News Beyond - Chapter Four Livestream (25.10.2018) - Background Simulation and Scenarios

BongoBaggins

Volunteer Moderator
XBox question:

The localised COVAS voice packs, are they set to the console's local region, or will we be able to choose languages?
 
I'm really enjoying these changes, it's really nice to have more information, get scenario objectives and more feedback in conflict zones. Really cool stuff
I have one problem with Happiness. If (big if) squadrons can be actually linked to their PMFs, then what is the rationale behind not allowing players directly choose (through a vote via your squadron or via leadership choice) where your PMF expands? I understand you like the randomness and state driven expansions, and I'm really ok with those for non-player factions.

But for player driven factions there's really no reason... I'm from a BGS playing groups, and I enjoy it and learning these states and influencing them but even I find it a bit strange that there's an artificial barrier between player faction behavior and players. One would think that player group would be the biggest lobby in that PMF's decision making process. That'd be able to generate some real narrative, create some good conflicts and have some actual player driven content. And it'll be a great way for the BGS to be more accessible to smaller player groups and new players.

Just a few considerations. I really like most of this update so far. Really positive stuff, but give this some thought. (Maybe you might have some good stuff planned that I don't know about, but given the "happiness mechanic" I thought I should share because it seems a bit of a gimmick.)

EDIT: Obviously when expansion happens should be BGS driven, I'm merely talking about where to expand to.
 
Last edited:
still 0 feedback on pmf bgs proposal dcoument. No API. No whathever. Maybe you'll be aware of us when leaving the game massively.
 
I'm from a BGS playing groups, and I enjoy it and learning these states and influencing them but even I find it a bit strange that there's an artificial barrier between player faction behavior and players.
On top of that, no way to monitor bgs state in systems, a dashboard or something. We have 50+ systems, how are we supposed to monitor all of them daily?
 
On top of that, no way to monitor bgs state in systems, a dashboard or something. We have 50+ systems, how are we supposed to monitor all of them daily?
Yes, you're quite right, it's a bit sad that we have to compile these by ourselves. It'd be nice to have an in-game faction overview. The codex would be a good place to start for that. You could even do it color coded and set alarms when there's a big influence drop over x%... just saying... it's not that hard to implement, and it'd help tracking things.

I hear there might be something in squadrons that includes some overview where your faction is located... but to be seen if true and useful. Waiting for those news for real.
If they do something good with that I'll be really happy about it. So far the news have been mostly very positive, so looking forward to that.
 
Last edited:
so with 3 system states.. what are they goin gto do about adding even more RNG to engineering?? as if it wasn't hard enough getting the G5 mats as it is, now they are making it even harder. sure finding the USS's is supposed to be easier, but when you can now basically get literally anything in them because of all the system states at once.. you can technically go your entire Elite experience and never get the G5's you need because the 3 states mean they can spawn literally anything
 
On top of that, no way to monitor bgs state in systems, a dashboard or something. We have 50+ systems, how are we supposed to monitor all of them daily?
If you paid attention to the video/stream, you may have to sacrifice some systems if you do not have the manpower to maintain them all. You may have to deflate your presence to a size you can manage.
 
Top Bottom