Mercs of Mikunn results after 3 weeks of effort - Also a request for documentation, in game and out
- Thread starter Walt Kerman
- Start date
- Status
So law is in civil war cooldown while the dukes are pending to come to war? Come on, my brain is twisted enough as it is trying to work out those states and their meaning ...
You had Expansion with the Dukes right? That's why it's there without the 'critical'. Law Party recently got out of a civil war right (flash one apparently)? That's why it's there without the critical. States that have been triggered and are active get the 'critical' removed too (like boom and lockdown in the picture). And now I'm going to blow up your mind even more: I believe that the order the states appear on the queue is ... wait for it ... alphabetical!
It's like it sounds, a queue, once a state is in the queue, is either waiting for it's turn or active. Programatically, it makes sense, as it's extremely simple to implement something like that; they will add complexity on top in the future I guess once the system is properly debugged and the emergent behaviour is battle tested (they will relax the cool downs for this).
If a state reaches whatever thresholds it needs to reach to trigger, it gets on the queue. there is no 'competition' between states as long as they do not drop below the thresholds (that's what the little arrows indicate). We are alpha-testing the basics, the initial code base, as this was not even programmed on beta, it was rushed for gamma, period.
Last edited:
Neither is apparently the case. The dukes haven't had an expansion in the last 30 days, at least not if expansion means gaining a new foothold in a system they weren't previously in. And how could law have had a civil war without an opposing party also at war?
You had Expansion with the Dukes right? That's why it's there without the 'critical'. Law Party recently got out of a civil war right (flash one apparently)? That's why it's there without the critical. States that have been triggered and are active get the 'critical' removed too (like boom and lockdown in the picture). And now I'm going to blow up your mind even more: I believe that the order the states appear on the queue is ... wait for it ... alphabetical!
It's like it sounds, a queue, once a state is in the queue, is either waiting for it's turn or active. Programatically, it makes sense, as it's extremely simple to implement something like that; they will add complexity on top in the future I guess once the system is properly debugged and the emergent behaviour is battle tested (they will relax the cool downs for this).
If a state reaches whatever thresholds it needs to reach to trigger, it gets on the queue. there is no 'competition' between states as long as they do not drop below the thresholds (that's what the little arrows indicate). We are alpha-testing the basics, the initial code base, as this was not even programmed on beta, it was rushed for gamma, period.
Yeah, not sure about this. I have my doubts Law Party was at Civil War. I think there was a miscommunication about that. Besides, if they went to Civil War, they would fought Dukes or some other faction, and would also be in in Civil War "cool-down" as Pending, if you're correct. Also the Dukes expanded before Christmas, had Expansion pending on Jan 15th, went away, then came back on the 22nd with no Expansion happening before.
I don't think we get any visible indication of a cool-down state.
Ok, we just had one of those such flash civil wars (a station changed hands) and the civil war state appears there afterwards. In a previous system a faction went both through civil unrest and lockdown, and afterwards the states appear in the queue (without the 'critical'). I've seen this in many systems with the 'boom' state.
Even Michael has given already many hints it works like that. In the case of a faction that is present in two systems with conflicting states there may have been some bug that's why the civil war is only in cooldown for one faction and in other in queue.
In my book I got enough solid proof that this is the way it works, does not mean that there may not be other bugs around.
P.S. There have passed 25 days sicne the 'Expansion' state ended for the Dukes? If not there is no reason why it shouldn't stay there.
Even Michael has given already many hints it works like that. In the case of a faction that is present in two systems with conflicting states there may have been some bug that's why the civil war is only in cooldown for one faction and in other in queue.
In my book I got enough solid proof that this is the way it works, does not mean that there may not be other bugs around.
P.S. There have passed 25 days sicne the 'Expansion' state ended for the Dukes? If not there is no reason why it shouldn't stay there.
Last edited:
I was just wondering if it would be worth putting a hold on the developments in LFT 133 and asking people there to come and help get one thing done at a time; either here or in Lugh. Would anyone be interested in a coalition of sorts? Mutual back scratching?
I think there wasn't much discussion on this, but still here's my take - I think getting more people involved is always a good thing, especially if it's on the level of one group helping out another, establishing a coalition and such. What I wouldn't want to have is a mobile flash mob coming in, clearing out the goals, taking every opponent down and leaving 2 hours later. Especially with the goal of Mikunn trying to see how far we can bring our influence to play.
I'm not sure about the expansion state happening within the last 25 days - but there has only been one actual expansion so far (into hr 7327) and that ended before Xmas '14. So there might have been an expansion state without any player viewable consequences later than that.
My guess on why the state would reappear in pending without critical is because the criteria used to initiate it in the first place is still in place. For example, Civil War gets triggered when the influence differences between two factions change or rate of change pass a certain thresh hold. Civil War occurs, ends, but the difference in influence is still enough to initiate Civil War, but it won't, because its on Cool Down.
Yes that's a valid explanation, but in a certain way, it's an indication of the cooldown (even if unintentional). What is important about the discussion though is: I don't think that states compete for a place in the queue.
Once a state reaches a threshold/criteria, and as long as it stays like that for X days, it will become active (so states need to stay 'critical' for an amount of time before they go active, I think this is safe to assume). As long as all of them don't drop under certain value, the order in the queue will be respected. Only if a state drops below the required value it will drop off the queue (otherwise, it will keep it's place in the queue and become active after the current active state runs it's course; if the value still is 'high enough' when it has run it's course, it will show in the queue without the critical).
Sounds like it works along those lines.
Just to show you how it worked for us:
- moved to new system
- traded, got "civil war critical"
- stopped all operations
- noone noticed a civil war happening
- someone noticed "civil war pending"
- checked the stations, and one had switched
So "civil war pending" might indeed be a sign for a cooldown civil war, since we got "civil war critical" when it was not in cooldown.
If your adversary is in cooldown, you might not get civil war either. Maybe you could try to aim for another minor faction, to trigger the civil war influence differential for the other minor faction.
- moved to new system
- traded, got "civil war critical"
- stopped all operations
- noone noticed a civil war happening
- someone noticed "civil war pending"
- checked the stations, and one had switched
So "civil war pending" might indeed be a sign for a cooldown civil war, since we got "civil war critical" when it was not in cooldown.
If your adversary is in cooldown, you might not get civil war either. Maybe you could try to aim for another minor faction, to trigger the civil war influence differential for the other minor faction.
It's been noted, Law Party is in Lock Down, be we've not seen any checkpoints. To the Michael Brookes / the devs, is this normal for the non-controlling party, like the lack of conflict zones before?
We are also in a lockdown state in Lugh with CSG since today and no checkpoint have showen up.
Michael Brookes
Game Director
Two quesions Michael. Does the import of commodities influence differend states like doing mission for a faction does ? In our case the import of non-lethal weapons or progenitor cells (maybe incease lockdown) > might lead to an overpopulation in high populated systems as they extend peoples lifespan and further could this lead to an epidemic (outbreak). ?
Might lockdown occur after a civil war of a non controlling faction ?
Might lockdown occur after a civil war of a non controlling faction ?
Last edited:
I would suggest that as well as "Pending" states for minor factions, the UI also display "Previous" state, if different from the current one.
I would also suggest that if a minor faction exists in more than one system, the names of those other systems should be displayed.
Further, the names of the stations that the faction controls in the current system could be listed, to save having to switch to the System map and clicking through all the stations and outposts.
I realise this is placing a burden on the relatively simple in-ship faction UI, but to be honest it seems unnecessarily difficult to understand what's going on. Keeping the mechanics of why something is happening obscure is one thing; making what is happening obscure is another.
I would also suggest that if a minor faction exists in more than one system, the names of those other systems should be displayed.
Further, the names of the stations that the faction controls in the current system could be listed, to save having to switch to the System map and clicking through all the stations and outposts.
I realise this is placing a burden on the relatively simple in-ship faction UI, but to be honest it seems unnecessarily difficult to understand what's going on. Keeping the mechanics of why something is happening obscure is one thing; making what is happening obscure is another.
Makes sense. Wasn't sure with the addition of Conflict Zones for non-controlling faction Civil War. Thanks for the clarification.
From our own data collection (mostly Liu-Kang's), we've also seen weapon import missions increase Lock Down. Good question on general market importation. Michael Brookes stated Lock Down is not needed for Civil War (agree it's more closely related to Civil Unrest). I would think you could get Lock Down of a non-controlling faction after a Civil War. In our case, I could see that happening if we (Dukes) lost the Civil War, and Law Party, which is currently already in Lock Down (assuming there's no Lock Down cool down period).
In the CSG thread, Mr. Brookes mentions they can reduce the length of Lock Down by Bounty Hunting. This makes sense and may seem obvious, but it answers the question on whether or not current actions influence can influence the duration of the current state, or simply goes into the "hopper" for the pending states.
Assuming this holds true for Boom, we can expect to be able to reduce Boom length, and get to Civil War faster by doing missions that reduce Boom and/or increase Bust, or at least have no effect on Boom. Previously, I was advocating this as a tactic, but I think the remaining mission types seem to be too ineffective* at bolstering our Influence in HR 7327. As such, we've been loosing ground to BOTH Law Party (the big issue for Civil War) and Dynamic Commodities.
*Could also be player actions supporting Law Party and/or Dynamic Commodities, like a certain mysterious voice guy may be implying.
Assuming this holds true for Boom, we can expect to be able to reduce Boom length, and get to Civil War faster by doing missions that reduce Boom and/or increase Bust, or at least have no effect on Boom. Previously, I was advocating this as a tactic, but I think the remaining mission types seem to be too ineffective* at bolstering our Influence in HR 7327. As such, we've been loosing ground to BOTH Law Party (the big issue for Civil War) and Dynamic Commodities.
*Could also be player actions supporting Law Party and/or Dynamic Commodities, like a certain mysterious voice guy may be implying.
- Status