Help a BGS newbie out

[LumberTubs]

I've recently started dabbling in the BGS by supporting an NPC faction with a presence in six systems, two of which are controlled. I deliberately chose a faction in systems that are about 130ly from Sol to make it easier for a lone CMDR to make a difference.

The controlling faction in one of the systems in which "my" faction has a presence appears to be a large, very well supported player group (which is fine, I don't have an issue with that and couldn't do anything about it even if I did). That PMF is, according to Inara, currently undergoing an expansion from that system. However, the Inara data is 2 days old and, having visited an outpost in the system and checked the PMF's info in station services, there's no mention of an expansion so I'm assuming it has now completed (unless there's a limit to how much info is shown).

Is there a way of finding out which system the PMF expanded to if it was successful (and I'm assuming it was given how well-supported it appears to be)?

Also, for future reference, during an expansion, is there a way of finding out which system a faction will end up in if the expansion succeeds?

I have no hope of stopping this PMF from, firstly, expanding into one of "my" controlled systems and, secondly, taking over but it would be nice to have some warning.

Thanks

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Is there a way of finding out which system the PMF expanded to if it was successful (and I'm assuming it was given how well-supported it appears to be)?

Local news articles in its system will show this during the period the expansion state is recovering. You may have missed that on this occasion, as the recovery state doesn't last long.

Also, for future reference, during an expansion, is there a way of finding out which system a faction will end up in if the expansion succeeds?

Yes and no.

The expansion destination is entirely deterministic. However, it's calculated based on the state of the BGS at the exact point in time the faction expands [1], so you can never be entirely certain in advance. You also may be missing some of the information you need to get the exact answer.

Still, you can get a pretty good idea. The expansion priority order is:
- nearest system within range with <7 factions current present, faction has not previously retreated from this system
- nearest system within range with <7 factions present, faction has previously retreated from this system
- system within range with exactly 7 factions present, system with the weakest invasion target first
- no expansion this time, extend range for next expansion if this was a normal range expansion, remove system as an expansion source permanently if this was already an extended range expansion

Normal range is a cube 40x40x40 LY centred on the expansion source system and aligned to the map grid axes. This means that all systems within 20LY are in range, and depending on the direction, some systems within 34LY are in range (but some within 21LY aren't - remember Pythagoras)

Extended range is 50% bigger. The 'extended range' capability is used up by the next expansion whether or not it's actually needed. Note that extended range can change priority order - a system 30LY away might be in range of a normal range expansion, while a system 25 LY is out of range because of its direction within the cube. So with a normal range expansion they'll go to the one 30LY away ... but with extended range, the 25LY is closer so they'll go there instead, all else equal.

The number of previous retreats or how recent the last one was don't matter - it's just a yes or no question. If there are no higher priority targets then factions can instantly re-expand to a system they've previously retreated from

The weakest invasion target is the non-native faction not currently pending, active or recovering any sort of conflict (war, election) on the lowest influence.

That's the theory: actually building a system to comprehensively manage calculations of expansion targets is much trickier ... but you can probably get most of the way there with a bit of notepaper and a lot of checking system maps.

[1] So it may change literally at the last millisecond as the tick processes another faction's expansion (taking the place it would have gone to) or retreat (opening up a closer target). You can look for this being potentially possible but there's not much you can do about it.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

To check where a Faction is present in, it's always worth a shot checking the large Databases.

i.e. https://elitebgs.app/faction
(EDDB for example would work just as fine)

Not 100% reliable, especially shortly after an Expansion into a low-traffic System though.

 

[LumberTubs]

Local news articles in its system will show this during the period the expansion state is recovering. You may have missed that on this occasion, as the recovery state doesn't last long.


Yes and no.

The expansion destination is entirely deterministic. However, it's calculated based on the state of the BGS at the exact point in time the faction expands [1], so you can never be entirely certain in advance. You also may be missing some of the information you need to get the exact answer.

Still, you can get a pretty good idea. The expansion priority order is:

• nearest system within range with <7 factions current present, faction has not previously retreated from this system
• nearest system within range with <7 factions present, faction has previously retreated from this system
• system within range with exactly 7 factions present, system with the weakest invasion target first
• no expansion this time, extend range for next expansion if this was a normal range expansion, remove system as an expansion source permanently if this was already an extended range expansion

Normal range is a cube 40x40x40 LY centred on the expansion source system and aligned to the map grid axes. This means that all systems within 20LY are in range, and depending on the direction, some systems within 34LY are in range (but some within 21LY aren't - remember Pythagoras)

Extended range is 50% bigger. The 'extended range' capability is used up by the next expansion whether or not it's actually needed. Note that extended range can change priority order - a system 30LY away might be in range of a normal range expansion, while a system 25 LY is out of range because of its direction within the cube. So with a normal range expansion they'll go to the one 30LY away ... but with extended range, the 25LY is closer so they'll go there instead, all else equal.

The number of previous retreats or how recent the last one was don't matter - it's just a yes or no question. If there are no higher priority targets then factions can instantly re-expand to a system they've previously retreated from

The weakest invasion target is the non-native faction not currently pending, active or recovering any sort of conflict (war, election) on the lowest influence.

That's the theory: actually building a system to comprehensively manage calculations of expansion targets is much trickier ... but you can probably get most of the way there with a bit of notepaper and a lot of checking system maps.

[1] So it may change literally at the last millisecond as the tick processes another faction's expansion (taking the place it would have gone to) or retreat (opening up a closer target). You can look for this being potentially possible but there's not much you can do about it.

Thanks Ian. Reading that made my brain hurt a bit but I think I got there in the end.

 

[LumberTubs]

Local news articles in its system will show this during the period the expansion state is recovering. You may have missed that on this occasion, as the recovery state doesn't last long.


Yes and no.

The expansion destination is entirely deterministic. However, it's calculated based on the state of the BGS at the exact point in time the faction expands [1], so you can never be entirely certain in advance. You also may be missing some of the information you need to get the exact answer.

Still, you can get a pretty good idea. The expansion priority order is:

• nearest system within range with <7 factions current present, faction has not previously retreated from this system
• nearest system within range with <7 factions present, faction has previously retreated from this system
• system within range with exactly 7 factions present, system with the weakest invasion target first
• no expansion this time, extend range for next expansion if this was a normal range expansion, remove system as an expansion source permanently if this was already an extended range expansion

Normal range is a cube 40x40x40 LY centred on the expansion source system and aligned to the map grid axes. This means that all systems within 20LY are in range, and depending on the direction, some systems within 34LY are in range (but some within 21LY aren't - remember Pythagoras)

Extended range is 50% bigger. The 'extended range' capability is used up by the next expansion whether or not it's actually needed. Note that extended range can change priority order - a system 30LY away might be in range of a normal range expansion, while a system 25 LY is out of range because of its direction within the cube. So with a normal range expansion they'll go to the one 30LY away ... but with extended range, the 25LY is closer so they'll go there instead, all else equal.

The number of previous retreats or how recent the last one was don't matter - it's just a yes or no question. If there are no higher priority targets then factions can instantly re-expand to a system they've previously retreated from

The weakest invasion target is the non-native faction not currently pending, active or recovering any sort of conflict (war, election) on the lowest influence.

That's the theory: actually building a system to comprehensively manage calculations of expansion targets is much trickier ... but you can probably get most of the way there with a bit of notepaper and a lot of checking system maps.

[1] So it may change literally at the last millisecond as the tick processes another faction's expansion (taking the place it would have gone to) or retreat (opening up a closer target). You can look for this being potentially possible but there's not much you can do about it.

Looking at the two systems my faction controls (plus the one I'm in the process of taking over as we speak), they all have 7 factions total and the lowest ranked in each in terms of influence (and each is the lowest by a good few percent) are native so can't be replaced (if I've understood that correctly).

Just double checking. This mean these systems can't be expanded into doesn't it?

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Looking at the two systems my faction controls (plus the one I'm in the process of taking over as we speak), they all have 7 factions total and the lowest ranked in each in terms of influence (and each is the lowest by a good few percent) are native so can't be replaced (if I've understood that correctly).

Just double checking. This mean these systems can't be expanded into doesn't it?

It makes them less likely as targets, but doesn't guarantee it.

A non-native faction doesn't have to be lowest in that system to be the target, it just has to be lowest of all non-natives in the entire expansion cube.

(On extremely rare occasions this has hit factions that are actually in control of the system, though that's so rare we're not sure if it's even still possible)

Keeping your other non-native factions at relatively high influence levels will certainly protect you against potential invasions, of course ... and if someone starts attacking them and pushing them down, that might be a warning that they're wanting to target that system specifically.

 

[LumberTubs]

It makes them less likely as targets, but doesn't guarantee it.

A non-native faction doesn't have to be lowest in that system to be the target, it just has to be lowest of all non-natives in the entire expansion cube.

(On extremely rare occasions this has hit factions that are actually in control of the system, though that's so rare we're not sure if it's even still possible)

Keeping your other non-native factions at relatively high influence levels will certainly protect you against potential invasions, of course ... and if someone starts attacking them and pushing them down, that might be a warning that they're wanting to target that system specifically.

Excellent. Thanks again

 

[Harpersteel]

you can also support a Player faction in a system, this way you can help and see if it is a faction you want to join. There are a huge amount of player factions giving almost every kind of ED experience. So have some fun with it, and find out who you fit with.

 

[LumberTubs]

I have another question.

This is a snip from Inara. The red line is the NPC faction I'm supporting and the yellow line is the player faction that I've mentioned elsewhere in this thread. This is in my home system.

I'm assuming this shows a 'retreat' by the player faction as they no longer appear in the system at all.

It looks like they were at 0% influence for about 2.5 weeks maybe.

Is there a specific amount of time that influence has to be at 0% before a faction is kicked out of the system?

I'm hoping this means that this PMF has no interest in my home system so even if they do expand here again (which I gather from @Ian Doncaster post above can happen immediately if the conditions are right - they left a free slot), they're not likely to try and take over.

Is there anything I can do to try to reduce a faction's influence when they're not controlling a station/outpost? Maybe killing any NPC ships aligned to them? Just wondering in case they come back but then don't pay attention.

Cheers

 

[Screemonster]

Is there anything I can do to try to reduce a faction's influence when they're not controlling a station/outpost? Maybe killing any NPC ships aligned to them? Just wondering in case they come back but then don't pay attention.

Mostly "do missions for everyone else". Negative actions are a pain to try and target in this game, the best you can hope for is giving them less positive actions.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

It looks like they were at 0% influence for about 2.5 weeks maybe.

0% is likely a display or data issue in Inara. Under normal circumstances factions can't go below 1%. Inara does throw out and average data after a couple of months, so maybe this is something to do with that.

I'd recommend using elitebgs.app for looking at historical bubble data, as it keeps more data and displays it more clearly.

In answer to your more general question:
- a non-native faction under 2.5% influence that has been in the system for at least 10 days will go into Pending Retreat
- one day later it will go into Active Retreat
- after between 5 and 7 days of Active Retreat, the retreat will be resolved.
- if the faction is under 2.5% influence at the start of the final day of the Active Retreat, it will leave the system at the end of that day, otherwise it will remain
- it doesn't matter whether or not the faction got above 2.5% between the day that set it Pending and the final day, so long as it's back down below it at the end, it leaves

No, you can't tell which the final day is going to be in advance. Just keep hitting them constantly...

Since the 3.6 release earlier this year, factions in Retreat get a 2% daily influence penalty on top of whatever else is going on in the system, which makes it tougher for them to get back above the line. Still, retreating a faction that someone is trying to keep around is tough.

 

[LumberTubs]

Thanks Ian

 

[Sapyx]

When Inara shows a faction at 0%, it means they've already retreated. Judging from that chart, the faction actually retreated back in late June. Inara keeps the retreated faction "on the books" until they fall off the left hand side of the data scroll. Even then, Inara will still remember that they used to be there in the list of factions for the system.

I'm hoping this means that this PMF has no interest in my home system so even if they do expand here again (which I gather from @Ian Doncaster post above can happen immediately if the conditions are right - they left a free slot), they're not likely to try and take over.

It entirely depends on the supported of the faction in question. Maybe they're just a small player group who didn't have the resources to stop the Retreat. Maybe they're weekend warriors who simply didn't notice in time. Maybe they're all out playing with their carriers right now, and will one day come back and start pushing their faction again. Maybe they've all stopped playing the game entirely, in which case they won't be back, but that won't stop another group of players from adopting the "abandoned" faction as their own.

If a faction is sufficiently supported that they start Expanding again, then it's reasonable to assume that they're being supported sufficiently that a resumption of takeover activities is likely. If a PMF ever appears in one of your systems, whether they've been previously routed from your system before or not, assume their intent is taking over, unless there's a diplomatic agreement otherwise. And since such "diplomatic agreements" are entirely RP and aren't enforceable, that's still not grounds for complacency. PowerPlay supporters, for example, might prefer an invader's government type to yours, so they'll come along and push them upwards, independently of whatever treaty you might have with the invader's supporters.

Your system now has a free slot, so someone will expand into your system eventually. If you're in a crowded/popular region of space, you probably won't have to wait long.

 

[Screemonster]

Your system now has a free slot, so someone will expand into your system eventually. If you're in a crowded/popular region of space, you probably won't have to wait long.

Of course, the best solution to this problem is to pick a nearby system controlled by an NPC faction that isn't present in yours, and push them into expansion. If your system is the nearest one they could land in, your odds are pretty good of stopping up the slot.

edit: Low-population systems are great for this, as they tend to have relatively low passive traffic otherwise, and a lot of player groups don't tend to consider a sub-10000-population single-outpost system to be much of a prize - under the old BGS we actively avoided them as they had a habit of causing annoying blocking states. I recently flipped a system to stop the procgen faction that were there from clogging up the local systems as they'd simply been expanding and expanding and expanding from a particularly low-population outpost. They're present in like two dozen systems and don't appear to be supported in any of them, so unless this was a big player group that's abandoned playing the game long enough ago for them to have all their systems taken from them in low-traffic space, I can't think of any other way they could have become so widespread without apparently taking control of anything.

 

[LumberTubs]

Of course, the best solution to this problem is to pick a nearby system controlled by an NPC faction that isn't present in yours, and push them into expansion. If your system is the nearest one they could land in, your odds are pretty good of stopping up the slot.

This is something that had occurred to me as being possible but I'm glad you've confirmed that for me.

 

[Leo Tannhauser]

A bit belated, but seems as good a place as any to ask.

Assuming you're focused mostly on a single system (or small number I guess), and other players aren't actively pushing the other way intentionally or otherwise, is it actually feasible for a single CMDR to manipulate the BGS? Like, helping a minor faction take control of a system etc.?

 

[FrogsFriend]

A bit belated, but seems as good a place as any to ask.

Assuming you're focused mostly on a single system (or small number I guess), and other players aren't actively pushing the other way intentionally or otherwise, is it actually feasible for a single CMDR to manipulate the BGS? Like, helping a minor faction take control of a system etc.?

Yes, most definitely. It does become a little more difficult if it's a very large population system, just due to the amount of activity required to move the Influence an appreciable amount but even then you'll get there in the end.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Assuming you're focused mostly on a single system (or small number I guess), and other players aren't actively pushing the other way intentionally or otherwise, is it actually feasible for a single CMDR to manipulate the BGS? Like, helping a minor faction take control of a system etc.?

If you're literally the only pilot in the system, then only your actions will be affecting the BGS, so you can do whatever you want very easily.

More likely there will be at least a bit of passing traffic that you need to counteract if you're trying to change system control - but focused and planned activity will generally beat that unless there's a lot of it.

 

[Screemonster]

A bit belated, but seems as good a place as any to ask.

Assuming you're focused mostly on a single system (or small number I guess), and other players aren't actively pushing the other way intentionally or otherwise, is it actually feasible for a single CMDR to manipulate the BGS? Like, helping a minor faction take control of a system etc.?

I've personally flipped a bunch of systems - at first just to see if I could, and later more deliberately. I've handled situations like the OP's of being wary of an apparently-expansionist player group that have spread near to but not yet in any of my systems, tracked where they could expand to, checked to see which of those systems could be launching points to expand into my space, and pushed nearby factions to expand and block the path. Right now, my mini-enclave is getting too big for me to manage so I've had to shift my focus to consolidating control in the systems I like, and I've only been in the area since the launch of fleet carriers. Seriously, if you're the only fish in the pond a solo actor can have a pretty big effect.

Of course, I've got an advantage over a lot of PMFs in that I'm working for a government type instead of a particular minor faction, which means I don't have to worry about managing expansions if I have eyes on a particular system.