ED Background Simulation - Large Faction Influence Swing Mechanics

[dynamicbob]

this method could also be extended to speed up expansion states much more quickly, a build up in state strength, another thing is exploration data sold one at a time could be used to create more transactions and therefore boosting the influence value of exploration data handed in as well ...... the extension of logic makes sense.

 

[CMDR Endincite]

this method could also be extended to speed up expansion states much more quickly, a build up in state strength, another thing is exploration data sold one at a time could be used to create more transactions and therefore boosting the influence value of exploration data handed in as well ...... the extension of logic makes sense.

That in particular, I think, needs more testing. Exploration data is the one thing I haven't actually seen work (in any version) to a greater extent by 'unit-sale'.

 

[dynamicbob]

That in particular, I think, needs more testing. Exploration data is the one thing I haven't actually seen work (in any version) to a greater extent by 'unit-sale'.

i have to wonder, i know Fdev select some CGs according to activity levels ( high traffic areas get galnet related CGs of solar systems or sizeable npc minor factions and the like) now if it is not player traffic but total transactions ( total activity) we could fool the internal metric counters to generate higher hotspots of activity in systems we wanted to influence perhaps ..... i have a few ideas and areas going back over galnet in the last 2 years and revisiting some areas for hotspotting.

I dont expect too many to get what im suggesting but ill continue testing in some areas that are outside of any player factions just to see if firstly influence results can be influenced first and then some other primordial ideas i have

 

[dynamicbob]

thinking it over, if one wanted to positive profit a faction that holds a station, then picking up occupied escape pods out of signal sources would be benefical as they have legal status they have 0 pickup(buy) and 2500 (profit) so that could be added as well to a profit positive approach

 

[Henry]

so i got some time to do some testings... (all in around 15mil pop. systems)

buying bulk, selling 1t at a time with profit - unsignificant effect altough i got some interference. needs more testing.
buying bulk, selling 1t at a time with loss - no effect at destination but a small gain at the source
buying 1t at a time, selling 1t at a time with profit - huge gain at the destination, some gain at source
buying 1t at a time, selling 1t at a time with loss - huge drops at destination, some gain at source

but now the game breaker:
buying bulk, selling 1t at a time to black market with profit - massive drops at the destination, so much that it cant even be countered by the same amount of normal 1t trading

it does not work with factions being in war/civil war.

i did even some tests in very high traffic systems with >50mil bounties handed in and i could still drop influence by almost 10% per tick.

whoever called early on may need to test again. this explains the mess in our previously owned systems fully. a single person with a python can outdo 20+ ppl running missions, bounty hunting and trading with one run... fix please?

 

[RandomGun]

It's most definitely there, it was never truly fixed, try it for yourself, note that you need to both buy AND sell in single units. Some of us believe we thought it was fixed only due to the new war state hold on influence confusing matters when it arrived...

Some issues were certainly fixed. Early in 2.0 you could buy batch-buy Biowaste at a station and then immediately sell it back to the same station in single units to destroy influence (I had some fun at Wolfberg ). Also, you could batch-buy from another system, sell in single units and have the same effect. These were fixed in a server side (configuration) update.

A good short term measure, yes, but if you have a large player population trying to move influence why should they be penalised? It needs balancing, not capping...

I would like to see diminishing returns of efforts (logarithmic or similar). Then large player population could always do more than a small one, but not much more. A single player could do something noticeable, but would always lose to an opposing small player group.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

so i got some time to do some testings... (all in around 15mil pop. systems)

This will be very dissapointing if true.

Jmanis did some very in depth testing of the 1-ton exploit. His efforts supposedly led to the exploit being fixed.

I only learned about the 1 ton exploit near the time it was closed. I was testing it a couple of days before and after the fix (Which I'm sure was on 21st March). My testing (1-ton loss trading only) showed a clear difference between before and after the fix.

I wonder if the code for the fix has been accidentally replaced during a later update.

 

[iFred]

@deathwatch please share those test. and make sure they are later than the bugreport filed on the first page.

@ifred thank you. your test is a hint, but i wouldn't have expected a lot of influence shift in a 13 mio population system with "only" 960 t sold... anyway, that at least shows that it needs much more effort, if it works at all, which i doubt.

I´m sorry. 2 years after release and 2.5 years after Premium Beta I am not willing to do a real deep testing again. I checked whether or not the OP´s points are valid or not (most of them are not), that´s all I want to put into this.

 

[goemon]

:
buying bulk, selling 1t at a time to black market with profit - massive drops at the destination, so much that it cant even be countered by the same amount of normal 1t trading

interesting. some questions:

a) did you reproduce that at least twice?
b) how much is the difference of selling the same amount in the same system not in 1T but at once?
c) did you reproduce that in a no traffic system? e.g. the huge drop you have seen could also come from various other sources (for exampel: bountyhunters without kws and the market coontrolling faction spawning a lot of pirates).

... and please share to the bug report linked on the first page or open a new one, if you have consistent results.

 

[goemon]

I´m sorry. 2 years after release and 2.5 years after Premium Beta I am not willing to do a real deep testing again. I checked whether or not the OP´s points are valid or not (most of them are not), that´s all I want to put into this.

fully understandable.

 

[Jmanis]

This will be very dissapointing if true.

Jmanis did some very in depth testing of the 1-ton exploit. His efforts supposedly led to the exploit being fixed.

I only learned about the 1 ton exploit near the time it was closed. I was testing it a couple of days before and after the fix (Which I'm sure was on 21st March). My testing (1-ton loss trading only) showed a clear difference between before and after the fix.

I wonder if the code for the fix has been accidentally replaced during a later update.

Someone linked the ticket I submitted somewhere, but my belief is the "fix" did not truly "fix" 1t trading, but just dampened the impact of it (by an order of magnitude or so). I haven't played much over the last two months. Suffice to say, when I did respond to the support ticket with a test, the "extreme" nature of doing this was tempered. To date, I've never had any significant, observable influence impact from, dare I call it "Standard" trading?

I did get back on the horse last night and ran some missions and, based on the discussions around here, some 1t loss trading (around 100t worth). The impact wasn't particularly severe on the targeted faction (the missions I ran had a much greater impact). I'll keep looking...

 

[Henry]

I would like to see diminishing returns of efforts (logarithmic or similar). Then large player population could always do more than a small one, but not much more. A single player could do something noticeable, but would always lose to an opposing small player group.

i really like that idea...


some more findings: it doesnt seem to work when you buy from a station in the same system or even buy and resell at the same station. also, it works best if you bring something to a station that isnt listed (no demand).

interesting. some questions:

a) did you reproduce that at least twice?
b) how much is the difference of selling the same amount in the same system not in 1T but at once?
c) did you reproduce that in a no traffic system? e.g. the huge drop you have seen could also come from various other sources (for exampel: bountyhunters without kws and the market coontrolling faction spawning a lot of pirates).

... and please share to the bug report linked on the first page or open a new one, if you have consistent results.

a: yes, tested in multiple systems. b: see above. c: yes, backwater systems as well as high traffic systems. i only tested trading 1t/time. only mentioned the bounties to show it even works in systems that are busy.

what do you mean with the bug report? shall i resurrect that yearold thing?

 

[dynamicbob]

This might force Fdev to actually comment on the background sim, i for one am using this as it would seem working as intended mechanic, the previous fix should eitehr be properly applied if Fdev are to lazy and slow then its time to begin using it as a working as intended mechanic - thats the quickest way to get Fdev to fix something is to begin grinding and id suggest like unknown artifacts begin working with key locations to cause rapid swings in influence values

- - - Updated - - -

i really like that idea...


some more findings: it doesnt seem to work when you buy from a station in the same system or even buy and resell at the same station. also, it works best if you bring something to a station that isnt listed (no demand).




a: yes, tested in multiple systems. b: see above. c: yes, backwater systems as well as high traffic systems. i only tested trading 1t/time. only mentioned the bounties to show it even works in systems that are busy.

what do you mean with the bug report? shall i resurrect that yearold thing?

if its been there "fixed but actually unfixed" for a year it shows frontiers lack of quality control and the need to actually fix the BGS and upgrade it with serious developer resources, resurrect it at the same time use it lets turn the galaxy upside down

 

[goemon]

a: yes, tested in multiple systems.

can you share the different numbers? e.g.: population size, tons sold, influence change after tick? can you share the numbers of the traffic report? backwater system = 0 traffic beside yourself?

b: see above.

i can't see numbers above, and from my understanding, you haven't tested in the same system twice, what is the effect of 1 t trading compared to larger patches in the same system, to quantify that effect - or am i missing something?

c: yes, backwater systems as well as high traffic systems. i only tested trading 1t/time. only mentioned the bounties to show it even works in systems that are busy.

for testing a mechanic any other traffic can be interfering. you simply don't know what 1 sidey did in system - he could have run 60 base assault missions on that very day. for testing a mechanic, you want a system, which shows 0 traffic besides yours, and no bountyhunter and no crime report (e.g. nobody active in system) - both when you conduct your test, as well as when you check 1 tick later for results. also you want to reproduce the same effect in the same system at least twice (or a very similar one for diminuishing returns with dropping or rising influence levels).

what do you mean with the bug report? shall i resurrect that yearold thing?

yep. because there was an FDEV input in it - chance is, that whoever fixed the bug/exploit back then can have a look at it again.

___

some here claim, that they tested and there is no effect of the actions described in the op (for exampel @iFred, @CMDR Endincite) - so either the testers are not testing the same thing, or the effect has more circumstances needed, or what you see isn't an effect of 1t trading.

 

[Henry]

getting kinda tired of ppl downplaying the whole issue. i'm gonna provide some screenshots tomorrow after the tick if i find another undisturbed system in my time.

some ppl claim it doesnt work anymore. reading their posts let me believe they buy and sell at the same station/system. OP clearly states it has to be 2 different systems.

EDIT: i just heard we will have another beta starting by tomorrow. might be easier to reproduce there (less traffic), screens have to wait for another day then.

 

[dynamicbob]

getting kinda tired of ppl downplaying the whole issue. i'm gonna provide some screenshots tomorrow after the tick if i find another undisturbed system in my time.

some ppl claim it doesnt work anymore. reading their posts let me believe they buy and sell at the same station/system. OP clearly states it has to be 2 different systems.

EDIT: i just heard we will have another beta starting by tomorrow. might be easier to reproduce there (less traffic), screens have to wait for another day then.

Ill confirm that testing yesterday produced a noticeable positive result at my end so henry u are onto something, i think those playing it down either want to hide its effectiveness or just havent done it the right way that is buy 1x1x1 in one system and then goto another system and sell 1x1x1 and the results are as the OP has reported, its a big tool and the fact the devs havent commented leads me to think they think it is working as intended

And if it is working as intended its time to goto town and really open it up

 

[dynamicbob]

This could be turned to the current community goal locations to spice things up

 

[dynamicbob]

This also explains why mining has such a massive influence shift when done on its own and then sold in anohter system. As there is a 0 base cost and then x profit for minerals mined, that does explain a few things ( and i would hazard that selling mining cargo one unit at a time)

 

[Jmanis]

I would like to see diminishing returns of efforts (logarithmic or similar). Then large player population could always do more than a small one, but not much more. A single player could do something noticeable, but would always lose to an opposing small player group.

This (should be) is already a thing, as far as I know. I don't have time for the maths though, plus there's a high likelihood the maths is out of date.

Diminishing returns was already a thing when I last focused on the BGS, even for 1t trading before it got nerfed. Shipping 1,000t of goods and selling them at profit 1t at a time might give you 20%, but shipping 2000t would only provide 25% (or less). Same same for missions, and this effect is noticed earlier in bigger systems. This effect is also tied in with population sizes.

To rephrase what you said, a single player should be able to have a big impact on a small population system, but minimal impact on, say, Sol, compared to a large player group. This lets a single player actually stick out in a small system (trust me, I'm that single player often) even against a large player group, but a large player group can consistently influence a larger system (in smaller amounts)

some ppl claim it doesnt work anymore. reading their posts let me believe they buy and sell at the same station/system.

I have most definitely tested this and as you say, it's incorrect. I actually *raised* the influence of a faction by buying/selling the same good at the same station repeatedly.

 

[goemon]

getting kinda tired of ppl downplaying the whole issue. i'm gonna provide some screenshots tomorrow after the tick if i find another undisturbed system in my time.

some ppl claim it doesnt work anymore. reading their posts let me believe they buy and sell at the same station/system. OP clearly states it has to be 2 different systems.

EDIT: i just heard we will have another beta starting by tomorrow. might be easier to reproduce there (less traffic), screens have to wait for another day then.

it is not about "downplaying", and it isn't about screenshots for (i don't need "proof" in screenshots). as said above - if you are running tests, it would be very helpfull if you would conduct them and present them in some way, that other can reproduce the test, and that as less as possible other factors influencing the test results.

that's why i ask for
- population size
- traffic report, bountyhunters report, crimereport
- actions taken, including numbers off tons bought, sold, and in which way
- influence effects with numbers
- comparing the effect to "normal gameplay" (e.g. selling the same amount in the same system at once)

... and reproducing that effect in the same system at least twice.

that kind of design has revealed a lot of basic mechanics of the BGS, when applied in no-traffic systems.

it is basically about test design and transparency.

if the 1 t bug is back that is really something bad! (as said more than once in this thread).