war with the independent faction noted above, they currently have 35% influence, however there are 4 Federation factions in the system - Hands in 10 x 1 million Federation bounties --> Bounties are shared amongst the 4 Federation factions. So how much influence will Federation faction 1 gain? I bet it's less than 5%.

And yes I know stations doesn't matter anymore.

 

[goemon]

Have you actually tested this? If so, what happens in the below situation:

Independent faction 1 owns the system, currently have 40% influence - Hands in 10 x 1 million faction bounties --> 100% influence goes to the independent faction therefore they gain 5% influence (for example)

Federation faction 1 wants to start a war with the independent faction noted above, they currently have 35% influence, however there are 4 Federation factions in the system - Hands in 10 x 1 million Federation bounties --> Bounties are shared amongst the 4 Federation factions. So how much influence will Federation faction 1 gain? I bet it's less than 5%.

And yes I know stations doesn't matter anymore.

you forget, that your indi faction will loose influence, as the federal factions win from superpower bounty redeems - and it will loose most for all of their gains, as it is the faction with most influence in system. in your exampel enough for triggering a conflict.

here you go:

system: IND 1 (controlling): 50%, FED 1 (1 station): 30, Fed 2: 15%, FED 3: 5%, IND 2: 5%

pre. 2.3.

superpower bounty redeem at a FED 1 own station worth 10 points of the 100 points influence bucket:

IND 1: 50/110= 45%
FED 1: 40/110 = 36%
FED 2: 15/110= 14%
FED 3: 5/110= 5%
IND 2: 5/ 110= 5%

as influence gains are distributed to losses to all other factions relative to their influence in system that leads to:

IND 1: 50/110= 43%
FED 1: 40/110 = 36%
FED 2: 15/110= 13%
FED 3: 5/110= 4%
IND 2: 5/ 110= 4%


after 2.3.

superpower bounty redeem for all FED worth 10 points of the 100 points influence bucket:

IND 1: 50/110= 45%
FED 1= 40/110= 36%
FED 2= 25/110= 22%
FED 3= 15/110= 14%
IND 2= 5%/110= 5%

as influence gains are distributed to losses to all other factions relative to their influence in system that leads to:

IND 1= 45 -3 -3,5 -4,5 % = - 11% = 39%
FED 1= 36 - 2 - 3 = 31%
FED 2 = 22 -1 - 1 = 20%
FED 3 = 14 -0,3 - 0,3 = 13, 3%
IND = 5 -0,3 -0,4 -0,5 = 3,7 %

... as you can see, the Indi faction looses 11% instead of 7% after 2.3. The FED 1 factions gains much less - 1% instead of 6%. the interesting question is whether FED 1 and FED 2, or FED 2 and FED 3 will get into a conflict before IND 1 and FED 1.

___

this is just applying three broadly accepted principles on the new superpower mechanis:

1. it is easier for a low influence faction to gain influence, than for a high influence faction.

2. Influence gains of a faction are distributed as losses to all other factions relative to their influence in system.

3. bounty hunting is heavily weighted on number of bounty redeems.

the actual numbers will be different for population size (and other factors), but the general picture should look like above.

 

[Schlack]

... as for "no effect" - i see low influence superpower factions raising as expected.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was talking about testing done waaaaay back in 2015. Originally Superpower bounties had zero effect. I don't wish to see a return to that state of affairs as it means so much wasted activity.

- - - Updated - - -

nope, it isn't working like that.

the 4 federation factions are winning from the indi faction in that case by a large margin, and what is even worse, you are loosing four times.

that effect even gets more pronounced, as it is easier for factions with lower influence to gain influence, than for factions with large influence.

and owning a station has nothing to do with it anymore.

Does this not mean that it is working towards equilibrium - in certain cases? The low influence bonus reduces as a factions influence rises.

 

[goemon]

it is working towards equilibrium - in certain cases?

it is working towards equilibrium as soon as the superpower aligned minor factions have overtaken the indi factions, yes.

so basically, a system with 3 superpower aligned minor factions of the same superpower and 2 indi factions, where only superpower bounties are cashed in, would look soon like

SUPER 1: 31% SUPER 2: 29% SUPER 3: 27% IND 1: 2% IND 2: 1%, with the three superpowers changing control often, and - if they get into election with each other - 1 of them skyrocketing in between (while the others are electing...)

I'd say, the current patch is a reason for enemies of superpower alligned minor factions to rejoice, as long as you only want to destabilise and harm then, and don't care whether you self get anywhere. if you only care about superpower allegiance of systems, and don't care about constant changing controlling factions, the patch might be good, too. but for anyone who likes to back specific minor factions, or likes to have superpower alligned systems in boom and stability for exampel, it's really a bad patch.

i personally would like a situation, where allegiance with superpowers would help minor factions, as freedom shouldn't be free and there should be a reason, why humanity invented that institutions... but the new superpower bounty mechanic fails to deliver that.

the situation would look much different, if superpower bounty redeems would go to a superpower aligned faction controlling the station only. but that wouldn't help the other superpower aligned factions. the situation would also look different, if gains from superpower bounties would always deducted from non-superpower aligned minor factions, and if that isn't possible, have no effect. but i'm not sure whether the second one is even possible with the current implementation of the BGS.

 

[Schlack]

FD have, throughout the evolution of the BGS, sought some mechanisms to prevent runaway growth. If I recall correctly at some point Michael Brookes discussed a mechanism for reverting factions away from extremes (both high and low). The BGS has evolved since with the introduction of the retreat mechanic.

I speculate that this may be the purpose of the recent changes. To introduce a equalizing mechanism while also allowing retreat of factions. It should be noted that it is FD SOP to introduce new mechanisms at an extreme so the effects are more visible and subsequently tweak. If that's the way they want to develop it, we will just have to find new tactics. We are the lab hamsters in this particular game!

The BGS meta is an "arms race" between the developers and the players. They change the system, we find new ways to cope with, use and abuse the mechanics, leading to further change.

Long term once the system is tweaked, what it means for factions, is that management of your faction in more systems will be necessary.

 

[goemon]

I speculate that this may be the purpose of the recent changes. To introduce a equalizing mechanism

I'm not opposed to it. there is something weird about player backed factions controlling >12 systems (which is, i think the highest number of systems a truly NPC faction controls), and - as much as i love the hutton truckers - the core space of the federation getting more and more independent.

my main gripe with the mechanic now (as i'm not affected by the whole superpower internal equilibrium, and the superpower vs. indi debate) is that multiplying actions by superpower bounty reddems makes systems unresponsible.

if i have a BGS battle with a bounty hunter wing (which that wing probably doesn't even know), i want to either win or loose influence (been there, done that), not looking at my actions having no effect at all, like in a padded cell.

 

[Schlack]

Just to repeat:

It should be noted that it is FD SOP to introduce new mechanisms at an extreme so the effects are more visible and subsequently tweaked.


We appear to be in the extreme phase!

- - - Updated - - -

And no, I haven't left out Alliance accidentally. In Mahon controlled space there are vastly more Fed aligned controlling factions than Alliance ones. Fed bounties will be easier to grab, and although Alliance aligned will have more chance to resist - the numbers will do for them in the end.

This does not appear to have been our experience to date. It is still early days with only a short period of data to work with.

 

[Matzov]

Just to repeat:

It should be noted that it is FD SOP to introduce new mechanisms at an extreme so the effects are more visible and subsequently tweaked.


We appear to be in the extreme phase!

- - - Updated - - -



This does not appear to have been our experience to date. It is still early days with only a short period of data to work with.

I'm glad to hear that, although long term I do think the numbers are stacked if it stays the same. It will not be long before certain elements (they probably already have) figure this can be used to destabilise and weaken triggers, flip systems and so on.

 

[Schlack]

I'm glad to hear that, although long term I do think the numbers are stacked if it stays the same. It will not be long before certain elements (they probably already have) figure this can be used to destabilise and weaken triggers, flip systems and so on.

And this is in the iterative nature of the BGS. New mechanisms means new tactics and strategies. I haven't formed an opinion yet on whether these changes are good or bad overall. Its barely been a couple of weeks and we haven't seen the new mechanics working over a longer period, including a variety of faction states, that would give a proper perspective.

I don't subscribe to some of the more apocalyptic views expressed - mainly as I believe it will be tweaked.

 

[Matzov]

And this is in the iterative nature of the BGS. New mechanisms means new tactics and strategies. I haven't formed an opinion yet on whether these changes are good or bad overall. Its barely been a couple of weeks and we haven't seen the new mechanics working over a longer period, including a variety of faction states, that would give a proper perspective.

I don't subscribe to some of the more apocalyptic views expressed - mainly as I believe it will be tweaked.

Fair comment. In LYR space, we have already observed big gains for Federation factions. Of course, so of this is normal player actions, but the effects are so widespread it is quite stark.

 

[Maxmilian Czhilli]

I will shortly be returning to the bubble with a large haul of exploration data. Probably somewhere in the 50-100 million Cr range.

I have friends playing the BGS and want to help them out. I understand there are limits to the effect of selling. What's my best strategy for getting bang for my bucks?

 

[Roybe]

I will shortly be returning to the bubble with a large haul of exploration data. Probably somewhere in the 50-100 million Cr range.

I have friends playing the BGS and want to help them out. I understand there are limits to the effect of selling. What's my best strategy for getting bang for my bucks?

Sell the data singly!

 

[Maxmilian Czhilli]

Sell the data singly!

Singly? I have hundreds of system scans.

 

[CMDR pollycough]

Singly? I have hundreds of system scans.

Individually is(/was) the hardest hitter when it comes to BGS inf. There is a point of diminishing returns and as such, It's better to put some in each day. The point of diminishing returns is a hard one to pin down but imo is not even a full page. It depends how helpfull you want to be.[yesnod]

FYI. If the faction you are supporting has more than one station, The point of diminishing returns (cap) has shown me before that it's Per station. (Needs more determined testing)

 

[goemon]

I'm glad to hear that, although long term I do think the numbers are stacked if it stays the same. It will not be long before certain elements (they probably already have) figure this can be used to destabilise and weaken triggers, flip systems and so on.

as it wasn't posted in this thread, i'll share this impressive gif you, made by voggix of the East India Company, showing the change in influence levels in 10k (!) systems since 2.3.:

as you can clearly see, high influence levels are dwindling, lower influence levels go to more midrange levels.

Very well explained in the OP. I'd like to share our findings of the grave effect this change is having on control factions from all powers:

https://np.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/677cmm/unintended_bgs_consequences_superpower_bounty/

It is my belief that this scenario is an unintended consequence of the decision to share bounty vouchers among all superpower-allied minor factions in a system. It is also my belief that this change needs to be reverted to avoid catastrophic conflict throughout the bubble as control factions are unable to maintain influence due to this mechanic.

 

[Don Alvarez]

Nothing in the patch notes today regarding a correction/reversion for this. I guess we're stuck with it until at least 2.3.1...

 

[Abil Midena]

And this is in the iterative nature of the BGS. New mechanisms means new tactics and strategies. I haven't formed an opinion yet on whether these changes are good or bad overall. Its barely been a couple of weeks and we haven't seen the new mechanics working over a longer period, including a variety of faction states, that would give a proper perspective.

I don't subscribe to some of the more apocalyptic views expressed - mainly as I believe it will be tweaked.

I hear you, but in the mean time, Indi minor factions are losing their assets and systems. That wipes out X months of time and work in a few days, with no way to counter.

Whether you agree with FD's methods or not, the situation does not encourage one to 'play the BGS', or want to come back after it's sorted and try to regain everything lost during the 'live bgs beta testing'.

 

[Starwolfe]

By sharing I mean having a 1/3rd of the effect if applied to 3 factions.

That won't work.

Once a grinder hits the influence cap - and it fear its much easier than one would think - they can't increase the primary any more. As a result the others get pushed up, that is the issue here.

Even if it is in theory only 1/3 the pace, the end result is still hit - meaning all related factions could potentially hit their cap and it still remains to be a detrimental effect.