Say goodbye to Anarchies

AhnSuYeong

AhnSuYeong
Rubbernuke said:
No Powerplay leader benefits or loses from anarchy factions- its a neutral government type for everyone.

There is a contradiction with Delaine in that one of his powers opens black markets, but black markets are a weakness BGS wise for his 'favourable' governments.
Click to expand...
If no PowePlay benefits the minor anarchist factions it means that there is no anarchist PowerPlay. Is it neutral? Up to a point at the moment that in the PowerPlay they need their own forms of government (democracy, dictatorship, etc.) to get Powerplay points. Perhaps it does not affect negatively in a direct way but governments of anarchy always annoy because they do not help to score either. And so it is for all PowerPlays. Delaine is not an anarchist. He is a Pirate. Therefore, he is not our Powerplay. We do not have and that also affects us negatively while other minor Federal or Imperial factions obtain benefits (also for BGS) by coinciding with their own PowerPlay in each PP "bubble".

I think this is another disadvantage and a clearly anarchist and non-criminal PowerPlay would be more than welcome.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
AhnSuYeong said:
If no PowePlay benefits the minor anarchist factions it means that there is no anarchist PowerPlay. Is it neutral? Up to a point at the moment that in the PowerPlay they need their own forms of government (democracy, dictatorship, etc.) to get Powerplay points. Perhaps it does not affect negatively in a direct way but governments of anarchy always annoy because they do not help to score either. And so it is for all PowerPlays. Delaine is not an anarchist. He is a Pirate. Therefore, he is not our Powerplay. We do not have and that also affects us negatively while other minor Federal or Imperial factions obtain benefits (also for BGS) by coinciding with their own PowerPlay in each PP "bubble".

I think this is another disadvantage and a clearly anarchist and non-criminal PowerPlay would be more than welcome.
Click to expand...
Government types only become important in Powerplay to make fortification amounts for each system go up or down. Each power has government types which it is strong against (that lower the amount each week) and those who its weak against (making them go up). Anarchy is unusual in that its neutral for all powers- its also a weakness because a power will want as many 'favourables' as possible and squeeze out all neutrals and unfavourables.

FD really are confused with criminals and anarchy, because (as you point out) anarchy is not inherently criminal on its own- there should be a better distinction and more use of the 'lawless' flag.

Regards Archon, he is more about fostering criminality in traditionally lawful places. As for an anarchy power- well, not at leader level, but you could consider how Powers work as being inherently anarchist. Powers have no leaders as such (having groups, individuals etc) doing their own thing to improve what they see as 'right'.
 

CMDR Harada

CMDR Harada
Back on the original subject, not that discussing the differences between criminals and anarchists isn't a subject near/dear to most of us..

If Anarchies are an endangered species ( no doubts here ), then what happens when they disappear ? I like the idea of being spiteful, and raining destruction on various systems en-masse. That sounds like a laugh. Large player squadrons, plus numerous skilled independents, tearing up a system a week WOULD get attention. Maybe focusing on a PP Power, bring it to it's knees in a few weeks, and moving on to the next. But in the end that isn't going to be sustainable or constructive to our cause.

Anarchies will have to be generated somehow, or propped up in some fashion, by FDev short term. Maybe the loss of our systems, along with the profitable stacked missions, will be enough to bring change.

Long term I like the idea of mission types specific to anarchies/anarchists But getting that implemented is going to have to go on a wish list for Xmas..
 

Fake Newts

F
Jokes aside I'm pretty sure the current problems are in part symptomatic of anarchy factions' narrow/short-sighted designation in Elite.

The game frames anarchies as antagonistic sci-fi reavers for other factions to shoot, rather than legitimate unfettered political groups or dashing space rogues to carouse around with. I am pretty sure many PMFs opted for anarchy not to be reavers but because it was the closest archetype to whichever of the other two things they wanted. There are of course some reavers as well. Hitherto we all made it work regardless of where we stood on the spectrum.

Some people seem to be suggesting players are at fault for 'not following Frontier's intended design' for anarchies but a) regardless of the original idea behind it we have been here doing our thing since 2015, holding down our systems against the odds. After a certain point you'd think the passion and efforts of the core audience should hold at least some sway over the original idea, if not actually take precedence, especially when it provides entertainment and variety for everyone involved. And b) as was helpfully pointed out by AhnSuYeong, with the current issues anarchies will actually die completely rather than be forced to the fringes. What's happening really doesn't seem to be intentional.

Anyway, this is just more blah-blah for the blah pile. To the handful of people saying 'we're doing anarchy wrong' or 'it's meant to be like this': nah, I don't think we are, and nah it isn't, ackchyually.
 

Screemonster

Screemonster
If they were intended to be reaver cannon fodder that players were never supposed to support, then they'd just spawn in as generic "pirates" or "terrorists" unattached to any minor faction - as they actually do in some signal sources and scenarios.
The idea that some players choosing to support anarchies is going against frontier's intended design is kinda daft - if it was really against their design, they wouldn't have made them supportable in the first place.
to wit - you can't (to our knowledge) support a thargoid incursion, or direct the thargoids to attack somewhere, or take their side in a CZ. Thargoids are evidently not meant to be supportable, and as such, you just... can't.
 

Fake Newts

F
Agreed, I don't think they saw them differently to other minor factions, but there are fairly strong indicators from days of yore that frontier never intended anyone to seek to guide or adopt the bgs in way we have. 'Background' is a big clue by itself, and it was as recent as the squadrons patch that we even got to show an affiliation at all.

Whether or not we're doing it according to the original plan is moot, it's way, way too late to get it back in the box, if it was ever supposed to be boxed at all.
 

Ruurka

R
For me, anarchists should be have also their own manufacturer, because they also can produce their own goods, hardpoints/internals or even ships like many lawful factions. However, due to their doubtful reputation, those things can be only bought in anarchy stations. They should be respected like many other factions.

However, important thing for now is fix anarchy BGS, because it's almost impossible to keep their influence (and their security). If still will be raiding their settlements, soon all anarchies will be entered into lockdown state, and it better not be happened.
 
Last edited:

LazyTachyon

LazyTachyon
1622215107522.png


Maybe..?
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Jmanis said:
@Ian Doncaster ... i recall you saying something about these factions once? Or am i on the good onionhead?
Click to expand...
Criminal ethos rather than Anarchy government is what sets up
- criminal-style missions
- wars with everyone
- being targeted by everyone else's massacres
- supplying ships to try to kill trade/courier/mining missions
- opening black markets (and therefore commodity markets)

The Anarchy government type provides
- access to superpower outfitting
- Lawless general attitude in controlled space
- Interstellar Factors at controlled stations

Obviously 99%+ of criminals are anarchy and vice versa.

We have a couple of Criminal Feudal out here (which Delaine's group should have been but aren't) ... I'm told there's a couple of non-Criminal Anarchy in the bubble who I suspect are doing rather better than the rest right now.
 

Riverside

Riverside
CMDR Surdra said:
So the damage has been done but the bleeding might slow now. Yet no changes to overall form/function of anarchies or how to support them.

Yay?
Click to expand...

Baby steps ;) In an ideal world I guess FDev as dungeonmaster would know all the rules (that we as players only see as black boxes of mystery) and understand the main ramifications of changing balance between opposing teams.

In practice I guess there is an intended change, an unintended change and arbitrary changes where whoever decided to do it or let it happen just didn't think it was important.

Unintended changes count as force majeure (it's still a level playing field), intended changes with unexpected results count as an exploit & should be compensated for (it's the Dungeonmaster's fault & their responsibility to make good).

Several updates in the past have severely disrupted BGSers' play, with some big winners & some big losers, depending on how quickly players were able to adapt to the new circumstances. I don't think there had been such a heavy bias against a particular faction type as the bounty re-balance late last year and whatever in the Odd update is causing Anarchies to fail right now.
 

fishevi

fishevi
Surdra said:
I was just going for some emergent gameplay is all. Anarchists get together, pick a big target near one of our own that’s getting clobbered and trash the place.

Eye for an eye and all that. They wanna flip the system from anarchists (unintentionally or otherwise)? We can send their systems into chaos as well.
Click to expand...
Who says we don't do that?!
We never stopped being Anarchists and bringing fire to our enemies' barns.

We dont have high command, leaders, etc.
We have elders, cmdrs who know their Anarchy bgs, lore etc.
And they are the ones that advise us or lead us when we consolidate our ranks.
Till then, we're free to roam the galaxy any way we want.

Right now we don't have organized gameplay with leadership and all, due to all issues.
But we still play as Anarchists, free of orders or organised play, free to attack or defend, explore or trade....
And our enemies still feel our steel on daily basis.
Unknown Zombie said:
I think there was a group of players that attempted to do basically this and spread a bunch of anarchies around Colonia a while back. Sounded cool, and I wonder how it went... I would have participated if I had been playing Elite at the time, but was just one of those times I decided to check out the forums but wasn't really into the game at the moment.
Click to expand...
And there are still groups of Anarchists in Colonia who are having fun with setting things on fire every day. And sometimes those fires spread and do big damage, sometimes they just burn out with no damage.

We use our torches daily.
Because it's fun😁
 

Ruurka

R
Still dropping too much security in anarchies. Maybe next tick shows, do they fix this or not. I hope FDev fix it quickly, because this start be annoying. I also want that they should interesting more about anarchies, because they need more attention and they need a lot of changes (for positive this time for them).
 

fishevi

fishevi
Andreus said:
Yet again they just don't bother to tell us what changes they're making.

FDev need to be absolutely transparent with how their mechanics work from hereon out. Explain how the BGS works in detail.
Click to expand...
No worries, we don't need them to explain or understand bgs, we just need them to make it stable and not so anti-anarchy by mechanics, but buy choice of cmdrs.

We have cmdrs who know how to figure out how things work, and then they tell me what I need to know 😉😁
 

KKomrade Sylas

KKomrade Sylas
Rubbernuke said:
There is a contradiction with Delaine in that one of his powers opens black markets, but black markets are a weakness BGS wise for his 'favourable' governments.
Click to expand...

A bit off-topic, but this is really not the case at all.

Archon's benefitial government types are all of the social ethos type, that being Confederate, Communist and Cooperative. All 3 of these government types already have black market contacts, so Archon's effect makes no difference on them whatsoever.

What it really does is open them up for every other government type, like Feudals or Dictatorships, which are government types that are detrimental to Archon. This gives you a better opportunity for undermining them which you get nowhere else in the bubble.

Archon's "open up black markets" effect is nothing but actively benefitial to the power. It does no difference against his favorable governments, but puts the neutral and unfavorable ones at a disadvantage. In fact I believe this to be the reason a certain someone that is an expert on pulling 500 unnamed, untraceable players out of his pocket when he needs to actually chose Archon as a power to support; it's a lot easier to expel unfavorable PMF's if these have black market contacts in their stations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom