Fed, Imp, Alliance, or Independent I highly suggest joining a player group. It brings much more meaning to the game than just earning credits and buying ships. You have goals as well as operations and if you join the right team you are a part of a family so to speak. o7
Time to remove BGS exploits
- Thread starter Vicktore Beskor
- Start date
- Status
Fed, Imp, Alliance, or Independent I highly suggest joining a player group. It brings much more meaning to the game than just earning credits and buying ships. You have goals as well as operations and if you join the right team you are a part of a family so to speak. o7
I understand this. I once felt the same. However, after a while of working in a player group and with certain factions you become attached. And I don't do much RP and this still happened.
All i have to say is this...
Last edited:
This is my faction. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
TBH, it’s not the war I would have picked. It’s really the one you handed us. And it hasn’t been particularly collegial between our groups.
There’s a lot I can’t/won’t do on the RP side, because it will inevitably turn extremely sour. Just read through this thread if you need any examples. For that kind of thing to work (press releases, Role-play, forum sperging) we would sort of need to set some ground rules. And frankly, our leaders can’t even agree that combat logging was a “bad thing” in this war after we lost some pilots in the initial skirmishes and tried to pay that back.
I’d prefer a fight like another PG I know ran with a French imperial guild. When their PVP fun was over, they let their enemies undock and just leave. Because they asked. Because they were cool with one another out of game, and the attitude was ‘see you guys tomorrow!’
But that’s besides the point. We do the best with what we get. So far, so good.
I am merely a foot soldier but I think things are moving in that collegial direction. We are all here to have fun at the end of the day. It's been a fun ride so far. Cheers to more good times.
L"
I dont even know what your end goal is, the post keeps shifting.
Its clearly not pvp, so that argument is out of the window. Plus there has been plenty of that.
If it was about Ross 128, then you shouldn't have attacked our main faction, since it's not tied to that campaign. And yet you did.
Is it straight up damaging our faction?
And seeing Victore post your video out of the blue, it feels like running a recruitment campaign on our back to be fair.
So by all means, give me something to stand upon instead of an endlessly moving goalpost.
Then there might be something to have a consistent position towards you to begin with.
We do the best with what we do. That's true.
What we wanted to do is provide a fun little event for the community around Ross 128. Our goal, as far as we are concerned, has been achieved. Twice. There was a lot of involvement at first and even more with the latest war.
However that war has concluded. We were ready to accept defeat if it came to that. It didn't and now the system is 100% Alliance controlled. I thought that would be a good point in time to have as a deciding event for all of this to end and for each side to move on to their own schemes, but then we get a grudge attack on our main faction yet again.
So, what is your goal? And what constitutes the success or failure conditions of it?
I dont even know what your end goal is, the post keeps shifting.
Its clearly not pvp, so that argument is out of the window. Plus there has been plenty of that.
If it was about Ross 128, then you shouldn't have attacked our main faction, since it's not tied to that campaign. And yet you did.
Is it straight up damaging our faction?
And seeing Victore post your video out of the blue, it feels like running a recruitment campaign on our back to be fair.
So by all means, give me something to stand upon instead of an endlessly moving goalpost.
Then there might be something to have a consistent position towards you to begin with.
We do the best with what we do. That's true.
What we wanted to do is provide a fun little event for the community around Ross 128. Our goal, as far as we are concerned, has been achieved. Twice. There was a lot of involvement at first and even more with the latest war.
However that war has concluded. We were ready to accept defeat if it came to that. It didn't and now the system is 100% Alliance controlled. I thought that would be a good point in time to have as a deciding event for all of this to end and for each side to move on to their own schemes, but then we get a grudge attack on our main faction yet again.
So, what is your goal? And what constitutes the success or failure conditions of it?
Last edited:
Would it be confusing to know the BGS was designed to actually be exploited in game; used and abused? I think it probably would, so best not think about that too much, given it's designed, specifically, to be used as a lever. That not all things are created equal, isn't a bug or fault. It's statistical probability. At any one time, one or more statistical values may be greater or lesser than another.
Also, Frontier has already capped most ways to manipulate the BGS, regardless of whether people believe their way to exploit mechanics is somehow more pure than the next.
Last edited:
So where is a good system for me to spend a few hours?
I need modular terminals and I about to the point where I'll start burning down wedding barges just for a hint of where I might find one.
I need modular terminals and I about to the point where I'll start burning down wedding barges just for a hint of where I might find one.
The cap only stops how much benefit or damage can be caused per day through the transactions. It doesn't stop how many transactions will collide with each other before the outcome.
In short, it doesn't protect you for crap. Worst case scenario it will just prolong your horror of watching your system go down in ruin over multiple days if you don't know how to deal with it.
Which could arguably be a worse position for some players to be in.
Missions boards are your best bet.
Indeed this.
FD (through the BGS livestreams) have said on multiple occasions the primary purpose of the BGS is to simulate a living, breathing galaxy. Providing a strategic, balanced, slow-burner game of conquest is an unexpected but not undesirable outcome of the BGS, but it's far from the primary concern for FD.
If you want a balanced game of galactic conquest, that's what Powerplay is for. If there's horrid imbalances in the impact of one activity compared to another in the BGS, that's fine, as long as it's providing a living, breathing galaxy.
Even when things make zero sense when something that is down to player mismanagement. or lack of care is rewarded?
If you want an end to it all - You could always be the magnanimous one and withdraw completely from Federation Space, and stop eating away at our borders. How long would you put up a fight if we had burned a red streak straight into Lave? THINK for a minute about what you would do if we did that. I don’t see an end to this without more systems changing hands to our side, but that’s just me. Sorry you broke into our house, shot our dog, and are unhappy the fact that we will continue fighting you until the heat death of the universe.
But I’m personally satisfied that you haven’t ‘put a green ring all around Sol’ as you blokes put it. We’re the Earth Defense Fleet, we’re defending the core Federation systems. I’m also not terribly put out about Ross 128 itself, more like the long green string of systems thrust into the heart of the Federation growing like a cancer.
But I’m not in charge of anything. I’m not a diplomat. I’m just a grunt. Maybe a reporter. Not even that great a pilot.
Last edited:
This ignores that the only context here is whether this is 'good' or 'bad' transactions, relative to one's own position. If it applied more caps, then this is an iterative dive down to 'nil' being the eventual outcome. Any ability to influence, means there's potential for someone else to influence. That's an automatic give in.
Sure, but that's the consequences of a BGS that can be driven by commanders; yes, one can achieve outcomes, but that does mean, so can others. This is ostensibly part of the way the BGS works; someone else might be in a better position to influence change; just as you (or I) might have been at other times. There is no natural way you can gate that, without reducing overall ability to influence, or resist.
Which is just a fancy way of saying that removing player agency doesn't actually solve anything. Any degree of lever available, means it can be used; another group may be able to use that lever more effectively.
Sure, but if I can influence a thing, so can someone else. If they happen to be in a better position to do that, than I was (but I was for the prior 3 weeks) how is this the game's problem to solve? At some point, people are going to spend weeks working on an outcome, only for that to go down in fire and flames because some other group mobilised and achieved an effective counter. Or just happened to leverage a CG or some other such.
This is what happens when you have a lever to a system, that isn't exclusively yours.
The BGS doesn't care what your motives are. It can't understand or interpret intent. It's not capable of contextual valuation. It doesn't place one pursuit specifically above another. There is no "right" way to manipulate the BGS. There are just levers people can pull. It's calculated risk. Expecting that calculated risk, to become automatic outcome, isn't how the BGS was intended to operate. It has caps, but its also specifically designed to be gamed so there's potential to flip systems, trigger wars, and so on. That automatically means it's not entirely controllable. Or 'fair'.
Screwing with the BGS is ostensibly playing odds. Sometimes, those are long odds. Weeks in the making. But they are still statistical odds. It's a crap-shoot. Sometimes someone else, intentionally or not, will have a bigger swing on that lever. There is always risk. Effort gaming the BGS is calculated risk. There's no participation medal, unlike other mechanics. Expecting one, isn't reasonable. Because this makes outcomes forgone conclusions.
And I tend to think if it was entirely predictable, a huge number of people would walk away from it.
Last edited:
Not sure what you are trying to convey. You sound really enthusiastic and I love that.
However the BGS is entirely predictable. Not easy to predict since you lack input feedback, but very much so and you know what to expect out of each action.
And I love it in an increasing rate the more I understand it to be honest. Because every piece of knowledge unlocks possibilities that you previously thought impossible.
However the BGS is entirely predictable. Not easy to predict since you lack input feedback, but very much so and you know what to expect out of each action.
And I love it in an increasing rate the more I understand it to be honest. Because every piece of knowledge unlocks possibilities that you previously thought impossible.
Transactions Vs Value.
The big hitters like Schlack advocate for value.
Weaklings like myself advocate for transactions.
Caps only draw out the problem.
Does the log of the value work?
Like a hundred is worth twice as much as one. And a million would be six times as much. Kinda thing.
Give you some sort of trade off between the value of each transaction and the number of them.
I don't know what is best.
What does Dav Stott think?
The big hitters like Schlack advocate for value.
Weaklings like myself advocate for transactions.
Caps only draw out the problem.
Does the log of the value work?
Like a hundred is worth twice as much as one. And a million would be six times as much. Kinda thing.
Give you some sort of trade off between the value of each transaction and the number of them.
I don't know what is best.
What does Dav Stott think?
The thing isnt that one is able to
- sell s systems one at a time
- make an influence contribution by killing one eagle.
- attack a system ruler's influence by attacking any ship in the system.
The point is basically twofold:
1. This is a technical and procedural advantage. You do not win by earning more exploration. You win by handing your systems in one at a time. To me that sounds unfair. Both persons have scanned 10 systems for 100k credits. But the one handing them in one at a time generates significantly more influence. This does not reward playing the game, bit having obscure arcane game engine knowledge. And it rewards not playing the game (=fun) but doing obscure things that aren't fun (=clicking).
Compare handing in 1 system scanned with advanced disco to a fully explored system... the difference is negligible in terms of influence generated. What do you think *should* bring more influence? Imho the fully scanned system. But it doesnt.
2. The time spent for influence activities should have comparable rewards. There will always be this one thing thats better.
But murder / explo are just waaaaaaay better than anything else. Plus they do not appear to be capped, so you aren't even rewarded for mixed operations, as in previous patches.
And that is the core issue. Similar things should be rewarded similarly.
Let's remember that your group initiated this fight against the Federation therefore you did involve your faction. It is not the faction you are pushing in this campaign but you do represent it. Not everyone may share your opinion as to what should or shouldn't have been done.
Just because the war in Ross 128 has concluded does not mean the fight you started against the Federation has also ended.
I have a feeling that only part of your actual goal has been achieved but you will have to prove me wrong regarding this. I guess time will tell.
Your questions are getting away from the original discussion so I would talk to our leadership if you want them answered.
Last edited:
- Status