Colonisation may not lead to the expansion of the bubble, but maybe it's condensing.

[Dark Heavy Eight]

Why?

Because BGS (Expansion) = <~20Ly, and Colonisation (Condensing) = <~10Ly

<~10Ly is now the rule (dependent on FDEV's parameters changing)

Now, as a PMF/BGS player, 'game' the rules.

1] Any uninhabited system within <~10Ly that has viable colonisation planets is (potentially) a viable BGS target, once colonised.
2] If you understand the "Extraction-Refinery-Industrial-Hi Tech-Agriculture" flow of goods within <~10Ly of each other, then you'll understand that all the different economies need to be within <~10Ly of each other (so the NPC's can go about their business)
3] Once the player base realises this, after they've done their "Whoopie! We Colonised!" thing, they'll realise that they need other nearby (<~10Ly) systems with other economies to flourish/survive/profit. And guess what. The majority of those systems are home to PMFs. So that means more BGS work to oust/takeover/dominate those systems to gain control of their economies and tie them all together into a profitable network. ('Profitable' here means Credits, PP tokens, trade routes, mutual security and support, sustainability, access, etc.)

And that is A LOT OF WORK. (Did I just say 'Grind'?)

Ya'll just turned inwards, not outwards.

Yes, there is talk of "Daisy-chaining" colonisation systems out to <wherever>, and for sure, the crazy (and amazing!) community of E will doubtless do that. But that will be the few.
But the majority of players (IMHO) will go through steps 1-3 (above) and end up condensing the Bubble, rather than expanding it.
Don't get me wrong - I'm all for base building and expansion, but I foresee 'The Law of Unintended Consequences', or 'Perverse Incentives' at play.
Is it good? Is it Bad? Is it MEH?
I dunno, but let's have fun! o7

<Let the Biowaste flow>

 

[Ian Doncaster]

2] If you understand the "Extraction-Refinery-Industrial-Hi Tech-Agriculture" flow of goods within <~10Ly of each other, then you'll understand that all the different economies need to be within <~10Ly of each other

Though it doesn't really matter if they're not, since only player-carried cargo affects the results, and players have a much larger jump range. There are thousands of systems, even within the bubble, which don't fit that closeness if just the primary system economy is considered (because primary High Tech is very rare, and even primary Agricultural is somewhat uncommon on the fringes) and they've been doing fine. There are quite a few systems in the fringes of the bubble which don't have any other inhabited systems within 10 LY.

Regardless, you can have multiple economies at different stations within a system, multiple economies per station, and Odyssey settlements to fill any gaps, so there's not likely to be a problem in that respect even with just one system.

So that means more BGS work to oust/takeover/dominate those systems to gain control of their economies

Does it? Systems belonging to different factions currently trade with each other just fine, and most of the high-profit goods for trading are universally legal anyway.

For RP purposes, sure, you might want to take over the nearby systems with your faction too (people are doing that already), but I don't see anything that Frontier have said about colonisation which indicates there'd be any quantitative benefit for doing so over and above what we already have (which isn't much)

The majority of those systems are home to PMFs.

So you've got the choice:
1) Engage in a long-term conflict with another player group of similar size to yourself (because all the smaller ones you already crushed anyway) with uncertain results
2) Just colonise a whole bunch of new systems and add them to your faction. Why get into fights any more when a big squadron can be adding new systems far faster than the once-every-two-weeks Expansion cycle could be capturing existing ones?

'The Law of Unintended Consequences'

"Unintended" by who?

A 10 LY range very strongly encourages building in and around the existing bubble; gradually expanding and in-filling [1] that rather than going off into deep space in all directions.

If Frontier wanted colonisation to be about scattering thousands of disconnected deep-space colonies across the map, the range would have been 50-100 LY at least, perhaps more.

[1] Though there's generally a reason that the uninhabited systems within the bubble are uninhabited; a lot of them don't have planets and other than on the fringes they don't have interesting planets. That wouldn't necessarily prevent colonisation but it might mean that only a BGS Builder with a "More systems, who cares what they are" attitude would bother with them.

 

[Dark Heavy Eight]

A 10 LY range very strongly encourages building in and around the existing bubble; gradually expanding and in-filling [1] that rather than going off into deep space in all directions.

... hence why the Bubble may condense, rather than expand. All of your arguments are valid, and I accept them. But there are (probably) more PMFs inside the Bubble than on the fringes, so they're going to 'hoover up' the 0 population systems internally - as you say, regardless of system type = "Let's get real estate!"

"Unintended" by the Developers. As Arf observed in the last Frontier Unlocked, words akin to "We expect players to behave one way and they go off in a completely different direction". For more on this phenomena, see this Wikipedia article.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

But there are (probably) more PMFs inside the Bubble than on the fringes, so they're going to 'hoover up' the 0 population systems internally - as you say, regardless of system type = "Let's get real estate!"

This one I think very much depends on so many currently unknown factors.
1) What proportion of the colonisation is driven for the purpose of PMF system count expansion
2) Whether systems "inside" the bubble get Colonisation Contacts at all
3) Whether a PMF needs an existing presence near the edge of the bubble to be able to colonise a system "outside" it
4) Whether colonisation is permanent, or is intended as a counteracting force to something else which destroys system populations.
5) Whether colonised systems have some sort of "value" beyond another tally mark for a PMF-supporting group, which might make "a brown dwarf and four icy planets" not worth taking even if it's right next to you.

...which all goes back to what Frontier intend Colonisation to be "for", which we don't really know yet.

Sure, Colonisation is almost certain to be used in ways which Frontier don't expect, and whether used in expected or unexpected ways have consequences no-one expects. But until we know what Frontier does expect we can't say if any particular usage or consequence is unintended.

 

[Dark Heavy Eight]

Firstly, for sure! As Donald Rumsfeld put it "There are knowns, unknknowns and unknown unknowns" (or words to that effect)
So at the moment, we, the player base, are living in an information vacuum.
What little information we have is guiding our decision-making at a visceral level. And that's Ok. Colonisation has just been announced, and will probably drop in 3-6 months time. Let's work with what we've got.

To respond to your points one by one:
1) 10Ly. PMF's can grind to get 20Ly with BGS expansion. Colonisation can get them 10Ly, but with what benefit? (As above, we don't have enough info ATM to make a determination, so I'll cede this point to you)
2) Yes, it's a valid argument. Are they 'Everywhere' (Ubquitious) or like 'Material Traders' (Somewhere) or like Engineers (Rare as hen's teeth!)
3) 10Ly. If your PMF ain't close to the edge, then you gotta lotta hard work to go.
4) Now this I hadn't figured upon, so thank you - pause for thought. 'Do it. Keep it up. Maintain it. Or it dies'. A bit like having a child. Or a house plant. But wouldn't that put more pressure on colonisation (expansion) than Internal consolidation (condesing)?
5) I have system research that shows that REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED. (Sorry. My apologies. That was a cheap shot, below the belt.) But i want to play some cards close to my chest.

Finally, thank you you for the debate/discourse - it's been educational, intellectual, even-handed, informed and respectful

o7

 

[Ian Doncaster]

3) 10Ly. If your PMF ain't close to the edge, then you gotta lotta hard work to go.

10 LY is the range for establishing a new system. Not yet answered, though, is where the starter factions in that system come from, and if they're subject to the same range limit. If the System Architect can start the system off with factions they choose at least to some extent, then being trapped in the middle of the bubble is less of an issue for a PMF wanting to grow through colonisation.

But wouldn't that put more pressure on colonisation (expansion) than Internal consolidation (condesing)?

That would depend strongly on the nature of the destructive force - if it is in some way stronger closer to the centre of the bubble, or even on one side but not the other, there might be more of a priority placed on getting away from it than on repeatedly resettling the systems it destroyed.

Conversely something which primarily affected "unused" systems - the ones which don't get traffic most days - might lead to the bubble breaking up into smaller clusters around the hub systems (including perhaps some new popular hubs from big coloniser groups), with colonising the gaps in-between easy to do but also easy to lose again because no-one else will maintain it for you.

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

5) Whether colonised systems have some sort of "value" beyond another tally mark for a PMF-supporting group, which might make "a brown dwarf and four icy planets" not worth taking even if it's right next to you.

Systems like these will maybe be valuable as stepping stones to other systems if the colonization range remains as pitiful as 10 light years is.

Though I'm wondering, as far as system value goes for colonization, if uncolonized systems with earthlikes will have the earthlike planet contribute massively to the potential system population and get the city night lights on its dark side to sort of indicate it's been colonized. I also wonder if terraforming candidates would be valuable for similar reasons. Most ELW's in the Colonized Bubble have the "This planet has been terraformed" tag.

 

[Marcus Bronco]

What is needed is players being able to craft and improve shipyard, shape their settlements as they want, they want green houses because their lore is connected to that? Or they are maybe agriculture based for power play so that makes sense and they want to align with that, then the game should allow to actually bring resources like specific polymers for the "transparent Ceiling" and agricultural goods to start farming in it etc...

Do we want to amplify our possibilities with a garage in a basic settlement then from standard we must be able to do it. We bring iron and so on, electronical stuff and so on.. this must be done in HUGE quantities..so only cooperation and organization can achieve it.
The game then must be able to sustain it without damging gameplay stability and so on.

Yes someone can build bases why not... far away but already the FC are working that way.. people bring tritium or whatever supply to such places and voilà u have already a colonization via FCs... amazing activity already happening since some time. Basically necessary pit stops for those who take the long journey and want it sort of comfortable.

Yes it doesn't need expansion out of the bubble, the colonization should allow indeed to terraform some places, so that also battle could happen for specific bodies (and thus the system)...

Anyway...other chances should be allowed: after x amount of months of domination one should be able to change the name of a settlement or starport? maybe... always respectful of Sci fi or anyway lore. And Fdev need to approve it before going on. And payment of CR needs to be done (big amounts.. like blns as it includes changes of HOLO here and there to advertise the name change of the station is happening...

Peoiple that are wrong doers maybe should alos be allowed to have theior bases here and there, possibly made oiut of asteroids? Made out of places that could look non habitable.. so they can sort of hide but still be found.

And yes.. stuff needs to be possibly destructible.
Progression must be destructible.

People must play this online, if they do introduce destruction, people can't destroy stuff while being offline and in private..

This is why the Solo and Private group the more the simulation gets deeper makes no sense at all... people seeing stuff blowing up below their eyes... can't do nothing really... would make no sense and just be frustrating.

The game needs to take the hardcore, realistic, permadeath or anyway immersive mood\tone\path.. it can't be relaxing experience offline forever.