Medicine worse than the disease?

[Jmanis]

But it would be better if the mission types were actually tied to state, economy and government/ethos properly (which would need a lot more of them, of course)

Of course. As I mentioned... Famine and Outbreak are the exceptions where the mission generation *does* bias according to state/gov/faction properly.

As for other combinations, it's literally a matter of which 10 minute tick you pick. There is never any rhyme nor reason to the current blobbiness. One 10 minute cycle, all missions are going to one faction. Next 10 minute cycle, they're all going to a different one, or the same. Doesn't really matter.

 

[Jane Turner]

Currently working a sleepy 10k pop system... faction started at 8%. I ran about 12 missions, variety of scan, assassination, source and donation. Gained about 4%. By contrast i ran 3 assassination missions and got a comparable change of around 3%.

My gut is telling me the raw effects of actions are still the same as always, but the diminishing returns kick in much sooner.

its still possible to get 3.2 level influence swings - you just need to run more like 40++

 

[Pro Cambarus]

I much prefer the current state with more efforts needed for the same result than the previous noise amplifier state where unintended random minor interventions wreaked havoc with influence levels in all systems. The current system is more like a noise dampener, where more concentrated efforts are needed but commanders are making these efforts for results, not constantly extinguishing fires in a hectic BGS. Commander efforts vs commander efforts the current system is more balanced.
(We're just through a challenging retreat so I know real commitment is needed to reach some targets.)

Other than that the BGS is hardly stagnant: numerous factions (some with dubious dedication or significant real activities) expand like there's no tomorrow. The BGS does not impose much restraint there.

 

[_trent_]

I much prefer the current state with more efforts needed for the same result than the previous noise amplifier state where unintended random minor interventions wreaked havoc with influence levels in all systems. The current system is more like a noise dampener, where more concentrated efforts are needed but commanders are making these efforts for results, not constantly extinguishing fires in a hectic BGS. Commander efforts vs commander efforts the current system is more balanced.
(We're just through a challenging retreat so I know real commitment is needed to reach some targets.)

Other than that the BGS is hardly stagnant: numerous factions (some with dubious dedication or significant real activities) expand like there's no tomorrow. The BGS does not impose much restraint there.

The fact that some factions are expanding like there's no tomorrow doesn't mean that the BGS isn't stagnant. In several cases that we know it means quite the reverse. The only reliable way to lower a faction's influence right now is smuggling, so if a faction's government type disables black markets they find it very hard to get themselves down below expansion level. We know several factions who now bemoan their constant expansions into systems they did not want to enter and cannot seem to retreat from.

For the BGS to be 'playable' there needs to be dependable mechanisms to both raise and lower influence by a realistic amount. Right now, we are just not seeing them in our little corner of the bubble.

 

[Jmanis]

For the BGS to be 'playable' there needs to be dependable mechanisms to both raise and lower influence by a realistic amount. Right now, we are just not seeing them in our little corner of the bubble.

I'm a broken record, but: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/472325-Time-to-buff-antagonistic-PvE

 

[Pro Cambarus]

I agree that inoperative undermining activities cause significant headache in BGS (and should be re-introduced). It is still possible to lower other factions' influence by positive actions but sometimes the proper tool would be undermine. My impression is, however, that undesirable expansions can be avoided in most cases and the diminishing returns are instrumental for that purpose.

 

[FrogsFriend]

It's still easy to drop the highest faction by doing some work for the lowest factions. Of course, it's more difficult to get your players to stop just boosting your own faction continuously, even when it's doing you no good

 

[Deareim]

While I think we all appreciate a bit of stability after the initial chaos of the 2 months after 3.3 was released, and the latest patch certainly did that, it also seriously slowed down faction work.

Part of that patch was the early ending to conflicts, which I am happy to say seems to work as advertised. Conflicts will end when one side can no longer lose it, and on next tick it immediately moves to None and transfers any assets. This is great. Moreover, I've only seen one empty CZ since the patch, and where conflicts went the wrong way, we suspect opposition/traffic, rather than it just going the wrong way, as it did initially.

However, part of the patch as well was to lower the influence of each activity. The same influence gains require something like 5x-10x more effort than before, which is bad enough in low traffic areas, in high traffic areas that is... discouraging.

Mission effects are way down.... while at the same time we no longer can board flip. So, even if I would like to do 20 missions or more, it basically ends up with 3 salvage missions and a cargo delivery.... if I am lucky.

It's discouraging to work for your faction and not see your efforts rewarded. But it is not much better to work daily for a couple of 10ths of a percent improvement, making a run on a system's ruler a multi-week slog, when in comparison armed conflicts are won sometimes with remarkable little effort.

At the moment, an armed conflict is a quicker path to influence growth by locking inf, winning 4 days in a row and get a free 4%. Meanwhile, getting that war organized now can require a completely insane effort over multiple weeks.

Is it perhaps time to bump influence effects up a bit again? Are people still seeing a lot of basic mechanic problems?

And please make explo data work again, as well as mining and trade. At the moment it seems missions and combat zones is most effective. Trade works under certain conditions but remains disappointing for effort involved, and missions are rare and if you're unlucky, stuck on pirate kills and salvage missions... Meanwhile some systems are self-growing themselves to expansion, making which system to expand hard to control.

I like the new mechanics. The ways armed conflicts work is great. But now I'd really like to make some progress...

Can we get the influence effects bumped up again? Is the BGS now stable enough to do that?

Love to hear your thoughts.

Just saw your post Mangal. I can just say it is 10000 spot on....