This is fairly common because some assume pre-3.3 rules are all still place. This is simply not true. Granted the BGS wasn't rebuilt from the ground up, all the new aspects alter the environment in such a way that classic mechanics are no longer viable on their own. Combat Zones are indeed the best way to win war (mileage may vary because bugs). Since 3.3 dropped, my faction has won every single war by winning CZs and turning in bonds, yet CZ victories are surely most important. I have tested this (accidentally) by soloing CZs for days in a war (my PMF is tiny) and not turning in bonds. Every . . . single . . . time, winning battles meant winning days. Supericially, the mechanics seem pretty straight forward: if I fight in 4 CZs and win 3, my PMF wins the day (assuming no player opposition) because my faction had more wins than NPC faction.I've discussed this point with the leaders of my PP group who have a lot more experience with system manipulation than me and according to them you are poking on outdated information (as a lot of people tend to do in this forum by just repeating what others have said somewhere some time ago). Should be fixed by now. Otherwise, prove me wrong.
Correct. And from my experience before the very first patch following 3.3, CZs have been the primary means to win the day, assuming individual battles are won. Will's post also states that CZs are the "obvious" way to win, which basically means they are the surest and best way.I think it's incredibly important given the new Conflict Zones and the knowledge of people being able to "game" the submission of combat bonds to provide some explicit clarity around the following:
- Does resolving a conflict zone give a proportionate boost to winning the war? That quote suggests actually winning the conflict zone, until recently, had no effect. Resolving a CZ should be substantially more effective than handing in bonds.
Historically they have not but this update fixes that as long as they are combat missions. My PMF actually started war today with the update and the mission board is populated with "war effort" missions in the conflict system, something we haven't encountered before. Maybe that's coincidence or the update included more obvious missions. /me shrugs- Do missions count for winning the war? Historically, they have not, but they really should. This also creates the argument that Combat Bonds should have *no* effect for winning a war (rather, winning conflict zones and doing missions should)
There is a lot to unpack here and some information you may not realize to look for. So I'll just throw some bullet answers.I am very new to this player faction play and before the changes today we a small group of players are trying to understand this this is our 3rd war.
The last war we did on day 1 we did very little CZ due to time zones and etc and one that day the other 4 days we hit CZ hard as much as we could handed in our bond and such only to loose the 4 days in a row. S the last 3 days of the war we did zero combat and won each day ( sounds strange to us and i hope you).
On all the CZ we did we won each time so how come the side that lost 20 CZ win on the day again don't make sense to me
The new war which started on thursday this week and we focused on just trade till the ticker of today and you hit us with NEW UPDATE. We lost so we have now done some combat and hope to be doing more before the ticker kicks in on the next day to find out how well we done.
Why not have a 2 bars on the screen where we can all see that days progress of who is winning that days war at least for me i would be able to Visualized my progress on that days war we have right now and may be in the future of Elite.
Because right now players say do less combat and trade to win and other say do more combat and win as for the bonds systems my self i would like to gone as the pay on them is not much if we have to keep handing them in after every fight we do take us away from the long fights we could be having.
I think that a more Visualized scale for that days ticker should be more in plain sight easy to read at least for me it way better to under stand than having to read forum posts saying this and that to win as for me right now their is no Clear to win u need to do this and do loose you need to do this.
So why not have the Visualized bars for us to easily understand.
Sorry if it feels i not read the post by Wil i just think its all over too complicated than it should be.
Sorry if doesn't make sense but i suffer from dyslexia to reading is not my strong point hence why i just like to to be made most simplified for players like my self
- There may have been bonuses handed out per previous rules that are now gone.
- Have you checked traffic reports? This will tell you if others (players) are potentially contributing to the conflict effort, and maybe against your faction.
- If you are trading in the system in which you are at war, it does NOTHING. All factions engaged in conflict have their influence locked and only war efforts aid in the conflict. If you were trading and not fighting, that could explain your loss for Thursday.
- Trading is not and was not a viable contribution to war (even if delivering military commodities makes sense). You may be confusing a conflict with a Community Goal. Community Goals can have CZs and offer trade options.
- Since days won are calculated upon the server tick, a real-time bar would be useless. Instead, you already have information at your disposal via local news boards. When docked at a station within a conflict system, scroll through the factions in the middle-bottom and look at the factions engaged in war (or elections). Within there you will find how many days won/lost and assets at risk.
Hope this helps.
I'm sure someone might correct me, but keep in mind I am only using post-3.3 BGS experience. A very intelligent and dilligent group is gearing up to start pulling real data and updating the math (looking at you, Jane Turner), and I'm looking forward to their findings. Hopefully we'll have more detailed information soon.