How Do Carriers Affect the BGS ???

Havoc4U · May 13, 2020

How are Universal Cartographics INF applied? To the system the carrier is in at the time of turn in?? How about redemption of bounties??

ebbrell · May 13, 2020

I suspect they dont especially if the owner is linked to a faction not in the system.

It would be nice if they did, it should boost inf on missions for faction owner is linked too and generate fear for other factions due to carrier being present.

I guess nothing at moment

Havoc4U · May 13, 2020

It would be great to pledge our carrier to a specific faction for all the INF to go to just for the BGS

Jmanis · May 13, 2020

Havoc4U said:
It would be great to pledge our carrier to a specific faction for all the INF to go to just for the BGS

Bounties and UC probably wouldn't be a good deal of problems, but markets would be incredibly exploitable. TBH, I think it would be confusing having some things provide influence and some not, and discrepancy between stations and FCs.

Dommarraa · May 13, 2020

Using the Redemption Office, Bounties count for any faction that exists in the system (Tested Beta 1), I assume Bonds do as well but not tested. Other Inf is lost as with IF.
There are no other direct influences that I know of.

Dragsham · May 13, 2020

Seems to me the Bgs is broken. In that affecting permutations of rep and inf standing and so on so forth, can be manipulated by buying expensive and selling cheap. A seriously cocked up mechanic.
FC's should be a part of the Bgs that's fixed and unexploitable.
The fact that a player faction long since abandoned, has run rampant expanding all the whiles without any player activity is a clear indicator that bgs needs fixing.
How what ? No idea I'm just a grunt. Fdevs need to look at bgs long and hard
Make it as it should be. Along with a fixed economy too.
Alot is amiss with elite to it's detriment.
But l don't care I'm gonner play the mechanics for what they are...as do others.
Sod it... can't grumble just go with what we have.
So yes a fleet carrier can help but only in some superficial way namely moving a player group from home system enmasse to system in conflict.
4 days later u high wake back. Job done. Move to next system in expansion.
FC's should be way more potent in these circumstances.
Just my rant

Lucyloo · May 19, 2020

I don't want Fleet Carriers to affect the BGS, as you'll get the larger player groups picking on the smaller ones. At the moment the smaller ones can still hold the line, just! It's meant to be a game not a reflection of what would happen in real life as such.

Dragsham · May 19, 2020

Er .. its a sim. A reflection of real life hehe. So mayhap it would happen. But l agree with you. It shouldn't

Pro Cambarus · May 25, 2020

Connecting FC UC to the BGS in any way would be a terrible idea. It would result in withdrawing more strategic elements from BGS. Stations are strategic assets in BGS for a reason. Owning / acquiring a station in a system or distributing them among factions is a strategic advantage (or, to a lesser extent liability). FCs providing certain services and large landing pads subtracts from the strategic value of stations, but only a reasonable amount (that might be still decisive when two factions compete). UC and trade for BGS would however nullify the strategic value of stations, again subtract from the strategic element of BGS and would annul years of efforts of factions building defense or ensuring certain resilience in/of their systems.

Jmanis · May 25, 2020

Pro Cambarus said:
Connecting FC UC to the BGS in any way would be a terrible idea. It would result in withdrawing more strategic elements from BGS. Stations are strategic assets in BGS for a reason. Owning / acquiring a station in a system or distributing them among factions is a strategic advantage (or, to a lesser extent liability). FCs providing certain services and large landing pads subtracts from the strategic value of stations, but only a reasonable amount (that might be still decisive when two factions compete). UC and trade for BGS would however nullify the strategic value of stations, again subtract from the strategic element of BGS and would annul years of efforts of factions building defense or ensuring certain resilience in/of their systems.

I think the short and curlies of it is, FC's are commander assets and, in part, Squadron assets. Not faction assets. Therefore, interactions with FCs shouldn't affect Factions.

Bounties and Bonds are the only time I'll waver on that (and I believe, they do count) because they're targeted to the faction that issues them, not by the player, and frankly, BGS influence should count kills, not bounty/bond hand-ins.