BGS Since Ascendancy

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Could be worth a try - and/or I guess, do it the other way round too: the systems I tested with Kaine were just four random edge-of-bubble systems I expected (correctly) to have no traffic, and where I don't have any particular preference for what happens to the influence levels, so you could try some or all of those.
Col 285 Sector OT-G c11-12, Col 285 Sector OT-G c11-6, Hydrae Sector QY-R b4-2, Col 285 Sector PO-G c11-22 (the last one has a very long supercruise)
 

HCR Motorhead

H
I can do that. I have a Mandalay built so distance is no issue for me and I can cover a lot of BGS activity. I did test mine in known space, two systems focused on were HIP 18828 and Pirawilotri. However, in the interests of sterile testing you can use your discretion and add in systems such as HIP 25795 or HIP 25843 which have had practically static influence for some time. Maybe throw in something random or one that is unaffiliated for a similar sample size.
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Thanks - tests set up now. I've also tested another Kaine system (in case that's changed since last time) and another ALD system not controlled by your faction (in case that somehow matters)
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Whereas mine have been weird. I did missions for two secondary factions in each case (a mix of source cargo, courier and credit donation), and also did a holohack as a non-influence Powerplay activity just to ensure there was some of that also going on
- HIP 69074, the Kaine system I was in before I set out to do the tests, those worked as expected
- HIP 13681, the random nearby low-traffic ALD system I checked afterwards, again, influence up as expected for those two factions, down for everyone else
- Pirawilotri had someone come in to do Reinforcement merits for LYR after I Ieft, and that seems to have been done in a way which boosted the controlling faction so it's hard to be certain if what I did made any difference, but it doesn't seem to have: it didn't push the controller that much
- your three HIP systems ... no change yet in influence at all.

So this is all very odd - missions work fine ... except when your minor faction controls the system?!
 

HCR Motorhead

H
I will cry if it turns out that we're one of a few factions who just ended up stuck due to some variable. But what variable? Bounties and exploration data are reliable as far as I know, I was going to do that in my tests today knowing that I personally don't kibosh influence from missions. Also in my plans include one system with just donations.
 

HCR Motorhead

H
Everything I did worked as it ought to, even just donations which were considered problematic in our neck of the woods before we realised it applied to every mission. Do you have any idea as to how this is happening the way it is?

What a mess. Between this and the expansions I've lost a lot of eagerness to play the game for a while.
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
It seems like there's multiple intersecting problems.
- expansions (and possibly other states) can get stuck in any of pending, active or recovering
- even if expansions resolve normally on the state timers, it's also possible for them just to not go anywhere despite having targets
- some systems absolutely no influence lever works (and this may or may not be related to the stuck states issue)
- some systems the missions lever doesn't work but everything else does
- some systems are perfectly normal despite all of this

And on the other side:
- the Powerplay status of the system doesn't seem directly relevant (at least some of this seems to be affecting Colonia)
- the person carrying out the action doesn't seem to matter

Checking back through my own records, I'm not sure any of this is necessarily even directly connected to the Ascendancy update itself - looking back at least some of the expansion weirdness seems to have started in mid-to-late September, almost a month before the Ascendancy release - though throwing a huge amount of extra player activity into the game and moving around which systems it applies to has probably done a lot to expose it.
 

AnvadicA

A
Hi there, how do you find this situation:

1734008656288.png


Formely, I remember, the minimum nuber of factions was 3. And a non-native faction could not retreat, if there are only 3 factions present. But after PP2 launched, all factions going down less than 2.5% received a retreat status and succesfully retreated. I could only save 1 at the 5th day. Is that a bug or a new rule? I just can't understand how the system might behave with only one faction at 100% influence...
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
AnvadicA said:
And a non-native faction could not retreat, if there are only 3 factions present.
Click to expand...
A non-native faction cannot start a retreat if there are only 3 factions present.

But if multiple factions start a retreat at or near the same time while the faction count is 4 or higher, then all those retreats can potentially complete and leave the system with only 1 or 2 factions.
 

Steven G

S
The faction i'm supporting is in pending expansion atm.
What is strange, is that the active state has changed over the past days, we are following it through the squadron menu of the right panel of the ship.
We have been in pending expansion, then in expansion, then moved back in pending expansion.
1st day of the 1st pending expansion state was 19 days ago.
 

NavlGazr

N
I understand that fixing the BGS may be taking time but please at least tell us you're working on it or at least are aware of it.
We're in "active expansion day 28", it's coming up on a month now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom