Mercs of Mikunn - 3 Year report: The Once Secret BGS mechanics and how to figure out exploits

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

As I've said, I'm an advocate for balance rather than any particular mechanism for achieving it. …

Focusing only on the result (balance) can lead to a system that has so many special cases, exceptions and overly complex mechanics that balancing can become more and more difficult as any new change affects everything in increasingly unexpected ways.
Instead of a lot of special fixes and changes often only one change would be needed.

Focusing only on the result is easier, but this ease is bought with more problems in the future.

A lot of problems with the BGS would get solved or at leased reduced by using a better transaction system that doesn't count the interactions with a faction as a transaction.

A simpler system is easier to maintain and easier to re-balance.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

....

A lot of problems with the BGS ....

Specifically which?

 

[EUS]

This is a very interesting thread, I have been thinking about how the BGS should run, and how influence should occur.
Watching arguments over voting, and what it means to individual persons here leads me to the conclusion that the mechanics should not be a static system of transactions vs value.
My opinion (in a very rudimentary breakdown), is that the BGS should be influenced by either transactions, and/or value + or - rep of the CMDR (or a mix of all) depending on what type of government runs the system where the activities are occurring.
IE, a communist system would calculate influence in a completely different manor (transactional) than a corporate (value), or monarchy (CMDR rep) system.
Different rulesets for different governmental ideologies.

 

[Jane Turner]

IE, a communist system would calculate influence in a completely different manor (transactional) than a corporate (value), or monarchy (CMDR rep) system.
Different rulesets for different governmental ideologies.

That sort of happens a bit now, in that Anarachy systems have different values or rather effects for the same transaction as other gov types. Interesting idea though

 

[Schlack]

A simpler system is easier to maintain and easier to re-balance.

It started off a lot simpler than it is now. Many of the changes that have been brought in are on foot of balancing, dealing with the unintended consequences of grinders and actual exploits like 1T trade. Essentially we are 3 years into BGS evolution from the simple system. We are at the other end of the process and you want to go back to the start ?

I also don't see huge problems with the current system other than perhaps that BH, Trade and bonds dont accurately reflect the totality of a cmdr's activity (I'm not 100% convinced that it should either!) . I have seen little in this thread to suggest that a major change would bring huge (or indeed any) benefits over the current system rather than a different set of issues!

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Specifically which?

The ones mentioned in this thread.
1 ton trading
bounty hunting and combat bonds having different effect on the BGS depending on how the bounties/bonds are handed in and not based on the number of bounties/bonds handed in
system security killing spree being close to impossible to oppose
discovery data INF bombing

Yes some of those have been fixed, but all of them are the result of the BGS treating transactions differently.

It started off a lot simpler than it is now. Many of the changes that have been brought in are on foot of balancing, dealing with the unintended consequences of grinders and actual exploits like 1T trade. Essentially we are 3 years into BGS evolution from the simple system. We are at the other end of the process and you want to go back to the start ?

I also don't see huge problems with the current system other than perhaps that BH, Trade and bonds dont accurately reflect the totality of a cmdr's activity (I'm not 100% convinced that it should either!) . I have seen little in this thread to suggest that a major change would bring huge (or indeed any) benefits over the current system rather than a different set of issues!

I think at some point FDev will have to go back to the start as more and more specific fixes to problems add up and cause problems. Sometimes it's easier to rebuild something from scratch, or fixing a very fundamental problem, than to patch around the effects of that problem.
The sooner this is done, the less work it is.

Btw, by simpler system I didn't mean simplistic or reduced functionality. I meant an system with rules that aren't complicated and designed in a way that they can be applied to various situations without having to do a lot of special adjustments or exceptions.

You are right that it probably doesn't really affect the player just playing the game and constantly learning the news addition or change to the way the BGS works.
But redesigning or fixing fundamental aspects of the BGS could make it more accessible for players and easier to understand.

 

[Schlack]

The ones mentioned in this thread.
1 ton trading
bounty hunting and combat bonds having different effect on the BGS depending on how the bounties/bonds are handed in and not based on the number of bounties/bonds handed in
system security killing spree being close to impossible to oppose
discovery data INF bombing

Yes some of those have been fixed, but all of them are the result of the BGS treating transactions differently.

I don't believe that is correct. its a result of a variety of factors particular to the BGS, playstyles and how BGSers and more casual players interact with the game.

1T trade is gone, explo bombing has been tweaked down significantly, sys security kills are far harder (murder is still possible). Despite how many pages of discussion the issues raised are primarily in relation to bounties and bonds. Tweaking further could resolve that without any need for wholesale changes. What a load of fuss over something relatively minimal. Sheesh i can imagine the pants wetting if this discussion was happening during the 1 mining mission =10% influence swing days.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

I don't believe that is correct. its a result of a variety of factors particular to the BGS, playstyles and how BGSers and more casual players interact with the game.

1T trade is gone, explo bombing has been tweaked down significantly, sys security kills are far harder (murder is still possible). Despite how many pages of discussion the issues raised are primarily in relation to bounties and bonds. Tweaking further could resolve that without any need for wholesale changes. What a load of fuss over something relatively minimal. Sheesh i can imagine the pants wetting if this discussion was happening during the 1 mining mission =10% influence swing days.

Are you speaking from the standpoint of a person who plays around with BGS for some reason, or of a player who does not care about it?

 

[Jane Turner]

Are you speaking from the standpoint of a person who plays around with BGS for some reason, or of a player who does not care about it?

He won't blow his own trumpet - but AEDC are one of the longest standing and best known BGS groups and Slack is one of the formost BGS experts.

 

[Schlack]

Are you speaking from the standpoint of a person who plays around with BGS for some reason, or of a player who does not care about it?

I'm speaking from the standpoint of someone who is very annoyed about how this whole issue was misleadingly presented in a sensationalist, narrow, insulting and ill thought out manner.

 

[Ryan Murdoc]

Hmmm, too much drama here.

Indeed. And in the light of how you presented everything there's no reason to be surprised about that.

Thanks to you certain people now think that others have been doing their secret BGSing and using (known) workings to their advantage over others. Some even starting to scream the SJW paroles I was talking about in my last post. Stirring up fears and resentment; creating this discussion even got Obsidian Ant involved, a person that many listen to.

I think I don't go too far when I compare this to the Witch hunts in medieval times. I'd kindly ask that from here on out you'd let the people who (should) know best about the BGS do their thing, and that's Frontier. We can always test and give feedback of how things work, don't work, shouldn't work in our opinion. But for that it needs to be in the game first.

We are not the creators of Elite Dangerous, only its Users. We do shape what we're given into what we like it to be, within the limitations that bind us.

Honestly, it sounds like the OP wants an EVE-like system

Let's hope that we never succumb to the likes of EvE, both in ways of gameplay as well as the level of toxic behaviour within their community. To promote that you screw each other over and the Devs themselves helping out certain Groups over there to gain advantage over the rest?

We can be better then that.

 

[Roybe]

I'm speaking from the standpoint of someone who is very annoyed about how this whole issue was misleadingly presented in a sensationalist, narrow, insulting and ill thought out manner.

Metagaming is metagaming!

 

[Deareim]

I don't believe that is correct. its a result of a variety of factors particular to the BGS, playstyles and how BGSers and more casual players interact with the game.

1T trade is gone, explo bombing has been tweaked down significantly, sys security kills are far harder (murder is still possible). Despite how many pages of discussion the issues raised are primarily in relation to bounties and bonds. Tweaking further could resolve that without any need for wholesale changes. What a load of fuss over something relatively minimal. Sheesh i can imagine the pants wetting if this discussion was happening during the 1 mining mission =10% influence swing days.

I cannot fathom alll the hidden tricks legal or not that you must know And it is normal with the time spent on it.

 

[Ryan Murdoc]

I cannot fathom alll the hidden tricks legal or not that you must know And it is normal with the time spent on it.

In my eyes it tells volumes about a person if she or he knew about something that would give them an unfair advantage over others, but doesn't use it. Some might call that stupid, I'd call it integrity and character.

Again - what was discussed here (and elsewhere) has been around for more then 2 years. No secret at all if you're willing to look for it (Google etc.).

And no, it is not ment to be plastered into anyones face. If you're interested you will go look and ask about something. If you can't be bothered with such menial things it's not the fault of others when your attempts end in ruin.

To discover and learn the workings of the BGS is the quintessence of itself. And no amount of explanation will help those who want everything hand-fed to them only to complain that they don't get it after all.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

I'm speaking from the standpoint of someone who is very annoyed about how this whole issue was misleadingly presented in a sensationalist, narrow, insulting and ill thought out manner.

BGS, commander! Do. You. Fiddle. It?

This issue presented in this topic is quite severe. As every player who is seriouly into bgs have to deal with this nonsense of a system.

 

[Walt Kerman]

its no secret, despite how it has been presented in this thread.

It was not presented as secret by me. Please read the original post.

"It is not so secret anymore, but many still do not know, and it is being used against groups extensively"
- Walt Kerman Original Post

Also you keep arguing with people who did not know that everybody knows. You having to do this requires this to be true:

many still do not know

 

[Ryan Murdoc]

I'm still waiting for some solid evidence regarding the amount of Groups / Wings who played their BGS without knowing about the transactional nature.

The only example you bring up is that 3 year long operating Empire Group / Wing.

Has someone from that Wing voiced themselves in this thread yet, explaining how they thought it would work otherwise?

How they were unable to locate controversial information that would lead them to rethink and question and hopefully retest their methods and outcomes?

The greatest mistake you can make is to believe that the BGS is something set in stone. It isn't and probably never will be.

I'd rather like to talk to the persons who were / are affected by their misconceptions of the BGS. Not someone who seems to try to gather followers for his cause to strengthen his own position.

And before you comment on the latter please read your posts again. If you're unable to find the sentences that make you come across like that I will after I'm back from work in 10-12 hours.

 

[Walt Kerman]

I'm still waiting for some solid evidence regarding the amount of Groups / Wings who played their BGS without knowing about the transactional nature.

The only example you bring up is that 3 year long operating Empire Group / Wing.

Has someone from that Wing voiced themselves in this thread yet, explaining how they thought it would work otherwise?

How they were unable to locate controversial information that would lead them to rethink and question and hopefully retest their methods and outcomes?

The greatest mistake you can make is to believe that the BGS is something set in stone. It isn't and probably never will be.

I'd rather like to talk to the persons who were / are affected by their misconceptions of the BGS. Not someone who seems to try to gather followers for his cause to strengthen his own position.

And before you comment on the latter please read your posts again. If you're unable to find the sentences that make you come across like that I will after I'm back from work in 10-12 hours.

There are 600 player groups that have requested minor factions that have been put in game that haven't been able to get out of their homesystems.

People have entered my threads saying they thought it worked otherwise. Why don't you ask them.

You can also check through the reddit thread and private message people there and ask them. https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDange...nce_secret_bgs_mechanics_and_the_unfortunate/

I'm aware of one of the largest groups on inara that did not know and sent them a message. Maybe they private message you, but two groups in particular here are being pretty hostile so why would they post here?

You also ask

How they were unable to locate controversial information that would lead them to rethink and question and hopefully retest their methods and outcomes?

There is tons of conflicting info, and I can also answer your question with your following sentence

The greatest mistake you can make is to believe that the BGS is something set in stone. It isn't and probably never will be.

Im absolutely trying to gain followers to support this change. Thats the whole point of this post and I stated that in OP.

 

[Jane Turner]

There are 600 player groups that have requested minor factions that have been put in game that haven't been able to get out of their homesystems.

And how many of them are actually still playing - the number of Zombie pmf is a regular topic of debate?

You can also check through the reddit thread and private message people there and ask them

I did, much as I dislike Reddit, and I failed to find any substantial difference between the debate there and here. If you do get people making personal contact - show them towards the BGS sub-forum, which is as polite, collaborative and helpful as an online forum can be.

 

[DNA-Decay]

What I told you four months ago wasnt that it supposed to be a BGS guide video, it was supposed to be a video on the transactional nature of the BGS, i explicitly mentioned how it would explain how it caused single selling commodities, but I did say i would not mention selling exploration data in singles.

Single selling was patched out ages ago.

You're really stretching your case to get your time in the spotlight here.

Hey speaking of videos - the Alliance Elite Diplomatic Corps [AEDC] recently declassified this old training video from 3302.

[video=youtube_share;BsBTSt6ncac]https://youtu.be/BsBTSt6ncac[/video]

All the stuff about the squad board refers to our old one that we decomissioned early last year, and the figures are like WAY out dated - we're currently celebrating 100 stations
But that video is a work in progress.