War effort

Does anyone know of any definitive testing that has been done on the effects of CZs Vs war missions / bounties etc on the contribution to war?
 
Very little, if there is, someone's keeping it very quiet - the outcome only being a binary "bigger"/"smaller" rather than the more analogue influence movement makes it much slower.

There seems to be fairly solid evidence that High CZ > Medium CZ > Low CZ ... but not on how much higher, or where a wartime megaship/installation/signal scenario might fit into that.

The relationship between the types of actions, unclear.

Even which missions count at all in wartime I've seen people I trust to do proper tests give conflicting answers.
 
i'll be delighted to read your test results!

all you need is triggering a couple of wars in a couple of no traffic systems, do type of action, compare, repeat for robustness a second time, do multiples of same action, compare, repeat twice.

  • do number of bond redeems count or total bonds? test that by not finishing CZs.
  • which missions do count? test that by only running a type of mission. don't forget, that differently to what fdev is saying, mining missions might count!
  • do mission inf+ has any effect if pitched against each other? are the influence increase values of scenarions relevant?
  • how much is something worth relative? a blackbox scenario vs. a low CZ win for exampel.

assuming you can work 4 systems each day, and a war can take 7 days, and around 20% of days are spoiled by random traffic ... sounds like a fun project for the next months ;-)
 
Yes - my impression is that there are only really two types of wars, which is why it's 2.5 years after the BGS rewrite and we still don't have any solid answers to this.

1) Ones where there's no actual opposition, maybe you'll get some passing traffic happening to do something ... one person doing a couple of CZs or handing in an hour's bounties wins no problem. So no need to analyse it too deeply because you're not going to lose.

2) Ones where there is definite intentional opposition. Since, unlike influence adjustments, you can't tell if the margin of victory on any particular day was narrow or overwhelming, it'd be a very confident planner who didn't just throw everything they had at it. Again, no need to analyse it too deeply - you can combine missions + CZs + bonds naturally anyway, so even if one of them is insignificant compared to the others you're not losing anything that way.
 
My group has a tiered approach to wars in order to save time and effort. Bare minimum on first day, if the day is lost, increase efforts beyond what a single pilot typically can do. If still lost, increase efforts beyond what a small wing can do. If still lost, maximum efforts until war is finished. Being intentionally vague so as not to give out exactly how much we're doing or what level of efficiency is involved, but you can do rough estimates by estimating time to clear zones/complete missions and roughly what bounties you'd get from those.
 
Back
Top Bottom