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
In light of the Influence situation, I'm inclined to agree. But we should still be selling Performance Enhancers to the Seeking Luxuries to shorten the Boom.
Michael Brookes stated the Boom can last a maximum of "about 3 weeks." I'm guessing that's 25 days, as that's also the current known cool-down period for Civil War. Unless anyone knows a more precise date, the Boom started between the 16th and 19th of January. Assuming 25 days, the Boom has a maximum duration until the 13th of February. Assuming actually 3 weeks and starting on the 16th, it would end by the 6th. I doubt it will last that long (to the 13th), as the Performance Enhancer prices have dropped to around 1000 credits profit per ton (from Mapor). I understand they started at about 2500 per ton.
So here's another bug for the record - Friend Enterprise currently consistently shows up green on my radar, with the faction association "Federation" (whom I'm friendly with), but with the original HR Dynamic association still in System map as hostile towards me. And I don't think that's an update delay as there are no federation factions at work in HR at all. Somehow the screenshot of the left panel didn't work, I'll add that later.
After Lockdown status you should experience Civil Unrest status.
That what triggered in Exphiay for the main faction there. Since lockdown status triggered, that federation faction catch up to influence level it lost before, and now its gaining even more influence in Civil Unrest state.
I suspended my project with Crimson Dragon's there, because even doing 50+ missions per day + killing major faction authorities/federal ships etc, all that efforts could not give my supported faction any influence raise at all.
M. Brookes recenly revealed, that background simulation system even has some kind of "momentum", and you should turn like 1 mission every 5-10 minutes, otherwise if you turn 5-10 missions at once, this "momentum" will record maybe only 1 mission from you. Same with selling exploration data etc. So if a player wants to raise one faction influence by selling exploration data, he/she must after exploring 50 new systems and returning to base sell data of each system once per 5 minutes! Instead of having fun playing the game you must... read the book, watch the movie or make food while selling exploration data, so all 50 systems will count for influence. I don't know who's idea was that, but it is just insane.
For me this "momentum" is just another nice word to cover bugged background simulation system. If i can take 5-10 missions and do it, I should be able to turn all these missions at once knowing that each mission will bring benefits to the chosen faction. That "momentum" explains my hopless and wasted efforts in Crimson Dragon's Experiment, because i was doing 50 missions per day, but in 5-10 missions packs and i never waited 5 minutes for every mission i turn in.
Great presisten Universe...
And the newest patch 1.1? Please...who give a damn about building capital ships? Why not make possible (the same as for capital ships) to build new and upgrade already existing spacestations? Let say BOOM status could trigger that opportunity. That would be great to be able to change small station to large hub, because of the trading effect/missions and BOOM status triggered. Right now BOOM status don't really give any concrete benefits. Only blocks other statuses for 25 days.
That what triggered in Exphiay for the main faction there. Since lockdown status triggered, that federation faction catch up to influence level it lost before, and now its gaining even more influence in Civil Unrest state.
I suspended my project with Crimson Dragon's there, because even doing 50+ missions per day + killing major faction authorities/federal ships etc, all that efforts could not give my supported faction any influence raise at all.
M. Brookes recenly revealed, that background simulation system even has some kind of "momentum", and you should turn like 1 mission every 5-10 minutes, otherwise if you turn 5-10 missions at once, this "momentum" will record maybe only 1 mission from you. Same with selling exploration data etc. So if a player wants to raise one faction influence by selling exploration data, he/she must after exploring 50 new systems and returning to base sell data of each system once per 5 minutes! Instead of having fun playing the game you must... read the book, watch the movie or make food while selling exploration data, so all 50 systems will count for influence. I don't know who's idea was that, but it is just insane.
For me this "momentum" is just another nice word to cover bugged background simulation system. If i can take 5-10 missions and do it, I should be able to turn all these missions at once knowing that each mission will bring benefits to the chosen faction. That "momentum" explains my hopless and wasted efforts in Crimson Dragon's Experiment, because i was doing 50 missions per day, but in 5-10 missions packs and i never waited 5 minutes for every mission i turn in.
Great presisten Universe...
And the newest patch 1.1? Please...who give a damn about building capital ships? Why not make possible (the same as for capital ships) to build new and upgrade already existing spacestations? Let say BOOM status could trigger that opportunity. That would be great to be able to change small station to large hub, because of the trading effect/missions and BOOM status triggered. Right now BOOM status don't really give any concrete benefits. Only blocks other statuses for 25 days.
Last edited:
well done milkkeen
I'm confused. If ANY status appears it last for 25 days? So nothing we do will really count? At best it will queue, so 25 days later is MIGHT affect something?
No different states can be extended or reduced in the time they last. Michael implied that spamming the luxuries will reduce the time of boom and in the Lugh thread that bounty hunting will reduce the time of their lockdown. Each state seems to have ways to make it last longer or reduce the time its in effect.
So if some threshold of the rate of change between the Influence levels of 2 factions is passed, Civil War or Civil War Critical is queued? It's been a while since calculus. Is that a first order differential?
You do realize that is in 1.1 as well right? Building a new station was one of the two examples given and was rather hard to miss, especially with the pretty picture of a partially completed station.
Last edited:
Doubt we'll be able to, being an independent faction.
Actually in the dev update Michael specifically uses the example of an independent faction that wants to build a Farragut Battlecruiser or Majestic Interdictor.
Really? You think you will be able to build a new station in the place you sacrifice 1 month of playing to expand Dukes of Mikunn?
No, Walt. You will be force to travel few hundred ly and build the new station in the place chosen by DEVS.
You wont be even able to atleast upgrade outpost to stations as a reward of your commitment for Dukes.
Here is interesting topic about it and other issues:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=106859
P.S
Right now in this game, only interesting thing for a while is exploration new systems far far away from civilization.
All other aspects of the game are just good for first 2-3 weeks of playing.
Last edited:
Actually in the dev update Michael specifically uses the example of an independent faction that wants to build a Farragut Battlecruiser or Majestic Interdictor.
Cool!
Edit: Based on this quote, I'm not sure its an independent faction, just a minor faction. That could be either a Federation or Imperial major factions.
Anyways, thinking about the whole "momentum" debate, I went back to Michael Brookes' statement:
I interpreted this to mean movement of the %Influence of two factions against each other. So I charted the difference between the Dukes and Law Party and the Dukes and Dynamic. I'm discounting the giant shift when the queue went in on the 15th. You can clearly see we're on an upward trend with Law since the 15th, it looks like we get a bump when we started the blockade, and slow and start dropping around the 26th. We were increasing against Dynamics until we started the blockade.
If we look at the rate of change (which I think may be a deciding factor for triggering Civil War), we were increasing the gap at a fairly steady 2% Influence per day against Law Party, which dipped when we started the blockade, but went back up until the 27th. For Dynamics we were gaining almost 4% Influence per day, until we started focusing on the blockade.
We've been losing ground against Dynamics since the about the 23th, and Law Party since about the 27th.
A conflating issue could be the actions of opposition players. We know of at least one, who claims to have an "armada" helping him.
Anyways, evidence we should step up the Missions, as that seemed to give us the most bang for our buck.
It may lengthen the Boom thus for stalling the Civil War, but that seems preferable to losing so much influence we don't get a War or even lose it.
Last edited:
Really? You think you will be able to build a new station in the place you sacrifice 1 month of playing to expand Dukes of Mikunn?
No, Walt. You will be force to travel few hundred ly and build the new station in the place chosen by DEVS.
You wont be even able to atleast upgrade outpost to stations as a reward of your commitment for Dukes.
Here is interesting topic about it and other issues:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=106859
P.S
Right now in this game, only interesting thing for a while is exploration new systems far far away from civilization.
All other aspects of the game are just good for first 2-3 weeks of playing.
Ok, cool. All I see is speculation on how the gameplay of 1.1 may or may not feel. You said "Why not make it possible to build and upgrade space stations (like capital ships in the example". Even that is mentioned in the link you give as existing. Sure you can complain that the devs are too involved in choosing where it will end up, but thats not what you said. You said that feature didn't exist when it does. I was simply pointing out that feature did exist and was one of the two examples given.
I will withhold judgement on gameplay until I play it. As a result, I don't feel one oway or the other about the guys sentiments in the link there.
Last edited:
Mr. Brookes,
If you get a chance to reply, could you let us know if we're in Civil War cool-down? In other words, did we ever have Civil War? That doesn't seem like it should be a black box kind of thing.
Also, if a state is pending as Critical - does that mean it's inevitable, or is it evitable?
Thanks
If you get a chance to reply, could you let us know if we're in Civil War cool-down? In other words, did we ever have Civil War? That doesn't seem like it should be a black box kind of thing.
Also, if a state is pending as Critical - does that mean it's inevitable, or is it evitable?
Thanks
What I noticed recently in a different system was one faction rising in influence past another faction that had a relatively static influence. Once one got larger than the other, there was a "Civil War Critical" pending state on both, but then there was a delay of a couple of days before the war started - by which point the gap between the factions had grown. Oddly enough since the war started the gap between the two has stayed fairly constant. A third faction meanwhile is coming up on the rails on both, but presumably three factions can't be in war with each other.
I'm also curious as to how the result of the war is decided. Is it which side has higher influence at the end, or is it which side has gained more influence during it? Can it end as an inconclusive draw?
The mechanics of the victory conditions for civil wars remain a complete mystery.
Once a civil war begins influence seems to change differently, e.g. trading, missions, cashing in combat bonds don't have the expected result, maybe influence is locked within a specific influence range of a few percent, although that doesn't explain other irregularities in changes, like aiding a faction and the result is they lose influence, anywho I digress
Without knowing which station/outpost the civil war is for we don't know which faction actually wins.
e.g. Faction A and Faction B are at war, both own a single station
Situation 1:
The war is for Faction A's station
Faction A wins - no change in control
Situation 2:
War is for Faction B's station
Faction A wins - Faction A now controls 2 stations.
Each time the player base supports Faction A. Without knowing what station the battle is for we can only guess if any of our actions have an effect on the civil war outcome. The players in situation 1 might assume that their efforts were for nothing as they thought they might gain a station, but in fact the war was to maintain control of their station.
The players in situation 2 are happy with the results of their effort, as expected they supported faction A and helped it win the war (another complete unknown - no ingame feedback relating to player effort in civil wars, do any actions actually aid anyone...)
Michael Brookes
Game Director
Your pending a civil war and recovering from expansion. Critical means that it should be the next state, however that can change rapidly based on what people do - although its usually a good indication.
Michael
I know you're trying to help the community, and it's appreciated. But quite honestly, your answers are awfully ambiguous at times. Meaning: they actually hurt more than they help, because there are many ways to interpret what you've said. Is there really _no_ chance you'll throw the community a bone and actually summarize at least at a high level which player actions influence which state changes, and which state changes are related to each other versus totally independent from each other?
- Status