That makes a nice recruitment poster!
Lets test this persistent universe and see if FD are true to their word.
- Thread starter orfeboy
- Start date
That makes a nice recruitment poster!
Quick update:
-The influence in Lugh has increased to 55% (wohoo!!).
-The pending civil war status has dissappeared.
And I really think there is something wrong with the relationships with factions. For some reason now I am friends of the Silvers! It doesnt make sense...
-The influence in Lugh has increased to 55% (wohoo!!).
-The pending civil war status has dissappeared.
And I really think there is something wrong with the relationships with factions. For some reason now I am friends of the Silvers! It doesnt make sense...
Crimson State Group 55.6%
Lugh for Equality 40.2%
Dominion of Lugh 0%
Lugh Defence Force 3%
Silver Natural 0%
Civil War is pending for CSG.
LDF is still showing a blank 'pending states'.
CSG has a blue up arrow and LFE has a red down arrow.
Keep pushing everyone. We are making progress...
Lugh for Equality 40.2%
Dominion of Lugh 0%
Lugh Defence Force 3%
Silver Natural 0%
Civil War is pending for CSG.
LDF is still showing a blank 'pending states'.
CSG has a blue up arrow and LFE has a red down arrow.
Keep pushing everyone. We are making progress...
Last edited:
So jealous XD, keep it up.
Is civil war required for power to change hands in a system? For some reason I assumed you became the dominant faction at 55%.
Is civil war required for power to change hands in a system? For some reason I assumed you became the dominant faction at 55%.
Last edited:
Nobody actually knows. We can only speculate. I personally believe it has to do with station ownership and that the 1% rises you see are based on the station in question. Each station makes up an overall % of the whole system. So a 1% rise is only .1 or .2 of a % of the whole thing. We have gotten loads of 1% rises so we would be at 7,000% by now if it was that simple! Just my guess...
Not so sure civil war has to do with take over at the moment. I am of two minds about this. I would guess that when we have a clear lead of 20% or more maybe FD have to inject something themselves. Who knows?
Last edited:
"Who knows". Frontier does =p. Documentation would be nice.
I really don't want to be told. I would prefer Galnet to report how things are on the ground. If we got feedback in a realtime sense that would go a long way toward creating atmosphere in the game, but I suspect FD can see the potential in this aspect of the game and will improve it further, we just have to be patient. I don't want it spelled out to me. It would be nice though to have some of the stats etc. explained a little better so be could be sure of what we are looking at. Again, I would imagine they are planning to give us something on that soon but need to think carefully about how to properly present it to us. They do not want to destroy the mystery of game mechanics and I can fully understand that and actually happen to agree with them.
Some players love this aspect of the game. Others I am told have expressed distaste for it and would prefer Elite to remain a space trucking game. For myself and Roybe it is the game! This has the most potential of any aspect of ED in my view and is the key to creating something really special. FD have expressed the desire for ED to be as big of a deal as the original Elite was back in its day. To simply recreate the old Elite would therefore be a contradiction to that ideal. I see this as being a huge (but not the only) aspect of this game for those players who wish to persue it. If you simply want to play the old Elite then go do that. There are 400,000,000,000 systems. If you want to follow the main story line then go do that. If you want to free Lugh then come here and help create our story. I think that is amazing to have in a game! There is room for everyone!
The one thing that would make it even better though is feedback from the game for you actions. That would really gel it together and not just allow players to make a difference in the galaxy but actually confirm they are making a difference for them. I really think FD should not underestimate this...
Last edited:
ollobrains
Banned
all we can do is wait til the devs wake up from their xmas NY hangover and pester them to get it right
I sort of regard that as a form of documentation. I should have said feedback though. Any positive indicator that things are going the way they are supposed to.
I really do think it's simpler than most of the previous posts suggest (it makes sense that the process would be simple, it's easier to code and troubleshoot!)
I think it's as simple as raising the profile of your desired faction in each of the stations in the system. Don't lose track of the stations your faction already owns either. The missions on the bulletin board indicate what the factions need to (re)gain more control, so we should be doing any missions requested by CSG out of any of the stations. I think we should be using these missions as a guide, rather than trying to second guess the system. If the station missions says they need Bauxite rather than non-lethal weapons, who are we to argue? We're doing it for the people (and their children!) so let's give them what they want.
Raising the profile of CSG in just one (or two) stations as we did initially will only get us so far (as we saw).
For missions, the summary page shows the effects on each faction, blue arrows are good for that faction, red arrows are bad. Civil War is, I think, within that faction rather than within the system so isn't always a good thing.
The "background simulation" will be working both for and against us. Since a couple of stations recently turned to CSG, giving CSG the majority of stations in the system, I think this just means that the NPCs are working more for us than against us. Other players either deliberately or accidentally will also be working against us while the opposition hold more stations.
I have been stationed in Adamson for the last few nights running any CSG mission that comes up and am seeing a lot more missions for them now (was only getting 1 or 2 CSG missions when I first arrived).
The more I see, the more convinced I am that we need to convert (and maintain control of) all stations - or at least the majority - to switch control of the system.
I may be wrong, but like I say I haven't seen anything to convince me to the contrary and since everyone has started doing concentrating on the non-CSG owned stations more progress has been made.
I think it's as simple as raising the profile of your desired faction in each of the stations in the system. Don't lose track of the stations your faction already owns either. The missions on the bulletin board indicate what the factions need to (re)gain more control, so we should be doing any missions requested by CSG out of any of the stations. I think we should be using these missions as a guide, rather than trying to second guess the system. If the station missions says they need Bauxite rather than non-lethal weapons, who are we to argue? We're doing it for the people (and their children!) so let's give them what they want.
Raising the profile of CSG in just one (or two) stations as we did initially will only get us so far (as we saw).
For missions, the summary page shows the effects on each faction, blue arrows are good for that faction, red arrows are bad. Civil War is, I think, within that faction rather than within the system so isn't always a good thing.
The "background simulation" will be working both for and against us. Since a couple of stations recently turned to CSG, giving CSG the majority of stations in the system, I think this just means that the NPCs are working more for us than against us. Other players either deliberately or accidentally will also be working against us while the opposition hold more stations.
I have been stationed in Adamson for the last few nights running any CSG mission that comes up and am seeing a lot more missions for them now (was only getting 1 or 2 CSG missions when I first arrived).
The more I see, the more convinced I am that we need to convert (and maintain control of) all stations - or at least the majority - to switch control of the system.
I may be wrong, but like I say I haven't seen anything to convince me to the contrary and since everyone has started doing concentrating on the non-CSG owned stations more progress has been made.
I agree with 90% of your post. This part however I am not so sure about. The missions push stats back and forth. If you want to push a particular stat you need to not do missions which push it back. There are A LOT of non-lethal weapons missions lately and we have seen a swift rise by pushing them and bringing them in through trade. I done 12 missions inside an hour last night. Four of them were deliver non lethals and two agri medicines. All the guys on mumble were doing the same. Then the system updated at about 11 o'clock (which seemed strange) and we had jumped up to 55.6%. I am not saying we single handedly achieved that (far from it) but it did make me wonder how much were we responsible for?
One thing is sure, what we are currently doing is working and we should just keep doing it until it stops working.
Last edited:
I think that may be my clumsy communication...
I'm not saying we shouldn't deliver weapons if that's what's requested - personally I don't seem to receive any missions for this, it was mainly food, metals and smuggling last night, but as I say, I'm concentrating my efforts on Adamson so as not to affect your testing on the other station.
I was just trying to say that we should bring in what the missions want, and not what we want.
I'm also not sure if one particular faction stat showing red based on one mission is something to be avoided if 6 other stats go blue for CSG? Especially given that we're all probably running up to a dozen missions per trip anyway? I ran about 10 missions yesterday and received multiple blue CSG arrows for each (one seemed to affect at least 6 arrows) and in all those missions only received 2 red arrows for CSG that I recall - and they were only when there were plenty more blue CSG arrows as a result of the mission.
But I agree, what we are doing appears to be working again so we should keep doing it!
This makes a certain amount of sense. I also wonder if you need to damage the influence of a faction in some way before you can gain influence for another faction. IOW, one faction has to be seen to fail, before the masses are impressed by another faction's successes.
I've been working on Hartsfield Market for some time now, and I've noticed that when I'm delivering my orders for CSG, I seem to get positive influences for CSG at first, and then nothing. Coincidentally, I always deliver all of CSG's missions first, before I start searching for USS's in order to betray LFE's missions.
I'm glad the fight for Lugh is still accomplishing something. As a test my friend and I tried to raise the 27.8% influence at a station in Wodimui controlled by the Empire in a tiny population simple little anarchy extraction system. We've hauled easily 20 mil cr in rare goods, both done so many missions we'd be allied cubed if ranks went that high, and shot down dozens of opposing faction ships at the beacon. Result after a week? 0.0% change. Nothing whatsoever except the ever-present blue up arrow. We gave up. I don't know what to think, I'm just glad Lugh is still changing.
Can Someone post a pic or where the "status" is actually shown please? I have looked in the right hand panel any number of times (saw the 55% last night and was pleased). Am I just being thick?
If you choose a faction and press the fire button in the right hand panel you get to the detailed status info, like pending states
Aha, I didnt know that. Thanks.
I think there is one more important part in Walt's list: "nearby enemies or allies".
Lugh is a really big system, surrounded by many allies. So I don't expect, that a system take over is simple. ... IMO at the moment, the standard environment is working against the take over, since most neighbours are Feds. So the "background" simulation supports the Feds, because NPCs are mainly trading for Fed stations. ...
I got / took several "delivery" missions to other systems, that increased influence for CSG and a non Fed party at the station. When I did deliver the contract, it was the first time, that I got a blue up (influence) arrow for CSG, blue up (boom) for the mission receiver. As a result in the general stats screen, I got a "red down" (relation) from the Fed station owner.
So I think, if it is possible, we should also have a closer look, who owns the surrounding stations, where we by commodities, to deliver them to Lugh. If it is possible we should not by at Fed's stations. ... At least I try to support the "opposition" in Fed controlled space, or I go to Independent systems and by there.
---------
As orfeboy points out, If the "support" traders try to maximize the profit, they probably cause collateral damage, pushing the Feds in the surrounding systems.
---------
Some brainstorming:
Let's say we changed Lugh to be independent. ... What happens next? ...
IMO we will need to expand CSG to neighbouring systems. Growing influence there will be much easier, if there are several parties with decent %age. If we only have 2 or 3 parties with low %age and one Fed party with 60++ it will be very hard there too.
So let's also have a look at the surrounding systems! It may make live much easier in the future.
just my 2 cents
have fun!
-j
I have just read where we are up to and wondered if we can achieve political revolution without resorting to civil war?
Maybe a democracy can do it by non-violent means, whereas anarchy systems might need to be fought for?
Maybe a democracy can do it by non-violent means, whereas anarchy systems might need to be fought for?
Last edited:
Interesting ideas re inadvertantly promoting neighbouring Feds by trading with them? Maybe we ought to look at this in the longer term, and create a list of alternative suppliers (Independent stations) in the federal systems, or just using non-fed systems preferentialy? Personally I'd consider weakening the Feds in their own systems, but this would need testing.