News Content Recap: Beyond - Chapter Four Livestream - Background Simulation and Scenarios

[Micha]

And all the while, the question remains, what would be so wrong for everyship to have an FSS as standard? If you want to find out what USS are in the system, you can invest the time in the FSS to find out... Done...

As an explorer, I'd certainly love for the FSS to be integrated as it would free a slot.. but, playing Devil's Advocate here, basically your argument is: "New gameplay, requiring new module, should be built-in". No?

If we retrofit that thought to the game, every ship should have built-in all the modules which were released after the game launched.

 

[Micha]

Understood, the Honk and FSS are currently aimed at being one in the same tool/module.

My question/point is, if we pretended than the Honk remained exactly what it is (an optional module), BUT the FSS was a standard feature on all ships? What would be pros and cons be?

From my understanding (possibly flawed?):-
- Explorers would still need fit an Discovery Scanner, to break the back of any new system they visited.
- Everyone else could benefit from being able to get the most out of systems content if they wished by using the FSS?

Yes, flawed, because the "honk" populates the FSS with data. No "honk", no data for the FSS to process.

 

[Corbin Moran]

[*]The Security bar consists of Lockdown, Civil Unrest, and a new state called Civil Liberty on the positive end. Civil Liberty represents a period of safety and freedom for the faction's population.

...

[*]Civil Liberty - The faction is enjoying a period of stability within this system, resulting in widespread happiness among the local population. Bounty hunting activity can help sustain the civil liberty period.

Isn't the wording Civil Liberty potentially misleading, since even a dictatorship might experience this state in the game? (I ask since the usual use of the word is related to the rights of individuals vs. society).

Isn't this state less about the rights of the population and more about the benefits arising from a feeling of security? Following that, I would suggest naming it Civil Security or something along those lines.

 

[wstephenson]

Isn't the wording Civil Liberty potentially misleading, since even a dictatorship might experience this state in the game? (I ask since the usual use of the word is related to the rights of individuals vs. society).

Isn't this state less about the rights of the population and more about the benefits arising from a feeling of security? Following that, I would suggest naming it Civil Security or something along those lines.

It's a tough one, isn't it? Expressing a society functioning well (which I think is the meaning of this end of the security bar) depends very much on the type of society it is. However, 'Civil Liberty' is a poor compromise, because it is already a loaded term in the English speaking world defined by its opposition to restrictive, authoritarian state tendencies.

The other problem that I have with the faction Security bar is that it will be confused with the effectiveness and responsiveness of system authority vessels. Or will the Security bar replace the existing system-wide security level in that faction's polities? It would make sense.

 

[zzehirbazz]

Make Happiness Prosperity again!

 

[LittleDizzle]

I finally got around to watching the livestream this morning and really loved every single thing. The mega ship assault at the end felt like the game was becoming closer to what the trailers advertise!

 

[aRJay]

I have no idea of what the actual numbers are of those who manipulate the BGS but I did see almost 6000 players watch this stream live as it was broadcast. Many were there a couple of hours before it aired just waiting. It seemed that there were many very interested in it at the time. Just my observation.

I also would like to see even more depth in the BGS such as the examples you gave. Population growth and decline, terraforming systems actually finishing, allowing players a little more involvement in the manipulation of commodities. I'd also like to see something like this example: delivery of explosives to an extraction outpost for a particular faction which in turn would create more or better missions of hauling precious metals that are extracted using the explosives to other systems that demand or use them. No explosives, no missions. That's a simple example but more depth with commodities affecting missions and factions could involve more systems. I already trade between systems that are symbiotic li!e that (extraction and industry being one) but its lacking a little more.

Also, in the commodities descriptions of markets, for example, gold and silver are used in the making of certain technologies BUT I never see any of this technology or some end use of hauling it there. Everything is kinda just used for money, influence or materials but not in actually affecting the system. I love the new updates but I'd really like to see more cause and effect in the BGS than just money and influence.....like watching a station grow after accumulating a certain amount of wealth...or being empty and abandoned because a famine killed off the populace. I think it would endear players more to the systems they frequent and create a bond where they actually care or not if pirates are disrupting shipping or lanes or God forbid, the thargoids show up and attack their station....right now I see so many stations they have been attacked and no one really cares...why should they? They have no connection to them.....

That is going to be hard to quantify as almost everything we do in game has an effect on the BGS which means that the number is the size of the entire player base, however the number that are trying to do it deliberately will be around that of the number of us in player factions give or take 10% or so.

 

[Konan]

Yes, I agree. The size of the player base AND the number of systems, stations and factions is a huge number and almost (in my limited computing knowledge) seems impossible for a lot of depth in the bgs. But.....one can always hope!

 

[aRJay]

Yes, I agree. The size of the player base AND the number of systems, stations and factions is a huge number and almost (in my limited computing knowledge) seems impossible for a lot of depth in the bgs. But.....one can always hope!

Remember we are playing relatively ordinary individuals the fact that we can only contribute in a comparitvely minor way to the state and economy of whole star systems is a good thing in my view and if there was to much depth to it it wouldn't be a Background Simulation it would become the point of the game and I like that my influence on the lives of billions of people in thousands of locations is not immensely more than my influence on anything in the mundane world.

 

[Konan]

Hahaha.....I'm sorry dude. That made me laugh out loud for real. You play a game, a video game, so that your character has little or no effect on a mundane world? That's fine. To each his own i guess. But honestly a little more depth would not force you to recognize or acknowledge your influence on your mundane video game world. You could still blissfully (or blindly)play the game doing whatever it is you do. Now to be fair, I don't want to turn the game into a civilization type game. But the game has commodity descriptions for the use of its products....it wouldn't be too much to ask to see those products being created or used in some fashion. (If the programming isn't too hard or difficult to create it). Bgs manipulation is a lot of hard work and very time intensive, as it should be. Right now the bgs is just pushing numbers on a screen basically. Only war has an effect you can see. I just want to see the galaxy or bubble appear to be alive...I apologize if I offended you with the lol.....it just struck me funny.

 

[Regemus]

Parmo.... Not much for the casual solo (not talking about game mode) player here. This type of player constitutes the vast majority of the ED player base - an assertion.
It's beyond reasoning that FDev does not keep this part of the player base in mind when introducng new features etc into ED.

Not sure where you get this assumption from, look at Inara squadrons, which was the old 'Wing', listed there are groups that have created squadrons, most of which are involved in Player minor factions, at a rough count there are over 20,000 members. I don't think the vast majority of the player base are casual solo.

 

[Rick Bravo]

So how exactly is a defense of a megaship supposed to be handled by the controlling faction? Presumably the scenario with the attacked megaship could happen in any mode. So if it happens in solo or pg, how is a faction supposed to defend the megaship?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

So how exactly is a defense of a megaship supposed to be handled by the controlling faction? Presumably the scenario with the attacked megaship could happen in any mode. So if it happens in solo or pg, how is a faction supposed to defend the megaship?

You defend the megaship from the NPC's that are attacking. Thought that was obvious.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

You defend the megaship from the NPC's that are attacking. Thought that was obvious.

Obviously it is not.

 

[Nerix]

Do we already know how many different scenarios there'll be? Definitely looking forward to that feature, but I'm worried a bit that they will soon wear off if it's only a handful (with the same voice acting).

To get more of them in the game this could eventually also done with text only.

 

[Rick Bravo]

You defend the megaship from the NPC's that are attacking. Thought that was obvious.

In the most superficial and simplistic sense, your analysis is correct but only IF you are presented the the scenario and IF you are the defending faction, then it is fine. HOWEVER, that megaship scenario can be played out hundreds of times by hundreds of different players and if you are the controlling faction, you will be negatively impacted EVERY time the pirates and/or player "kill" the megaship. This is an issue that has not been properly addressed by Fdev, or at least not properly explained if Fdev has a solution.

 

[StefanOS]

Sorry I cant read all the posts .... so I post my ideas without any knowledge of what others did write...

My 2 cents on scenarios WHICH I THINK ARE NEEDED VERY MUCH.... FINALLY WE GET THEM !!!!!

1. the shown scenario with the ship asking for food ..... it is nice but somehow VERY unrealistic because I normally don't have food in my cargo, and I am sure if I had, he would ask me for beer, and I had beer he would ask me for meat...... I also hope that it is enough to drop the needed cargo because I 100% don't carry a transfer limpets just in case this scenario will happen! (BTW I hate the DIFFERENT LIMPETS FOR EVERY TASK IDEA IN ED..... it is making everything OVER COMPLICATED to the point that we always are wrong outfitted for what may span)

2. I know that I can go and get the needed item in the neighbor system, but this is somehow odd, why is the ship not capable to jump there to buy it themselves? Is the frameshift drive defect?? Dont they have credits to buy fuel? Are they under a trade embargo?

3. a scenario system WOULD BRING LIVE TO extraction sights. A miner is attacked by pirates in a RES, he calls for help - I can choose to intervene or not. If I respond and save him he should also say thanks and offer some reward (f.e credits) and give me some reputation for his faction! I would be nice to get recognized and hailed in a specific manner by ships and stations of this faction if your reputation is getting high by saving their miner/trader fleet!

4. same SCENARIO system like 3. would bring live in SUPER CRUISE with trader or passenger ships.... A trader/tourist ship is attacked by pirates in a SUPER CRUISE, he calls for help - I can choose to intervene by jumping in that SYSTEM SOURCE or not. If I respond and save him he should also say thanks and offer some a reward (f.e credits or materials) and give me some reputation for his faction! I would be nice to get recognized and hailed in a specific manner by ships and stations of this faction if your reputation is getting high by saving their miner/trader/tourist fleet!

5. other possible scenarios:
defend a station,
defend a ground base,
defend a planet outposts

 

[Rat Catcher]

In the most superficial and simplistic sense, your analysis is correct but only IF you are presented the the scenario and IF you are the defending faction, then it is fine. HOWEVER, that megaship scenario can be played out hundreds of times by hundreds of different players and if you are the controlling faction, you will be negatively impacted EVERY time the pirates and/or player "kill" the megaship. This is an issue that has not been properly addressed by Fdev, or at least not properly explained if Fdev has a solution.

The scenario would be available to all, the controlling faction players have the same opportunity as everyone to interact with said scenario. This can be done in any mode by anyone, as it always has been before. The only drawback for those with a controlling interest in a system is that should a massively coordinated attack by e.g. a larger faction occur then influence would be lost if the player faction defending (loosely put) are unable to present a similar 'defence' stategy. In the livestream it was mentioned that, in particular, larger PMF's might find things a bit harder.

In your response to Max you did appear to miss the point that having your faction play the same scenario but in your favour would assist your faction in the same way, which is how the game mechanic works. the Fuel Rats nearly lost their controlling influence by a well-executed coup that was only averted by massive community engagement in their favour. A very good example of how the BGS works - there isn't any issue with the mechanics - it is working pretty much as intended.

 

[Rick Bravo]

The scenario would be available to all, the controlling faction players have the same opportunity as everyone to interact with said scenario. This can be done in any mode by anyone, as it always has been before. The only drawback for those with a controlling interest in a system is that should a massively coordinated attack by e.g. a larger faction occur then influence would be lost if the player faction defending (loosely put) are unable to present a similar 'defence' stategy. In the livestream it was mentioned that, in particular, larger PMF's might find things a bit harder.

In your response to Max you did appear to miss the point that having your faction play the same scenario but in your favour would assist your faction in the same way, which is how the game mechanic works. the Fuel Rats nearly lost their controlling influence by a well-executed coup that was only averted by massive community engagement in their favour. A very good example of how the BGS works - there isn't any issue with the mechanics - it is working pretty much as intended.

Well this was at the heart of the question to Fdev. What do they envision as the strategy of defense in this scenario? In the stream they pointed out that this scenario should be defended but they never said how. As you suggest, the only apparent defense is the defending faction doing its best to farm as many of these megaship scenarios as possible. That seems a bit cumbersome and would make pretty much any faction dread the idea of a megaship traveling to their system. I was hoping Fdev had thought a little deeper than that and maybe they have and just not expressed themselves very well. If not, I think this scenario could use some refining in beta. The idea that a single scenario could occupy much of the time of an entire player group for an entire week is not good gameplay. Imagine doing the exact same thing over and over for a week. Maybe limiting the number of times a megaship scenario can spawn in a week or per server tick? I think this kind of thing will be exploited unless some limits are set.

 

[Rat Catcher]

But the Megaship scenario is only a small part of the machinations called BGS, even if limited as you suggested the 'defending' faction would still need to pour their resources into the scenario or have thier influence reduced by those who are playing the scenario from opposing factions.

Just in case it is coming next, no - open only wouldn't be the answer either, not unless ED became a pay-to-play game with dedicated servers accomodating the entire playerbase, even then I'm not sure that console players would be able to play inclusively with all platforms.

As it stands it will present a challenge to PMF's in pretty much the way it always had, just giving you new scenarios to play rather than only manipulation of the BGS through missions/CZ's etc.