Has anybody else noticed how crowded it's getting around here?

[Sapyx]

Having been out exploring since April, I hadn't paid much attention to the BGS around my sphere. After coming back, I've updated my spreadsheet, and noticed one thing in particular: almost all the star systems now have seven factions in them. Before I left, only a few places were "maxed out", with most having 5 or 6. Now, only a tiny number of them have fewer than 7. One has managed to get 8, though that's apparently exceptional circumstances.

I put this down to a "perfect storm" combination of the following factors:

• Ever-increasing number of new PMFs being added to the game. Two new ones have popped up on the fringes of my sphere.
• The overall happiness and positivity of the universe (and removal of other states blocking Expansions) meaning ruling factions find themselves in Expansions far more than they used to be.
• The difficulty in getting an "unwanted" faction to actually Retreat.

The end result is a fossilization of the BGS, with everyone jam-packed in so tight they can't move. Factions can fight to take control of systems where they happen to be already present, but it seems to me that the days of faction-backers pointing in a direction and saying "We're gonna expand in that direction", like the Alliance did with L2AC when they took over Ross 128, are all but over - except maybe way out on the fringes of the Bubble where hardly anyone ever goes and most systems still have just a few factions in them.

Is this a problem that needs a solution? And what kind of solution might "work"? Removing the seven-factions-per-system cap? Making Retreat easier? Allowing for the actual elimination of factions under certain conditions?

 

[Trotsky2112]

Combat zones in a faction's home system could destroy the losing faction permanently. Though with the amount of people who actually participate in them, I doubt it will make much of a difference. The cap for number of factions could be raised, which would also give a nice boost to those of us who scroll the mission boards for our cash.

 

[Jmanis]

The cap for number of factions could be raised, which would also give a nice boost to those of us who scroll the mission boards for our cash.

It wouldn't. Mission board caps out at about 100- odd missions. Extra factions in a system doesn't increase that, it just thins out the number of missions each faction can offer.

I.e a system with four factions would allow each faction to offer 25 missions on average... a system with five means each faction offers 20 on average.

States tend to cause increased mission generation, which starves other factions of missions.

This is why FD really need to split mission boards into broad categories of combat, trade, specialization and criminal, to overcome this barrier.

Overhaul of Mission Board UI and Mission Lists

DISCLAIMER: I can't photoshop to save myself. I apologise in advance for my rancid efforts :) Removing board flipping from the game is, fundamentally, a good thing. It's a good move by FD, and I stick by it. However, there's still some extant problems with the mission boards that board flipping...

forums.frontier.co.uk

 

[Jmanis]

Combat zones in a faction's home system could destroy the losing faction permanently.

Dav also said in the livestream factions are designed to be in the game forever, so that's unlikely to happen.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Having been out exploring since April, I hadn't paid much attention to the BGS around my sphere. After coming back, I've updated my spreadsheet, and noticed one thing in particular: almost all the star systems now have seven factions in them. Before I left, only a few places were "maxed out", with most having 5 or 6. Now, only a tiny number of them have fewer than 7. One has managed to get 8, though that's apparently exceptional circumstances.
[...]
Is this a problem that needs a solution? And what kind of solution might "work"? Removing the seven-factions-per-system cap? Making Retreat easier? Allowing for the actual elimination of factions under certain conditions?

There's already a solution for this, which is the Invasion mechanism allowing expansion into a 7 faction system, by throwing out another non-native faction instead. This allows movement around a 7-faction region to continue, at least for supported factions.

Unfortunately, since 3.3 there's a bug where the "expand-in" bit works but the "throw-out" bit doesn't. (It's been acknowledged in the issue tracker, so hopefully a fix is on the way)

Out in Colonia we had the "lots of systems up at 7" for a while, even before 3.3 made it easier ... now we've got a whole bunch stuck at 8, which is worse. The same will happen in some bits of the bubble soon.

 

[Jmanis]

There's already a solution for this, which is the Invasion mechanism allowing expansion into a 7 faction system, by throwing out another non-native faction instead. This allows movement around a 7-faction region to continue, at least for supported factions.

Unfortunately, since 3.3 there's a bug where the "expand-in" bit works but the "throw-out" bit doesn't. (It's been acknowledged in the issue tracker, so hopefully a fix is on the way)

Out in Colonia we had the "lots of systems up at 7" for a while, even before 3.3 made it easier ... now we've got a whole bunch stuck at 8, which is worse. The same will happen in some bits of the bubble soon.

Additionally, the intended, unimplemented Expansion mechanics would help taper off the rampant, unchecked expansion (where the requirement is for high influence in all systems)

 

[Kissamies]

Combat zones in a faction's home system could destroy the losing faction permanently...

No need to jump straight to measures this harsh. Just make kicking foreign factions off systems easier to achieve. Right now retreat never falls through without significant player involvement and the invasion is not working as it's supposed, as explained above. I personally think that a better than invasion would be having 8+ faction systems in "sudden death" mode where retreats are almost instant and losing any conflict would kick factions out.

 

[Jmanis]

Yup, easier targeted negative effects (including the ability to cause the negative states such as Boom and Lockdown) which would increase the ability to hit and maintain a retreat state, and the originally proposed Expansion mechanics would ease some of the growth-pressure currently occurring.

Tangentially... wouldn't it be great if Lockdown locked influence until the security level was increased. Make a target hit 1%, trigger retreat then cause a lockdown, with continued security effects keeping the lockdown in place, thus, locking the influence at 1% and forcing the retreat? Conversely, it could be used as a security measure for a high influence faction; too much negative effects and the Lockdown freezes it's influence, providing some security until the situation stabilised? Personally, maintaining an iron grip of a factions holdings through sustained Lockdown is a pretty logical scenario.

 

[Kissamies]

I think it would also greatly help the clutter if the retreat state wasn't so auto-canceling because of all the missions from other systems it generates. If a faction got pushed into retreat state by some random player activity, and no one cared about it either way, there should be a good chance that the retreat would happen. Ideally a bit less than 50%, but still a sizable chance.

 

[Old Duck]

I'm new to the BGS, but it seems like factions expand quicker than they should these days. I thought, based on what I've read, that a faction had to be at 75% influence to trigger an expansion, but my faction is investment mode and talking about expansion with less than 50% influence.. Is expansion triggered by things other than influence, like economy? Even then, the system I've been in isn't a popular one and I've not been pushing my faction since they gained control. I actually have no aspirations for expansion, but it's happening anyway....

 

[jimbeau1571]

I have just pushed a Retreat from my system without much effort. Once it went below 2.5%, just doing a few missions a day for my faction kept them down and they are gone. Not sure how the Retreat mechanic seems to be an issue for some, but it wasn't for me.
I guess doing just one mission for the Retreating faction is going to make it difficult. An given that the TR report only reflects any ship going out of the system, then you could have people in the system already doing a cash donation mission and not appearing on the TR.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

I'm new to the BGS, but it seems like factions expand quicker than they should these days. I thought, based on what I've read, that a faction had to be at 75% influence to trigger an expansion, but my faction is investment mode and talking about expansion with less than 50% influence.. Is expansion triggered by things other than influence, like economy? Even then, the system I've been in isn't a popular one and I've not been pushing my faction since they gained control. I actually have no aspirations for expansion, but it's happening anyway....

Some of the text around the Investment state still reflects its pre-3.3 relationship with Expansion, and needs updating.

Not sure if anyone's bug-reported this one yet: I keep not getting round to it.

 

[Old Duck]

Some of the text around the Investment state still reflects its pre-3.3 relationship with Expansion, and needs updating.

Ahhh, so then likely my system is not getting ready for expansion? That works for me! I prefer keeping a low profile.

That does beg the question as to how so many factions are spreading all over the place, unless there really are that many players invested in the BGS these days. Then again, I recently had a new faction join my system, but I don't believe it's a PMF, nor have I seen any evidence that players have followed their faction to support it in my system. So it can't just be players focused on BGS...

I bet it's these damn void opals

 

[Ian Doncaster]

That does beg the question as to how so many factions are spreading all over the place, unless there really are that many players invested in the BGS these days. Then again, I recently had a new faction join my system, but I don't believe it's a PMF, nor have I seen any evidence that players have followed their faction to support it in my system. So it can't just be players focused on BGS...

There are - so far as EDDB's data on which the PMFs are is accurate - just short of 2,000 PMFs, in just over 10,000 of the 20,000 inhabited systems between them. So quite a bit of the expansions are coming from those.

It's also fairly easy for a faction with control of the stations near the star to just expand a bit through passing traffic, since it's only really missions which benefit the other factions. Depends on the region.

 

[Obi Wan Naboo]

It is getting crowded in the bubble, no doubt about it. The balance between expansion (too easy) and retreat (too hard) combined with the invasion bug means more and more systems are filling up to the brim. Fossilization is a great term for this phenomenon, and every day FD ignores the issue it gets harder and harder to reverse.

 

[zimms]

I'd be happy if Frontier had locked more important systems. But I'm part of the minority who values lore over PvP content.

 

[S0rkvild]

About a year ago retreats, famines, unrests were far more common and factions reactions were much more lively, now it's pretty much one big boom and expansion.

 

[Old Duck]

Some of the text around the Investment state still reflects its pre-3.3 relationship with Expansion, and needs updating.

So if I may ask, what's the current purpose of Investment if not expansion?

 

[teje3]

In our area, there is no place for expansion and force the retreat is really a pain. The system helps to recover from retreat if there is no player interaction. At least, it is like that in the high traffic systems where we are.

Passive retreat never works.
It need to be compensated or calibrated or whatever... But the current system makes, as commented, the system crowded.

 

[BinakAlgo]

I think it is time to delete non-player factions that are completely insolated on their own system with less than 2.5% of influence, that could free up some space. This should be together with a mechanic to create more space making viable, but difficult, expanding to unsettled systems. I know many are against making the bubble bigger, but I think that 30 lys more will give us enough room for a couple of years at least.