Alliance factions!

I've been playing awhile now and I've noticed that on the whole Alliance factions are more sneaky in how they play the BGS. Can anyone enlighten me politely why this is the case.
I am aware of some Alliance supporters who would fit this description, but only a few.

I am also aware of some larger factions who because they are not dictatorial on how their members play could be misinterpreted as fitting this description, but in fact it's just the odd player from those factions helping those who do fit this description.

I am also aware of many honourable and open Alliance factions.

I could also say the same about Federation factions too, and have indeed had to fight against unknown Fed supporters who are never seen in Open on PC, Xbox or PS4 by others fighting them.

I could also say the same about various Power Play factions when they get involved in BGS.

I can also say the same about independent factions.

I can't say it about imperials, but I think that's more to do with my location in the galaxy. Although I have heard the same said about the small numbers of Imperials in my area, although in those cases I had to point out to the PC players saying it that the local imperials are 99% Xbox players so not really a fair comparison.

I think you have to accept that there are certain people in every camp who consider secret attacks from PG/Solo, even when in violation of treaties their own or allied factions may have signed up to, as acceptable game play. It doesn't mean everybody in that camp is though, and if it seems more of 1 camp than others (as indeed it does to me) that is usually caused by the geography of your experience.

FDev enable this gameplay and as long as they do, people will use it.

What would be nice is if all the major groups at least committed not to attack other peoples space secretly from PG/Solo, and not to ally with or later support those who do. but I can't see that happening even though it would allow people to defend their space from PG/Solo and carry on in those modes if not hurting others.
 
"What would be nice is if all the major groups at least committed not to attack other peoples space secretly from PG/Solo, and not to ally with or later support those who do. but I can't see that happening even though it would allow people to defend their space from PG/Solo and carry on in those modes if not hurting others."

That'd be nice, but the reality is that it's a common toolbox tool. The system that allows it to happen without tracing the attackers needs to be fixed, elsewhere basically there is no reason NOT to do this. Why seek retaliation if you don't have to?

I'm not condoning it, I flat hate it, but you have to understand that because it exists, it's going to be taken advantage of.
 
can't disagree, but as FDev repeatedly say they can't change the modes effecting BGS and I can't see them ever allowing others to track player movements and actions (particularly as that would simply become a griefing tool), if players want to change things to push FDev to do something, it seems like the only option we have to me.
 
"What would be nice is if all the major groups at least committed not to attack other peoples space secretly from PG/Solo, and not to ally with or later support those who do. but I can't see that happening even though it would allow people to defend their space from PG/Solo and carry on in those modes if not hurting others."

That'd be nice, but the reality is that it's a common toolbox tool. The system that allows it to happen without tracing the attackers needs to be fixed, elsewhere basically there is no reason NOT to do this. Why seek retaliation if you don't have to?

I'm not condoning it, I flat hate it, but you have to understand that because it exists, it's going to be taken advantage of.
It would be nice, sure. But how do you police it? No point making an open only agreement if it can't be policed, can't be enforced and can't be punished.

All you can do is recognise that a group cannot be trusted to honour an agreement in some way that can be observed (like growing in a system where it was agreed there would be no attempt to grow) & respond to to that.
 
Don't know about you, but I have various friends, allies and a few others on my friends list. I can see who is in Solo/PG from that, and can see where they are.

It's easy enough to put 2 and 2 together and get 4, and if it happens too many times make the assumption to 8.

For me, if they signed up to something like this and were breaking that promise, I wouldn't be able to trust their word moving forward.

And for those that are caught, losing allies for help in attack or defence would take it's toll over time.
 
Don't know about you, but I have various friends, allies and a few others on my friends list. I can see who is in Solo/PG from that, and can see where they are.

It's easy enough to put 2 and 2 together and get 4, and if it happens too many times make the assumption to 8.

For me, if they signed up to something like this and were breaking that promise, I wouldn't be able to trust their word moving forward.

And for those that are caught, losing allies for help in attack or defence would take it's toll over time.
Those on your friend list may remain in open (or be obviously not BGSing in group or solo) but what about those supporters not on your friend list, or on another platform, or an alt account?

One can never be sure.

So while I do do my stuff in Open, I am not in the least concerned about what platform or mode any opposition may be in. If they're not in Open (on PC) where I am, if anything it makes it easier for me to complete my missions & meet potential allies as well as enemies.

An Open only agreement is a noble thing, but ultimately cannot be 100% policed & worrying about trying to stop submarine warfare is pointless. Just look at the figures after the tick, and act on that.


With the Code/TCF war both sides have expressed frustration about instancing, and not being able to find the other side. They just want to have meaningful PvP & I rather like that. It's all a bit easy in a group, or in Solo, effective but boring.
 
Even during the CG's, instancing was an absolute . Guardians (lack of better words) would patrol systems, while the gankers/griefers, would be in totally separate instances.
So the choice is to rage & get really angry about that, or just accept it & get on with BGSing ;)

But I do all my negotiating & ahem other interactions with players in the game. Being in Open means I have the opportunity to meet those whose goals align with my own, and those who may take an opposing stance with good reason. If I don't meet them I'm not going to recognise & react to their personal motivations.

Generally speaking I am opposed to any group that cares only about the statistics of how many systems they are in, or whatever. Each system is unique, once you become familiar with it's strengths & vulnerabilities (tactically), just as every player is unique once you actually get to meet them.

I have formed strong alliances with plenty of player groups & individuals, I enjoy the dynamic of trying to find solutions that can satisfy all & brokering deals. Some guy wants a system that Hudson flipped to Feudal, well if they can flip another system in that bubble to replace it then can have theirs. That kind of thing. Should I support TCF or the Code? It's happening all around me. I make a non proliferation agreement with both, and see who breaks the deal. That can be policed. Doesn't matter what instance, mode or platform they are in/on.
 
Last edited:
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this joke of an OP.
The ARRC are a small player faction with a tight knot of very passsionate players who never attack other factions unless there really isn't another option. The we will fight in open for the most part with only our less able commanders working in PG or Solo (a mode we frown upon BTW).
We are currently defending a few of our allies against potentially hundreds, if not thousands of hidden players working the BGS in admirable, if secretive, ways, when this joke appears. We are seeing tens of Alliance systems being retreated by these hidden cowards,

o7 Commander may the light of truth blind you!
All I do know is that she actually started quite an interesting thread, which makes a change lol
 
I think a generally accepted bottom line of all this is "Yes, Alliance factions do solo/PG BGS assault, so do Feds, Imps, and Independents". Followed by "Guess what, if we didn't, then everyone else would, and we'd be at a disadvantage".
I also think it's where you are based in the bubble and your interactions with certain factions around where you are. This will be the basis of how you view the Alliance, Empire or Federation.
 
"Guess what, if we didn't, then everyone else would, and we'd be at a disadvantage".
That's kinda grating though. A group that claims to be really good, tries every trick in the book (as I discussed earlier in the thread) to win. Yet I generally beat them, effectively with one hand tied behind my back if you look at it that way. Makes one wonder just how good they actually are. Makes your typical non-aligned random player not particularly support them in wars & elections. Unlike the Code for example, who are equally divisive and get both huge support from random traffic and invite & provoke conflict in any form.

I do agree that broadly speaking Open conflict is for fun & private conflict is to win though, and it is a constant dilemma for many players I know who are not playing primarily to PvP. The thrill of the chase can be fun, but sometimes you just want to go to founders or an engineer in peace.
 
I also think it's where you are based in the bubble and your interactions with certain factions around where you are. This will be the basis of how you view the Alliance, Empire or Federation.
Nail on the head there. I've been fighting tooth and nail with Fed factions a lot recently, To the point where, I'm almost naturally aggressive to feds, yet don't give a damn about Imps.
 
As a New Zealander, who always plays in open but is 12 hours out from the rest of the world, we never see anyone, EVER, unless they are from Australia.
1. I have been told this is not only the time difference but also the instancing as if our ping rate is not the same as the USA then we will not get put together as PvP would be a mess with desynchronization etc.
2. Pc vs Xbox vs PS4 means lots of people never see each other.

So I actually think a lot less people are being "sneaky" then we think.
 
As a New Zealander, who always plays in open but is 12 hours out from the rest of the world, we never see anyone, EVER, unless they are from Australia.
1. I have been told this is not only the time difference but also the instancing as if our ping rate is not the same as the USA then we will not get put together as PvP would be a mess with desynchronization etc.
2. Pc vs Xbox vs PS4 means lots of people never see each other.

So I actually think a lot less people are being "sneaky" then we think.
You may have a point, but honestly, I doubt it. If there's only two live players on at the same time in the same system, I'm ppretty sure they will instance regardless of where they're from.
How do I know this?
We have Ozzy players in our faction and our European players instance with them from time to time.

[edit]
This does not apply to PS and XBox players who have thier own servers and cannot instance with each other or PC players, even if they want to.(Thanks ED Bleugh!)

o7
 
Last edited:
You may have a point, but honestly, I doubt it. If there's only two live players on at the same time in the same system, I'm ppretty sure they will instance regardless of where they're from.
How do I know this?
We have Ozzy players in our faction and our European players instance with them from time to time.

[edit]
This does not apply to PS and XBox players who have thier own servers and cannot instance with each other or PC players, even if they want to.(Thanks ED Bleugh!)

o7
If you are on each others friends lists, or even share a friend in common who is online, it seems you are more likely to instance no matter which area of the world you come from.

And for the counter, I've had times when I have not instanced with a friend in Australia when entering the same system as him, even though we were in wing together, so it is variable and does seem a problem.

Most people I randomly meet seem to be EU (which I am) no matter what time of day I play so while not absolute, Marcus has a valid point
 
I meet people from most places, I regularly instance with people in the US (both coasts), south America & occasionally Australians. Loads of russians & eastern europeans, French, all sorts. I'm in the UK on fibre broadband which might help.

I think the countries thing is more a matter of timezones than latency.
 
Last edited:
TCF Rock.

They're kinda the loose cannons of the Alliance.
Good fighters in a scrap.

AID are cool too - Germans. RI - Same but French.
AOS are the spreadsheet kings of grind. They keep up an impressive workload.
AEDC are tankies.
ARRC are like acountants on rohypnol.
What are tankies, according to you?

Want to guess which side of the war broke their agreement btw? Go on, have a guess ;)
 
Top Bottom