That's not how wars will work in 3.3. Influence levels have nothing to do with who wins the war now.
Saw this after writing my response to Nicholas. INF will NOT determine the outcome of wars in 3.3? Then what does?
That's not how wars will work in 3.3. Influence levels have nothing to do with who wins the war now.
Saw this after writing my response to Nicholas. INF will NOT determine the outcome of wars in 3.3? Then what does?
Saw this after writing my response to Nicholas. INF will NOT determine the outcome of wars in 3.3? Then what does?
The idea is that when you get into the war, the influence of the two factions is locked together. Then you do war stuff (scenarios, missions, bonds) and win or lose each day, and then it's best of 7 days. Not clear at this stage what determines where your influence ends up after the war is over, though presumably the winner will end up higher than the loser, and at the moment it looks like scenarios and missions don't actually affect winning the war either which makes it all a bit pointless.
The idea is that when you get into the war, the influence of the two factions is locked together. Then you do war stuff (scenarios, missions, bonds) and win or lose each day, and then it's best of 7 days. Not clear at this stage what determines where your influence ends up after the war is over, though presumably the winner will end up higher than the loser, and at the moment it looks like scenarios and missions don't actually affect winning the war either which makes it all a bit pointless.
Actually I prefer the new way. Before you could technically win a war without firing a single shot, which was a bit odd. Now in combat zones you have a progress bar that fills in one direction or another depending on kills, and when it's completely filled one side has won the battle. Win enough battles and you win the war.
Assuming your question is serious which is far from a guarantee in these forums.Whats a Thargoid?
What's a question?Assuming your question is serious which is far from a guarantee in these forums.
A Thargoid is an insectoid race with (seemingly) bio-tech ships (You could compare them with the Shadows and/or Vorlons in Babylon 5, Species 8472 in Star Trek, or the Bugs in Star-ship Troopers). See this article on the unofficial wiki.
My main concern around Thargoids being added to the bgs revolves around Frontiers favorite thing to nerf: credits.
My anti-xeno anaconda cost upwards of 550 million credits. That was just the cost of the ship. I then had to engineer it to grade 5 from thrusters to hull to get it be survivable in a 1v1 fight with a cyclops. After that I had to have guardian equipment from module reinforcements to hull reinforcements to weapons to be able to do enough damage effectively.
This is an end game ship to sure. The amount of money it cost was significant.
How are new players or players who don't participate in combat (traders and explorers) supposed to defend their home systems when the thargoid incursion model rests on how many thargoids are killed?
Is Fdev's intent to push players into thargoid combat regardless of their own desires? How will this effect the xeno allies?
My main concern around Thargoids being added to the bgs revolves around Frontiers favorite thing to nerf: credits.
My anti-xeno anaconda cost upwards of 550 million credits. That was just the cost of the ship. I then had to engineer it to grade 5 from thrusters to hull to get it be survivable in a 1v1 fight with a cyclops. After that I had to have guardian equipment from module reinforcements to hull reinforcements to weapons to be able to do enough damage effectively.
This is an end game ship to sure. The amount of money it cost was significant.
How are new players or players who don't participate in combat (traders and explorers) supposed to defend their home systems when the thargoid incursion model rests on how many thargoids are killed?
Is Fdev's intent to push players into thargoid combat regardless of their own desires? How will this effect the xeno allies?
So I guess it's all smoke and mirrors like before 3.3? Combat Bonds, and only combat bonds, make the difference? Or have FDEV stated anywhere that this is not their intent and that they will change it before release?I prefer it too, I just wish that's how it worked.
Unfortunately at the moment in 3.3, only Combat Bonds claimed seem to have any effect... "winning" a conflict zone has no effect at the moment (nor do the scenarios, or any other things FD said should help win a war)
So I guess it's all smoke and mirrors like before 3.3? Combat Bonds, and only combat bonds, make the difference? Or have FDEV stated anywhere that this is not their intent and that they will change it before release?
They've certainly responded to bug reports, and while it at least sounds like an ackniowledgement of the bug, whether it gets fixed or not is an entirely different question.
So I guess it's all smoke and mirrors like before 3.3? Combat Bonds, and only combat bonds, make the difference? Or have FDEV stated anywhere that this is not their intent and that they will change it before release?
They've certainly responded to bug reports, and while it at least sounds like an ackniowledgement of the bug, whether it gets fixed or not is an entirely different question.
Well my assumption is that the progress bars will for sure be in the game. And all the scenarios and all that. What remains to be seen (and what I've got a sinking feeling about), is whether or not the outcomes of those progress bars will actually matter. It's entirely possible that all of it will be window dressing and the thing that moves the needle behind the scenes is going to be "transactions" just like it always has been. I hope this does not turn out to be the case, but the response from Frontier has been wishy-washy enough that I frankly don't know what to expect.Huh... so is that a bug or did the progress bar thing get pushed back to a later release? I'm pretty sure I saw it explicitly mentioned during one of the livestreams.
Ah good, so it is a bug.
By all accounts it's still the case.Why do I have a bad feeling that the 'get 1 kill, hand in bond, repeat' transactional model will still be the meta?
Huh... so is that a bug or did the progress bar thing get pushed back to a later release? I'm pretty sure I saw it explicitly mentioned during one of the livestreams.
Currently, this is not the case, or has so little impact, actually winning a round in a conflict zone has virtually no effect when compared to the effect of handing in combat bonds. I've posted in the other linked threads, but tl;dr Combat Bonds submitted should have no impact on the outcome of the war (they represent personal commander gain, and enemy destruction), only conflict zones resolved (which represents strategic objectives being met)Conflict zones are now round based; players battle to win a round which then feeds into the war state
They sneeze at you and your hull melts.Don't be afraid - it's only caustic goo.
By all accounts it's still the case.