Increased volatility in the BGS -runaway leaders many retreats

[Regemus]

Just for clarity, you are aware that the screenshot shows just one faction, The Coffin Dodgers, pending expanding from a single system, not 24 expansions? Expansion is a global-faction-state so it appears as a pending state in every system that the faction is in.

The last few expansions we did, it only showed that state in the affected system. The Squadron link in game also shows expansion in every system.
either way we can not kep up with this out of control influence spikes !
After the last update the BGS is controlled in individual systems and does not overflow to other systems.

 

[Jane Turner]

and this one

 

[Jmanis]

Yes, there's a flood of lines here, but I find it particularly interesting... you can tell which ones we control, and which ones we don't , and the trending compared to the previous weeks is pretty noteworthy

 

[FrogsFriend]

Much like the infamous January Update it seems that following the big spike on 10th/11th, the best strategy is to stop waggling the controls as it only tends to make things worse.

EDIT - If nothing else, the graphs give a good indication of which systems are getting actual player input and which are being left alone. Much better than the system traffic reports. We're in control of all of our systems and they were all in the 40-50% area, but only 3-4 have seen significant increases after 10th/11th.

 

[Jane Turner]

This is the best way to explain what I think may be happening visually. We've gone from a situation (left of the claret line) where the maximum gains that could be made were proportional to the combined % influence of the other factions x the cap to one where is the gain is a flat rate and in a 7 faction its 6/7ths of thecap

 

[Jane Turner]

Tick seems a little late, which might not be a bad thing.....

 

[FrogsFriend]

Tick seems a little late, which might not be a bad thing.....

Maybe it's taking some time out to think about what it's done

 

[Jane Turner]

ah here it comes - about 15 mins delay from y'day's start

 

[millstonebarn]

This is the best way to explain what I think may be happening visually. We've gone from a situation (left of the claret line) where the maximum gains that could be made were proportional to the combined % influence of the other factions x the cap to one where is the gain is a flat rate and in a 7 faction its 6/7ths of thecap

I need this in wine bottles. Thanks

 

[teje3]

We are trying to resist in a small system, where currently there are 3 MF in retreat.
We had 1.1% and after 40 INF, we are in 1.3%.
It is impossible to survive under these conditions and in a few days, only 4 MF will resists in the system.
What a disaster!

I will go in an exploration trip. It doesn't make sense to try to do any BGS like this.

 

[Vingtetun]

lol. we're bailing as fast as we can to move influence in the right direction, but at the moment, not having an effect! more gains for leading faction.... this is proving to be an enormous effort to attempt to stop them. in hutton space, we're expanding more than my waistline over the christmas holidays.

 

[Riverside]

lol. we're bailing as fast as we can to move influence in the right direction, but at the moment, not having an effect! more gains for leading faction.... this is proving to be an enormous effort to attempt to stop them. in hutton space, we're expanding more than my waistline over the christmas holidays.

What actions are you trying?

I posted earlier in this thread that bounty hunting was effective. Wars still work fine too. I have an election that started yesterday ('my' faction fell back & hit another but presumably the actual behaviour was that they worked to maintain inf (they are a non-native faction) and 'I' didn't do enough to counter it because I didn't spot it. It's for a ground base 'I' own, so I sold a stack of exploration data & nothing else. Normally easily enough to win with this pairing (against a faction that can only do missions for the election), but I lost the first day.

I can't be sure of course, but it suggests inf for exploration data isn't working properly. Today I'll try only Trade & see if that works.

OTOH selling bounties to non-controlling factions, where they control another system, works more or less as expected. But I can't do that for most factions of course, although a KWS is currently my single most useful BGS tool.

I don't like the mess this is creating but I do quite like that my way of maintaining multiple, overlapping factions (normally to defend against large factions invading) has given me a robust enough platform to still have some effect on my neighbourhood. Although my first line of defence (stopping my main enemy expanding) has fallen, they are also in retreat in several systems so swings & roundabouts.

I can empathise with those that want to quit, it is heartbreaking to see all that hard work get torn apart by a typo.

 

[Walter2]

I don't like the mess this is creating but I do quite like that my way of maintaining multiple, overlapping factions (normally to defend against large factions invading) has given me a robust enough platform to still have some effect on my neighbourhood. Although my first line of defence (stopping my main enemy expanding) has fallen, they are also in retreat in several systems so swings & roundabouts.

I can empathise with those that want to quit, it is heartbreaking to see all that hard work get torn apart by a typo.

I have to agree, but there is a view from the other side. This is the "emergent gameplay" that has turned everything upside down and we're all rushing round like ants on a disturbed nest trying to restore a status quo that may - for some - have become just a little flat and predictable.

In RL terms it's analogous to a world-wide pestilence that affects every level of society, upsets every marketplace and induces paranoia and anxiety. But what are the chances of that happening within a well-ordered structure?

Guardian cartoonist Stephen Collins has the answer.

 

[Hors]

I can't wait for Frontier to tell us that undoing years of work and causing irreparable damage is Working As Intended.

 

[Nadreck]

We had 1.1% and after 40 INF, we are in 1.3%.

Hmmm. I wonder...

IIRC, normally it's easier to boost a low-influence faction, and it becomes progressively harder at higher percentages. But what if an arithmetic goof in the new algorithm has reversed that? So the more influence a faction has, the easier it is to increase it? And low-influence factions can't make headway?

 

[Riverside]

I have to agree, but there is a view from the other side. This is the "emergent gameplay" that has turned everything upside down and we're all rushing round like ants on a disturbed nest trying to restore a status quo that may - for some - have become just a little flat and predictable.

In RL terms it's analogous to a world-wide pestilence that affects every level of society, upsets every marketplace and induces paranoia and anxiety. But what are the chances of that happening within a well-ordered structure?

Guardian cartoonist Stephen Collins has the answer.

Yes I would compare it to a natural disaster - an act of 'god'. Some give up & move on, some set about repairing the damage. Perhaps those that give up will return once those that stay & rebuild have figured out the new meta.

For me, the very small team I'm a part of work systems individually - it's not always the same player that works a system on any given day, but it is almost always only one, we set personal goals & work towards them. Every day is different for us, and in that respect this massive stirring of the pot is more of the same. Find out the strength of the opposing force, set an achievable goal & figure out how to get it done. I have done it for years, and I enjoy it. That someone enjoys building houses of cards is not a reason to deliberately knock it over though, just so they can 'enjoy' building it again. That's just stupid.

 

[Jane Turner]

One incredibly frustrating outcome this tick - with huge effort we put two of our faction in retreat risk into an election at 7.5% - one with retreat active. They have both crashed to below 2.5% while still in election, so I think that's the end.

Most of the strategy was sucked out of the game with the uncoupling of states in 3.2-3.3 Planning outrageous expansion moves was the bit of strategic fun left... and around 4 years of work on that is going down the pan as we watch helplessly. Expansions are going to be from whichever system happens to tick 1st into whichever system has a faction most recently retreated from.... Bog all point or ability in steering it now. Around 500 expansions used to steer directions are at risk.

 

[Riverside]

Yes the non-native factions caught up in conflict are the lucky ones

 

[Vortex-XIII]

wrote this the other day....

[...]in systems that are 'maxed out', the highest faction is taking pieces of 'forbidden pies'
Systems that have 1 or 2 lower conflicts (which are locking infl%) and all other factions at 1% - the controller is taking a few decimals per day from the factions in conflict.
(a.k.a. the brakes we intentionally put in are slipping) [...] bottom factions are dropping further. 0.950 % , 0.924%

well, today the brakes have slipped a bit more.
And lagged forth and back, causing a pending expansion in a 71% system with everything else 'locked up'

yes, that conflict is still active (pending on 8-Jun, active on Jun-10 - side gimmick of the update, it hasn't spawned any CZs)
yes, that's the system that the station board is saying we're expanding from.
and it is actually our highest system atm, 'cuz we had the crucial ones 'locked down' and suppressed in preparation for the update and ever since - or thought we did.

And, as even someone with a "D" in google-fu can find out easily:
system name is "Hilla", our home system - inara-link - elitebgs-link

 

[Vingtetun]

What actions are you trying?

I posted earlier in this thread that bounty hunting was effective. Wars still work fine too. I have an election that started yesterday ('my' faction fell back & hit another but presumably the actual behaviour was that they worked to maintain inf (they are a non-native faction) and 'I' didn't do enough to counter it because I didn't spot it. It's for a ground base 'I' own, so I sold a stack of exploration data & nothing else. Normally easily enough to win with this pairing (against a faction that can only do missions for the election), but I lost the first day.

I can't be sure of course, but it suggests inf for exploration data isn't working properly. Today I'll try only Trade & see if that works.

OTOH selling bounties to non-controlling factions, where they control another system, works more or less as expected. But I can't do that for most factions of course, although a KWS is currently my single most useful BGS tool.

I don't like the mess this is creating but I do quite like that my way of maintaining multiple, overlapping factions (normally to defend against large factions invading) has given me a robust enough platform to still have some effect on my neighbourhood. Although my first line of defence (stopping my main enemy expanding) has fallen, they are also in retreat in several systems so swings & roundabouts.

I can empathise with those that want to quit, it is heartbreaking to see all that hard work get torn apart by a typo.

Bounties, missions and more missions.