Failed missions VS BGS

CMDR_MCCRAW

CMDR_MCCRAW
@QA-Jack

Hello. I have a question for a member of the staff please. I've searched and searched and searched to find out if failing missions has any affect on influence for the faction providing the mission. I have read the fandom wiki and it claims it does not, however there are so many commanders on the forums that claim it does that it has caused a huge rifting debate between myself and the members of my faction as to the affect of failed missions. Could a member of FDEV please tell me once and for all if faction influence is in any way affected by failing missions? (For clarification I mean actually failing missions, not just abandoning them or letting them expire. IE: Taking a ground extermination mission and dying, ergo failing the mission.)

Please and Thank You.
 
Last edited:

CMDR_MCCRAW

CMDR_MCCRAW
Bottom Hat said:
I don't know if I'm allowed to answer, but failing does, as does abandoning. In horizons. I presume odyssey too, else it would be weird.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the response but i've quoted multiple commanders as stating that it does affect the influence but because of the wiki page saying that it doesn't i'm being told that I'm wrong and spreading false information. so I'd really like a member of the FDEV team to clarify for me. Thank you though.
 

CMDR_MCCRAW

CMDR_MCCRAW
Flimley said:
Your welcome to trawl through frontiers you tube channel. bgs with Dav Scott

Flimley
Click to expand...
With respect, I don't have the time to stroll through a hundred youtube videos. I would if I did but I just don't. If however you can provide a link at the very least to the youtube channel itself i'll attempt to look through some of them to see if I can find him stating that. Otherwise maybe in the mean time a member of staff can simply tell me yes or no. Which would be far easier for everyone
 

CMDR_MCCRAW

CMDR_MCCRAW
MDHansen said:
youtube+elite dangerous+dav stott

you had all the info, and it took lot less effort than the text you wrote above.

FD wont comment here, no point paging them


MDH
Click to expand...
Well so far you've spelled the dudes name two..three? different ways? so you're not making it very easy to figure out who it is i need to look up. You're welcome to continue being sardonic however.
 

Vingtetun

Vingtetun
Deliberately failing missions does NOT affect the bgs (we tested in an out of the way system with 0 traffic)

Legitimately failing a mission by either failing a condition (like 'don't die') or failing to complete it in the allotted time does appear to affect the bgs in those same tests. In terms of 'how much', we've not been able to determine whether it is in proportion to the original mission reward + quantity or is an arbitrary amount.
 
Last edited:

Jmanis

Jmanis
Short version..

Abandoning a mission; no effect
Failing a mission; has effects

Personally, i wish all missions had negative- resolution paths which achieved a functionally negative effect, for a comparable amount of effort to the mission.

Eg. instead of killing the assassination target, kill the trader they bailed up. Or instead of delivering goods, steal them (without needing to abandon the mission, which has no effect) and then "complete" it as per partial completion rules, but for a zero- delivered outcome.

Would be much better than the contrived mechanics we have right now like "load up passengers and scrape your ship against the station walls"
 

Disemboweled Ego

D
Failing missions alone doesn't affect influence, there needs to be positive influence for other factions in the system for the effect to do anything. Other negative BGS actions should work the same way I think.

Abandoning a mission only hurts your reputation with the faction.
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
Flimley said:
As cmdrs could use the tactic of failing many missions on purpose. (Very easy to do) These no longer effect the bgs. This was stated by Dav many moons ago in one live stream.

Flimley
Click to expand...
Are you sure you're not confusing that with abandoning missions? That definitely used to have an effect and was removed because abandoning missions was just too easy.

Failing missions is a whole other bag; most missions can't be deliberately failed, and for the ones that can, persistence will quickly result in hostile rep and you'll be unlikely to be able to take the ones which can be failed. It quickly becomes way more effective to just run missions for your supported faction.

As a corollary, deliberately failing scenarios most definitely works.
 

Vingtetun

Vingtetun
As it stands, it IS open to a little exploitation in that taking 20 missions for a faction and then letting them time out will have a net negative effect on a daily basis but it is much better than allowing the spamming of accept/deliberately abandon which could massively skew the BGS.
 

Northpin

Northpin
Yeap, that's what i knew too:
Abandoning missions = they will hurt your Rep with the faction, but will have No effect on Inf *()
Failing missions = they will hurt Faction's Inf


*(Abandoning Restore missions is the method used to lower the Rep with Sirius Corp so one can easily unlock Uma Laszlo while at the same time stocking on Power regulators)
 

Vingtetun

Vingtetun
For my part - I'm NOT a fan of applying "negative" actions to the BGS as a viable means as it is open to exploitation.
I'm of the opinion that doing "positive" actions for your chosen faction should be the de-facto method of helping a faction and raising influence.

Smuggling is an interesting excpetion to this, and from our testing, is a little OP at the moment (small amounts of smuggling can have a huge effect, that isn't countered by similar time-sinks/quantities of actions). Though I understand why smuggling should be harmful to a faction - without this method, it would be a redundant mechanic other than to change the "sliders" and affect system state.

For my part - NEGATIVE actions should only affect the sliders, not the percentages - ie the outcome of a negative action should be to reduce the economic and security status of a faction, not actually plummet their influence. Negative states make it HARDER to support your faction (in theory), so it would still be a viable tactic, but not open to exploitation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom