A Guide to Minor Factions and the Background Sim

[Ryan Murdoc]

Hi All,

Just coming back into some BGS work.
Following the lave radio podcasts, I am a little lost. When you win a conflict, it used to be the case that you flipped the least important station (if any owned) by the losing faction. I am getting the feeling from the podcast that this has now changed to the most important? Is that true?

Cheers
Simon

From my observations (which don't necessarily have to correlate with others), there's a certain order of how Stations are picked (at least was the case up to 2.3 release).

1. Controlling Station
2. Big Stations closest to furthest from the Star(s) (Orbis / Ocellus / Coriolis)
3. Small Stations closest to furthest from the Star(s) (Outposts)
4. Ground Ports

Also, the amount of facilities seems to be a factor, though how that one works (or worked) still needs to be determined. We recently won a conflict where we thought we'd take over the Outpost which had more facilities, yet instead got the one with less but closer to the 2nd Star in the System.

 

[smiths121]

Hi All,

Thanks for answering my question. Ironically my observations had led me to believe almost the exact opposite to Coragon. I stopped BGS around 1.4, and was involved in a fitile attempt to stop Contrail taking Anlave begining of 2016. So it has been some time. I will go with a single conflict against a faction takes the best station, the controlling station if that is there best. Makes my life easier.

Simon

 

[CMDR Endincite]

From my observations (which don't necessarily have to correlate with others), there's a certain order of how Stations are picked (at least was the case up to 2.3 release).

1. Controlling Station
2. Big Stations closest to furthest from the Star(s) (Orbis / Ocellus / Coriolis)
3. Small Stations closest to furthest from the Star(s) (Outposts)
4. Ground Ports

Also, the amount of facilities seems to be a factor, though how that one works (or worked) still needs to be determined. We recently won a conflict where we thought we'd take over the Outpost which had more facilities, yet instead got the one with less but closer to the 2nd Star in the System.

This concurs with most of my observations. One of the livestreams also has Dav mentioning (rather vaguely) the order as following the "value" of stations (population, market activity, etc) from highest to lowest, not lowest to highest as suggested above.

 

[M. Grey]

Quite sure this is the prio order...or was this pre 2.3?

Orbital Station > Planetary Port > Orbital Outpost > Planetary Settlement

 

[FrogsFriend]

Recent takeover in a system with three outposts around the first three planets and one planetary base (on the first planet) all owned by one Faction. Outpost closest to the star taken first, then the planetary base.

Probably other factors such as facilities have some effect on the sequence.

 

[M. Grey]

Controlling/Main asset always has the highest prio, this can be an outpost.

 

[Ryan Murdoc]

Controlling/Main asset always has the highest prio, this can be an outpost.

Matches with what was experienced here too. We expanded into a System with 2 Outposts and 2 ground Ports. We first took the lesser valuable port as foothold, then proceeded to go against the controlling faction which held the remaining assets.

Order of taking over was Outpost (closest to Star), ground Port and then the Outpost furthest away.

Which is, as I just see now, different then my initial post. Talk about contradicting oneself, but meh.

Seems also be different depending on the System. In our biggest one we only have one MF left to deal with (4 ground ports, 1 Outpost left). All ground Ports are close to the 1st Star in the System, but just recently we took over the Outpost closest ot the 2nd Star, and the one left to get will probably come before the ground Ports are considered by the game.

BGS, we love you.

 

[NRCrosby]

Hey guys I wish this thread had better search capabilities cause I sure this has been answered before somewhere in the 559 pages of text but here goes on expansions after achieving them what is the time period that they last? Does the 15% drop in influence trickle in over that period or all at once I read the cooldown is 3 days after an Expansion is this correct, bottom line can you give me the best data available on the expansion state. Thanks N.R.Crosby

 

[Jane Turner]

Influence is lost at 3.2% a day for 5 days. If you end it early with a war then you escape the loss for the missing days. I am not certain of the cooldown but we have thought 5 days and have that recorded in our internal guide

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Influence is lost at 3.2% a day for 5 days. If you end it early with a war then you escape the loss for the missing days.

I wonder if not losing influence for the war shortcut is an oversight, rather than an intended feature. Expansion is supposed to be a way of bleeding influence from factions.

 

[NRCrosby]

Influence is lost at 3.2% a day for 5 days. If you end it early with a war then you escape the loss for the missing days. I am not certain of the cooldown but we have thought 5 days and have that recorded in our internal guide

Thank you Commander Turner so one needs only keep it up past 75% until the expansion state goes from pending to active after that 3.2% per day loss no need to try and maintain the + 75% we were working our butts off trying to maintain it even with the -3.2% per day loss. Good to know

 

[DNA-Decay]

I wonder if not losing influence for the war shortcut is an oversight, rather than an intended feature. Expansion is supposed to be a way of bleeding influence from factions.

shhhh

 

[Mrjupp]

Yes shhhh you know why we expand so well.

 

[Sitoutumaton]

Matches with what was experienced here too. We expanded into a System with 2 Outposts and 2 ground Ports. We first took the lesser valuable port as foothold, then proceeded to go against the controlling faction which held the remaining assets.

Order of taking over was Outpost (closest to Star), ground Port and then the Outpost furthest away.

Which is, as I just see now, different then my initial post. Talk about contradicting oneself, but meh.

Seems also be different depending on the System. In our biggest one we only have one MF left to deal with (4 ground ports, 1 Outpost left). All ground Ports are close to the 1st Star in the System, but just recently we took over the Outpost closest ot the 2nd Star, and the one left to get will probably come before the ground Ports are considered by the game.

BGS, we love you.

I've a recall from my own private struggles against a faction that shall not be named, who owned a small outpost orbiting the sixth planet, and major station orbiting 13th or so planet. Neither of these were main starport of the system, which is controlled by a third party. When brought to a war over these, they lost the closer and smaller outpost.

 

[Sentenza]

I wonder if not losing influence for the war shortcut is an oversight, rather than an intended feature. Expansion is supposed to be a way of bleeding influence from factions.

Or it is just a way to not impose double penalty since a war is damaging in itself.

 

[Johnny Cyclops]

Expansion vs Investment. What's the LY cutoff please? I've got an MF that's expanded five times. There are still some gaps locally in other systems, but don't want to push the central/home system again if that results in an Investment rather than Expansion. I think Expansion is to "any suitable system" inside 15 (or 20) LY?

Also, a number of local systems have 7 MFs already. Is that now the maximum a system can take? I.e. my MF will be precluded from expanding into a system that already has 7 MFs to make an 8th? I've not seen any locally with more than 7. All are 4-7.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

Or it is just a way to not impose double penalty since a war is damaging in itself.

I hadn't thought of that. Good point.

 

[goemon]

Expansion vs Investment. What's the LY cutoff please? I've got an MF that's expanded five times. There are still some gaps locally in other systems, but don't want to push the central/home system again if that results in an Investment rather than Expansion. I think Expansion is to "any suitable system" inside 15 (or 20) LY?

Also, a number of local systems have 7 MFs already. Is that now the maximum a system can take? I.e. my MF will be precluded from expanding into a system that already has 7 MFs to make an 8th? I've not seen any locally with more than 7. All are 4-7.

- yes, 7 or less minor factions. i have heard that you might trigger a invasion war if all systems are full, but i haven't seen one in the bubble.

- the expansion range is a strange thing. @dommarra made a good cause arguing that the algorythm works in cubes instead of a bubble, as it is easier to pull systems from a database that way, and it works along differences of coordinates. anyway, longest direct expansion i have seen without investment is 29,36 ly distance ... i still can't get my head around it, as we jumped several possible systems closer by. might have been a bug, too.

- the maximum range after investment is between 45 ly and 55 ly, as factions don't expand from robigo to almagest (55 ly distance), but expand between maia and HIP 19072 (45 ly) after investment.

 

[CMDR pollycough]

Deleted

 

[CMDR pollycough]

I had one go 32.55Ly last week from the PMF control system without investment.