Possible attribution issue.

Also it is very easy to win a war via winning CZ instances and not handing in bonds, which would cause very little movement to the security or economy sliders.
Correct, but I did hand in bonds. That was not represented. The actions necessary to counter that would show on opposition economic sliders, unless incredibly unorthodox, inefficient gameplay tailored to counter my every move was not included.

And would you rather I write you a 2-page pitch + resume on how I helped write the book on modern BGS understanding?
 
Last edited:
Before the tick last night, I:
  • Ran missions for my supported faction only (they were all Salvage/Assassination missions in a neighbouring system)
  • Handed in bonds and bounties for my supported faction only
  • Cleared one Medium CZ for my faction only
This amount of work for example, would probably lose to two high CZs, or maybe three medium CZs
That would not make a noticeable movement on economic or security slider.
 
Correct, but I did hand in bonds. That was not represented. The actions necessary to counter that would show on opposition economic sliders, unless incredibly unorthodox, inefficient gameplay tailored to counter my every move was not included.

And would you rather I write you a 2-page pitch + resume on how I helped write the book on modern BGS understanding?
So yell me then, since you are the BGS guru himself.. how did you know you were unopposed prior to the war? What was the absolute proof?
 
And would you rather I write you a 2-page pitch + resume on how I helped write the book on modern BGS understanding?

Sorry... quoting myself for a moment... this comment is slightly out of line. But look... I showed 1t trading exists, worked out what missions were specifically worth based on their level, and most recently demonstrated (again, in this thread) missions do contribute. But because I'm not part of some big group or write papers to FD on every BGS decision, I have to sing this song every time I make a post, and it's just frustrating as all hell.
 
Also, winning CZs certainly trumps handing in the bonds btw, but of course you know that sonce you are the BGS guru
 
Sorry... quoting myself for a moment... this comment is slightly out of line. But look... I showed 1t trading exists, worked out what missions were specifically worth based on their level, and most recently demonstrated (again, in this thread) missions do contribute. But because I'm not part of some big group or write papers to FD on every BGS decision, I have to sing this song every time I make a post, and it's just frustrating as all hell.
1T trading hasn't worked for about 3 years, so you writing the book on modern BGS is kinda out of date
 
Now it should be a simple question for someone who understands BGS, what was the absolute proof that you were unopposed prior to the war?
 
There is a way to know, but it aint traffic reports or the ease at which you gained influence "from 10% to 50%". Those are pieces of evidence, but not proof. If there are more than two factions there is a very good way to determine if more than one faction was worked.
 
So yell me then, since you are the BGS guru himself.. how did you know you were unopposed prior to the war? What was the absolute proof?
The absolute proof was the lack of economic slider changes for both sides.

I handed in bonds, which should have resulted in +ve security status effect for my side if unopposed.

If opposed, the only thing which could counter that effect are:
1. Missions run in-system, where my faction was the target of them, causing -ve security effects
2. Scenarios run in-system where my faction was the target of them, causing -ve security effects.
3. Missions sourced out-of-system, where my faction was the target of them, causing -ve security

CZ's run for the opposition without bonds handed in could definitely counter my efforts, not denying that, but it wouldn't counter the security effect from my own bonds.

1 & 2 are out of the question, because both would have +ve/-ve security or economy effects for a faction in that system. There was none, for any faction that day, unless you decided to then balance that

3. is feasible, but as I said, requires near-perfect intelligence of my activities. My faction owns no assets in the system, so that immediately rules out being the target of many mission types... so that really just leaves Spec Ops missions. They're few and far between in most cases, but again, perfect information would be required so as to not over or undershoot the value of my bonds handed in.

So the only workable proposal is that, in response to me running 4 Medium CZs and handing in associated bonds, someone took the time to jump around neighbouring systems for a while, looking and hoping for missions that specifically target my faction, which would've taken a good couple hours given the amount of valid target systems in the area, and took exactly the right amount of missions to counter the security buff of my bond hand-ins, while also running exactly 4 Medium CZ's worth of conflict zones to counter the war.

That seems incredibly unlikely to someone just going in, taking some massacre missions and blatting out in a cz for a couple hours.

As for traffic, this is one of those very sleepy systems.
  • Inara shows it averaging 0-5 ships
  • it's one of those systems where it won't even get an update on Inara or EDDB for weeks or even months on end.
  • It's not within a power's sphere of influence
  • It's a nothing-system, in terms of it's contents.
  • I've observed traffic within it for years now.
  • I've had the opportunity to take it for months, and the current faction is only there because I put them there myself.
  • I check the traffic every 6-8 hours
Again, none of that is a "smoking gun no opposition"... but it's getting beyond a joke now for the amount of ducks that need to line up for this to have been active opposition.

1T trading hasn't worked for about 3 years, so you writing the book on modern BGS is kinda out of date
My point on that one is that I've been ekeing out how the BGS works for many years now. I know how it works.
 
As for traffic, this is one of those very sleepy systems.
  • Inara shows it averaging 0-5 ships

You do realise that Inara traffic reports do not reflect the actual traffic of a system don't you?
Also, given that the economy and security sliders are a highly ineffective way to judge if someone is opposing you, and also given that you are a BGS veteran, could you tell me how we knew (and still do know) how you are being opposed prior to 3.3?
 
You do realise that Inara traffic reports do not reflect the actual traffic of a system don't you?
Also, given that the economy and security sliders are a highly ineffective way to judge if someone is opposing you, and also given that you are a BGS veteran, could you tell me how we knew (and still do know) how you are being opposed prior to 3.3?
No, I'm done with this.

I came here to ask people to see if they were seeing the same behaviour, not to face some Q&A on what I know about the BGS over the last 6 years.
 
It's quite simple really. If there are three factions A=50% B=25% C=25% and you gain 7.5% for C and the result is A=45% B=22.5% and C=32.5% you are unopposed. Oh wow I didn't need to write a thesis on BGS to explain it.
Look back at your influence figures and see if this is the case, if it is then you can say with some certainty that you were unopposed prior to the war. Still doesn't prove you were not opposed during the war though.
Good luck with your BGS o7
 
It's quite simple really. If there are three factions A=50% B=25% C=25% and you gain 7.5% for C and the result is A=45% B=22.5% and C=32.5% you are unopposed. Oh wow I didn't need to write a thesis on BGS to explain it.
Look back at your influence figures and see if this is the case, if it is then you can say with some certainty that you were unopposed prior to the war. Still doesn't prove you were not opposed during the war though.
Good luck with your BGS o7
dude. do a quick search of Jmanis on the BGS sub forum. he/she knows what he/she is talking about.

but this thread did give me a couple of laughs.
 
If Jmanis knows what they are talking about then they should know that they have not provided any proof that this is a bug.
..and quite frankly they have said some things which lead me to believe they don't know what they are talking about
 
Top Bottom