War, civil war and election.

[Gwyther]

Hi.
I have read that only conflict zone victories (first to win 4 daily battles) will mean winning a war or civil war.
But some other sites say that completing war/civil war related missions will also count towards a war win, a bit like when you do election related missions to win an election.

Which statement is correct?

Thanks.

 

[goemon]

Which statement is correct?

none of the above.

during any conflict, you have to win more days than the opposition in a 7 day window. you can win a war/civil war with winning a single day.

you can win such a day with minimal effort by e.g. a single bountie (not even bond!) redeem.
or by completing an installation scenario for a faction.

so, first statement is definetly wrong.

as for missions. there are repeated dev quotes, that "war themed missions contribute". according to devs, you should be able to win a day by running war-themed courier missions. but players have more than once reported testing that statement (testing as in: running courier missions only, in a no or low traffic system, in a war they are not interested in), that some missions do not work.

so, the second statement is imho correct as in "it is said by devs and probably intended to work like that, but it doesn't (always/with all type of war-themed missions) ". even if it would work consistently, there is still the question of weighting.

which gets us back to the first sentence. winning conflictzones, with their effects by winning, by fullfilling objectives, and by bond redeems plus eventual massacre mission hand-ins from them is probably the best and foolproofed way to make sure you win. but it is not necessary to do them.

you might want to check into the thread on wars/civil wars: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...ide-best-current-thinking.425015/#post6665897 and raise your question there, as there is a bunch of experience(s) and perspectives on this around.

 

[Gwyther]

Nice one. Thanks.

 

[Jmanis]

Yep... so I've found, for example, Boom delivery missions work for war. It's weird.

A more accurate statement about CZs would be "CZs are the most effective means to win war"... for some definition of "effective", but far from the only.

 

[graflex22]

Yep... so I've found, for example, Boom delivery missions work for war. It's weird.

A more accurate statement about CZs would be "CZs are the most effective means to win war"... for some definition of "effective", but far from the only.

strange. i'll have to try this.

though, i may need to find a new playground to test it. the Systems i am currently working went from zero traffic to 17 ships over the last week.

 

[Jmanis]

strange. i'll have to try this.

though, i may need to find a new playground to test it. the Systems i am currently working went from zero traffic to 17 ships over the last week.

One of the points of contention is that there's a common thread that only certain types of mission will count, e.g massacre, assassination and other combat theme missions count, while delivery/courier missions won't.

But there's war-themed versions of all missions, even courier, delivery, salvage and other non-combat themed missions. It would be bizzare if any mission didn't work in that context... but when I last checked, even boom themed did work. Who knows if anything's changed under the hood, since that's a while ago now. The only consistent thing I found was that people who reported that missions didn't count, only seemed to do one mission, and got no change in the conflict the next tick. My suspicion there is that there's a minimum threshold to overcome before you can get a point or not, which is only observable at large or very small levels.

That is... if the thresholds were needing a minimum of 60% of the total points scored to be on your side to win a point that day... e.g if a total of 100 points were scored between both sides of a war, and more than 60 were scored by one side, they'd win a point, but if it was less than 60 (e.g 59/41) then day would end in a draw with no change. At low levels with rounding, that might become 50% of 1 which is 1 (if missions count less than bonds, which would make sense)

 

[goemon]

One of the points of contention is that there's a common thread that only certain types of mission will count, e.g massacre, assassination and other combat theme missions count, while delivery/courier missions won't.

But there's war-themed versions of all missions, even courier, delivery, salvage and other non-combat themed missions. It would be bizzare if any mission didn't work in that context... but when I last checked, even boom themed did work. Who knows if anything's changed under the hood, since that's a while ago now. The only consistent thing I found was that people who reported that missions didn't count, only seemed to do one mission, and got no change in the conflict the next tick. My suspicion there is that there's a minimum threshold to overcome before you can get a point or not, which is only observable at large or very small levels.

That is... if the thresholds were needing a minimum of 60% of the total points scored to be on your side to win a point that day... e.g if a total of 100 points were scored between both sides of a war, and more than 60 were scored by one side, they'd win a point, but if it was less than 60 (e.g 59/41) then day would end in a draw with no change. At low levels with rounding, that might become 50% of 1 which is 1 (if missions count less than bonds, which would make sense)

that's actually a very interesting perspective.
strictly speaking from watching influence movements in no-traffic systems, there is similar in place - there is a minimum gain/loss, which can be attributed - if a loss (or gain) is below that for a faction, it stays where it is (even if other factions than move).
could be the case with war-missions as well.
that said - in case of bond redeem, a single bond redeem would already beat that "1".

on the other hand, here for exampel somebody reports taking 4 missions:

I tried the simple delivery missions with name "strategic data transfer" and they do not count towards winning the war.
I took four missions, I did no combat missions or conflict zones and no one won the tick/day.

so, if it is not 4, maybe it is 5 or 10?

 

[Jmanis]

so, if it is not 4, maybe it is 5 or 10?

And therein lies the problem.

If only certain missions count, it should be war- theme missions, otherwise the blurb accompanying strategic data transfers is wrong (along the lines of "this will aid us in our conflict"). If it's only combat missions, well, that doesn't hold water for me as I've also won elections just off assassination missions, where elections are meant to be non combat. So the possibilities are:

• claims like that are flawed, for some reason... equally so my own claims are flawed, but notwithstanding that;
• either themed missions are the only ones which should work, and the claim that com/noncom work for war/ election is wrong, or
• it's only com/noncom for war/election which works, and the ingame flavour text is wrong; or
• it's all up the clackers, and there's no consistency for either ruleset.

Either way, there's no real chance of getting a clear answer without direct citation from FD beyond the usual "com/noncom" lines; instead being a "flavoured missions" or "missions of type x, y, z help, and a,b,c don't during state x".

For myself, hijack missions are one that sticks out. I would call them combat missions, but arguably they are noncom as well. They work for elections, but flavoured versions for war also exist.... so which way does it go?