Lets test this persistent universe and see if FD are true to their word.

[Brindarm]

What's the word on all this? Is it working? Partially working? On and off working? Know one knows yet if it's actually working like it's supposed to?

This thread has been up for weeks and I'm very very curious what the general consensus is. From what I've read it would appear that some things work and some don't but, I'd have to guess it's not working as intended. Either that or what was "intended" is fundamentally flawed, at least I would have never expected what I've read here to be what was intended.

For you guys plugging away on this, is this what you expected it to be like?

Not everything is working - we're uncovering bugs as we go along, the main thing is that we're providing (hopefully) useful data to FD to resolve things as they come up. For me, yes, this is what we expected.

Re the pending states:
If we read a down arrow as a cool-off period and a up arrow as coming soon/still going, then things start making a bit more sense for me.

Assuming that is true: Boom is cooling down (fair enough) and lock down is taking over.

Lockdown may be a necessary event after a civil war amongst non-controlling factions? That's sort of logical. So, when we've worked through the lockdown I reckon we should be able to start another civil war (so maybe we should start doing missions etc. that will make it appear in the queue?)

Oh, and I don't think LFE's Boom is lasting longer than ours. From memory it started a day or two later?

 

[sirius42]

Lockdown may be a necessary event after a civil war amongst non-controlling factions? That's sort of logical. So, when we've worked through the lockdown I reckon we should be able to start another civil war (so maybe we should start doing missions etc. that will make it appear in the queue?)

Lockdowns have nothing to do with civil wars, they are their own state.

Michael

Seusang had also its civil war for about two weeks ago. No lockdown showing up there till now. On the other hand it became a controlling faction in the system with its civil war.

 

[Nightstorm]

From the Dukes' thread:

It needs to be the controlling minor faction to spawn checkpoints.

Michael

So we shouldn't expect checkpoints unless LFE go into lockdown as well (which I don't think they've shown any sign of)

 

[Brindarm]

From the Dukes' thread:



So we shouldn't expect checkpoints unless LFE go into lockdown as well (which I don't think they've shown any sign of)

Less clutter in the navigation panel for us then I think the same held true for the Boom (we only saw "Seeking Luxuries" when LFE entered Boom state too), and I'm guessing it will hold true for a civil war if it doesn't include LFE?

So, how do we minimise the amount of time Lockdown will be in force for, while still boosting Civil war? Any ideas?

 

[Michael Brookes]

Less clutter in the navigation panel for us then I think the same held true for the Boom, and I'm guessing it will hold true for a civil war if it doesn't include LFE?

So, how do we minimise the amount of time Lockdown will be in force for, while still boosting Civil war? Any ideas?

I suggest bounty hunting.

Michael

 

[Sanderson]

Another question, to anyone, How's the "flow" for lack of a better term, with the way players influence the galaxy? I know there's a lot of variables but, in your experience does it feel (feel being subjective) like things move well?

You all have been at it for months now so your opinions or guesses are best suited for this question I think.

 

[Soda Popinski]

Ok thanks good to know, a week seems reasonable for a galactic map update - i wouldnt expect to many changes of system factional control at the current time anyway. Maybe once community missions come in that might alter the balance fo things.

I suggest bounty hunting.

Michael

Interesting. Does it matter if they're Bounty Hunting Missions or just general bounty-hunting?

 

[Nightstorm]

I suggest bounty hunting.

Michael

Whoa, that might be the most directing suggestion I've heard from Michael yet! It must be Friday afternoon. Thank you, have a good weekend!

 

[Mauze]

I suggest bounty hunting.

Michael

Is it enough to just kill the wanted ships, or do we have to turn in the bountys in Lugh to gain a effect? (this would mean we have to turn in Fed bountys and this would support LFE i guess?)

Nonetheless thanks for the straight answer!

 

[Technaut]

I suggest bounty hunting.

Michael

Thanks for the suggestions, I like knowing that FD are closely watching what we are doing in Lugh.
I have been interdicting all wanted ships except CSG in the system. I had been thinking that going for the feds directly might help in the lockdown situation.

 

[orfeboy]

Brace yourselves because I have another one of my theories coming on....

Back over Christmas we had a discussion about the effect of influence and where it stems from. We were saying how missions according to the DDA were the main source of influence change and my argument was that trade had a huge effect. At the time I was saying that missions might be the source of big chunks while huge amounts of trade all add up and we should not underestimate it blah blah blah.

Well now I have another such theory about 'Lockdown'.

From what I have seen so far and please correct me if I am wrong, it seems doing 'kill the pirate' missions are the only thing that seems to lower lockdown. These again are missions and may provide big chunks as mentioned above but remember that we have been avoiding doing bounty hunting in the Lugh system for fear that it raises security.

Now if you consider that bringing in weapons raises lockdown because Joe Public is running around with a stun gun in his hand and then the cops rush in and decide to shut the place down and the cure to that is reducing tension by removing pirates by doing missions then I think we should consider that maybe doing basic bounty hunting in the Lugh system might also do the same thing just in very much smaller chunks working in much the same way as trade...

This is something we actively have been avoiding.

If I can return once again to my analogy of pushing a car up a hill and trying to keep it on the road and steer it straight. It may be the case that doing weapon missions does actually encourage a war (fuel the flames of war etc.) but at the same time we need to counter possible lockdown by removing stress from the system and not encouraging the police to roll in and shut the place down.

Michael mentioned that in order for a station to flip influence must be raised and if 'the right conditions exist' it will enter a civil war and flip if the revolting faction wins.

It stands to reason to me (by my logic anyway) that in order to fuel the flames of war (just like the title on the mission) you need to bring in weapons but you cant do this indefinitely for fear of imposing lockdown. Therefore there must be a way to counter it as you go...

The only other possibility besides the game itself being badly designed is that perhaps Lockdown is actually one of the criteria required before a war will ensue. ie. the things have to get really bad before the people revolt.

Thoughts?

This is what I have been saying before (see above)... Our stress levels are too high and bonty hunting would relieve them.

 

[orfeboy]

Thanks for the suggestions, I like knowing that FD are closely watching what we are doing in Lugh.
I have been interdicting all wanted ships except CSG in the system. I had been thinking that going for the feds directly might help in the lockdown situation.

I would think going for CSG wanted ships would actually believe it or not be the correct thing to do. It is CSG that are in lockdown because they are seen by the Federation (and LFE) as out of control with pirates running wild and citizens with stun guns and baseball bats on every habitation zone corner They need to see stress levels drop so they can relax and decrease security. Security has hit its pinnacle in Lugh right now and lockdown is the result. I believe that bringing in weapons and doing fuel the arts of war missions are like a multiplier when increasing influence but if you bring in too much then you have gone overboard and will trigger a panic amongst the controlling faction and they send in the police with the riot gear.

The bit that bugs me though is that when you have no current state and want to push a war to bring in weapons etc. actually causes a boom and then this state denies you having your war. It seems like a contradiction. That is if we are assuming that bringing in weapons actually does increase the chances of revolt. I am assuming that individual commodities have a bearing on the simulation. perhaps not. Perhaps it is only missions that affect that aspect of the simulation and all our weapons deliveries to the commodity market done nothing but spawn a boom and zero towards actual war...

 

[Brindarm]

I would think going for CSG wanted ships would actually believe it or not be the correct thing to do. It is CSG that are in lockdown because they are seen by the Federation (and LFE) as out of control with pirates running wild and citizens with stun guns and baseball bats on every habitation zone corner They need to see stress levels drop so they can relax and decrease security. Security has hit its pinnacle in Lugh right now and lockdown is the result. I believe that bringing in weapons and doing fuel the arts of war missions are like a multiplier when increasing influence but if you bring in too much then you have gone overboard and will trigger a panic amongst the controlling faction and they send in the police with the riot gear.

The bit that bugs me though is that when you have no current state and want to push a war to bring in weapons etc. actually causes a boom and then this state denies you having your war. It seems like a contradiction. That is if we are assuming that bringing in weapons actually does increase the chances of revolt. I am assuming that individual commodities have a bearing on the simulation. perhaps not. Perhaps it is only missions that affect that aspect of the simulation and all our weapons deliveries to the commodity market done nothing but spawn a boom and zero towards actual war...

I'm inclined to believe that trading only increases the commercial side, i.e. boom as we're bringing in just what the "standard channels" need, and shipping out what they're making. I think the missions is where the other bits are generated, so I think concentrating our efforts on trading worked against us.

But, it's good to know that bounty hunting is the antidote to Lockdown. Which also implies that we can "shrug off" any of the "unwanted" states if we need to. So, bounty hunting is the name of the game tonight then!

EDIT: Sorry, very rude, forgot to thank Michael.... Thanks Michael!

 

[orfeboy]

I'm inclined to believe that trading only increases the commercial side, i.e. boom as we're bringing in just what the "standard channels" need, and shipping out what they're making. I think the missions is where the other bits are generated, so I think concentrating our efforts on trading worked against us.

But, it's good to know that bounty hunting is the antidote to Lockdown. Which also implies that we can "shrug off" any of the "unwanted" states if we need to. So, bounty hunting is the name of the game tonight then!

EDIT: Sorry, very rude, forgot to thank Michael.... Thanks Michael!

You are actually wrong there. trade increases influence and influence sparks takeovers so trading most definitely helps. The problem is that there are invisible statistics that are brewing in the background that all these actions affect. It is these statistics that trigger states. In order to get an effect you need to raise these statistics and hold them there for a set amount of time to trigger one. The problem is that they all have a downside and if that statistic is allowed rise too high instead of achieving the effect you were striving for instead will spark a side effect.

My pushing a wobbly cart up a hill on a windy road analogy pretty much sums it up I think.

 

[Dogoncrook]

You are actually wrong there. trade increases influence and influence sparks takeovers so trading most definitely helps. The problem is that there are invisible statistics that are brewing in the background that all these actions affect. It is these statistics that trigger states. In order to get an effect you need to raise these statistics and hold them there for a set amount of time to trigger one. The problem is that they all have a downside and if that statistic is allowed rise too high instead of achieving the effect you were striving for instead will spark a side effect.

My pushing a wobbly cart up a hill on a windy road analogy pretty much sums it up I think.

Yeah if you take a balanced approach I believe you can push influence higher than the controlling states without triggering any state at all. I'm currently working on a system that has a faction with more influence than the controlling faction and it seems like as long as I don't concentrate on just that faction I can keep this up indefinitely. Currently I'm trying to balance the two factions to keep them weak because neither is the one I want in control, and the one I do want in control doesn't have a station. They way I balance influence though is by hurting the dominant faction in other systems. Concentrating on one system doesn't seem to work as well.

Edit: I'll also add it seems like there are connections between factions that are not clear. The faction who's influence I want to raise gives missions to join a local war i would not have guessed they had any connection, and if you follow their ships at a nav point they regularly engage this faction. The bounties for this faction are all empire and I'm 100ly from the nearest empire system. I haven't thoroughly investigated this but the missions may not be as random as they appear at first glance and watch what the faction does in the wild. I'm not sure of course but it seems concentrating on one thing isn't going to work especially with so many actors involved.

Edit2: Also if you keep saying everyone concentrate on this your gonna keep pushing it to quickly one way or the other then need a mass concentration elsewhere to balance it, IMHO you need to make a recipe for a balanced approach that keeps everyone happy but slowly nudges it the direction you want and that includes doing missions or trading with the faction you want to get rid of but just not as many and maybe hurting them in another area. So trade with them but destabilize their home system at the same time.

 

[carniak]

I suggest bounty hunting.

Michael

This works with lawful faction, but what about lawless factions?

Other than our own faction ships, no other ships generally have bounties...?

 

[Dogoncrook]

This works with lawful faction, but what about lawless factions?

Other than our own faction ships, no other ships generally have bounties...?

I'm not sure if kills in another system count, but if you can find them in an anarchy they all have bounties.

Edit: disregard he's probably talking about bounty hunting in that system.

 

[carniak]

I'm not sure if kills in another system count, but if you can find them in an anarchy they all have bounties.

Edit: disregard he's probably talking about bounty hunting in that system.

Unfortunately, Michael seems only to be following this thread... But there are other faction efforts going on.

I'm backing the Keries Camorra, which is decidedly unlawful... I guess I'll try taking some more hunt authority missions.

 

[SirFreddie]

Unfortunately, Michael seems only to be following this thread... But there are other faction efforts going on.

I'm backing the Keries Camorra, which is decidedly unlawful... I guess I'll try taking some more hunt authority missions.

I believe Michaels comments were a reply to a specific situation regarding lockdown, not saying that it doesn't help your situation

Michael may not be the Messiah, just a very naughty boy

 

[Brindarm]

Just to let you know that Lugh is teaming with Wanted traders tonight if you have interdictors.

If you don't then just go USS jumping - currenly about 3 in every 5 USS's contain pirates from what I've seen. Chatted to Technaut in-game and he confirmed the same, so this looks like our ticket to shift the lockdown status.

Orfeboy: Sorry, I was ignoring the influence side of things. Influence is definitely affected by trade, Michael has said as much in the past. Most things we do for CSG (missions, trade, etc.) boost the influence. I was just saying that I think *other than influence* it's possible that trade only effects Boom state. To trigger the other states we have to do other things. I think. Possibly.

So, I believe that concentrating on trading high supply & demand goods queued up the Boom. Running non-lethal weapons missions seemed to have queued up lockdown. Becuase we concentrated on both of those things, those statuses got prioritised over others. That combined with the civil war cool-down lead to where we are today. Which I don't think is a bad thing by the way. We just need to find the right combination to trigger Civil War.

Yes, I know we stopped doing the non-lethal weapons, but I think by that point the state was already in the queue.

Hope that makes sense.

EDIT: brainwave (sorry it's late!)....so, following my logic above... to initiate civil war maybe we have to run the "fuelling the flames of war" style missions while keeping on top of the bounty hunting. Based on: more weapons in means weapons getting in to the hands of the wrong people which leads to the police cracking down if we don't do it first (i.e. lockdown) Maybe we weren't running a tight enough ship and that's why lockdown queued instead of another civil war??

EDIT 2: Actually, musing further, it makes sense that the type of goods you trade in effect the other states too to a certain extent. And I think the comment earlier (sorry, can't remember who made it) that trading the type of goods requested in missions may have a similar effect in the background as the missions do. We just have to balance what we do. To get civil war, bring in the guns but avoid lockdown and Boom. To avoid Breakout, keep trading the medicines, but don't over-trade or you'll get another boom. Looking at it that way, the background sim becomes one big, complicated Tamagochi that we have to feed and nurture to get it to do what we want it to do. Which is actually rather neat and logical. So, in summary, I think maybe we have to do what we were doing before but this time manage the unwanted side effects. So efficient system flipping becomes a big team effort with people working on different parts, managing the unwanted side-effects while focusing on the main task and keeping the state queue clear for a civil war.

Sorry, most of that is obvious, and I'm sure some of you have been saying it for ages (including you Orfeboy with your wobbly cart) I'll stop rambling now!