Inara updates, bug reports, requests
When you try to link your accounts, you may receive the http error 400 about expired tokens. It's an issue on Frontier's end that I cannot solve on Inara. Fortunately, the solution is simple - please give it a few days and it will start to work later (probably when the access token on their cAPI server expires). If the error 400 appeared later and it worked before, try to reauthenticate as said in the error message (may be just a regular reauth forced by Frontier). Alternatively, you can try to use the workaround below. If even that won't work, it's the problem described above.
Please vote for the issue on the official bug tracker: https://issues.frontierstore.net/issue-detail/21258
Possible workaround: Try to connect the account while you are in the game. It may work.
Game data and imports not available for console commanders and PC players with Legacy game version
Inara supports only the Live game version (so PC Horizons 4.0 and Odyssey) since game update 14, thus all the game data on the site and the commander data imports work only for those game versions.
15 Apr 2021, 8:06pm
ArtieActually, he will see it more clearly now, because before such information was possible to deduce just from the supporters numbers there, but now it's clearly flagged.
Okay, I must be blind then, where is this flag shown exactly?
I personally only knew of Brian Solutions and Revolutionary Jotunheim Resistance as adopted factions but I can't see any new markers on any of the two. And at least for Brian Solutions it would seem it has significant backing till today, even if it's only a few players...
I might retract my complaints if I can actually see this "clear" marker
Edit: On a different topic, I have seen you added "population" to factions, which apparently is calculated based on influence levels? If you ask me, since influence levels are something that can change rapidly, I would personally calculate it based on the faction-owned assets rather than influence. Of course, this is just a suggestion but I feel that influence is a bit too fleeting for a population number
Last edit: 15 Apr 2021, 8:12pm
15 Apr 2021, 8:14pm
Yes, we are - there is absolutely no change to the existing "[player]" tags displayed (the bug with it not being displayed for PP alerts was fixed right now, thanks for the report). Just the "[adopted]" tag in the listings was removed due mentioned difficulties. BUT, the minor faction detail pages are unaffected, there was just the "adopted" replaced by "related" and "supported", depends on the state. So, if somebody will be doing his research, he will still clearly see that minor faction is supported by and/or related to players. Actually, he will see it more clearly now, because before such information was possible to deduce just from the supporters numbers there, but now it's clearly flagged. So if somebody will be claiming: "I didn't know it's a faction supported by players!" then he is basically telling: "I was lazy to check what faction I will attack".
The new system is definitely a huge improvement to how it used to be.
there is absolutely no change to the existing "[player]" tags displayed
I simply hoped that the "NPC" factions in question could at least have the [player] tag in the lists as a placeholder, like PMFs do now. (not the old adopted, but all of the new related/supported ones)
Both types having the same tag would not be a huge deal IMO, since what matters is identifying player support.
Even if that's also not possible right now, I am still happy with the change. The tag appearing in lists will just be the final step to make that information much more visible. Big QoL improvement, especially for people not familiar with the factions in question.
15 Apr 2021, 11:19pm
Inara is great for console and PC players to interact in a game where we never meet in space.
The one combining rule of BGS is that people don't want to get into conflicts with neighbours. Racing for unclaimed systems you want is fair game. Plot and scheme to your hearts content, but if players takes control of a system then people will leave it alone. Yeah I know some factions like to fight, but it's sooo draining and most BGS players are more interested in making rather than breaking.
Set your HQ in the home system of your adopted faction and link it to your squadron. Anyone worth their BGS salt will do their homework when planning invasions and will know who controls what. If they do end up on your doorstep then contact them and most decent factions won't push an unfriendly invasion.
16 Apr 2021, 12:41pm
DragoCubX
Okay, I must be blind then, where is this flag shown exactly?
I personally only knew of Brian Solutions and Revolutionary Jotunheim Resistance as adopted factions but I can't see any new markers on any of the two. And at least for Brian Solutions it would seem it has significant backing till today, even if it's only a few players...
I might retract my complaints if I can actually see this "clear" marker
Edit: On a different topic, I have seen you added "population" to factions, which apparently is calculated based on influence levels? If you ask me, since influence levels are something that can change rapidly, I would personally calculate it based on the faction-owned assets rather than influence. Of course, this is just a suggestion but I feel that influence is a bit too fleeting for a population number
On top of the minor faction page, "Player faction: yes/no/related/supported". But as I mentioned before, it requires the faction to be actually supported/related to a squadron with at least two members (to limit behavior of people creating dummy squadrons "hoarding" minor factions for whatever reason. The number of members check may go higher, when it will be necessary in the future).
I will add some extra number for the "controlled" population there later. It's just for bragging anyway.
16 Apr 2021, 12:45pm
Artie I will add some extra number for the "controlled" population there later. It's just for bragging anyway.
You're right
16 Apr 2021, 3:50pm
I found a bug since a few days (probably since last update).
I noticed that a commander's cargo&inventory isn't showing correctly anymore when it is not your own commander.
e.g.
https://inara.cz/cmdr-cargo/1
https://inara.cz/cmdr-cargo/111130/
show all the same info (=commander example) which is correct if the commander doesn't want to let others see the info. But it even shows "commander example" even if the commander has enabled viewing of cargo&inventory to everyone.
16 Apr 2021, 3:57pm
KrikieuHi,
I found a bug since a few days (probably since last update).
I noticed that a commander's cargo&inventory isn't showing correctly anymore when it is not your own commander.
Hello, it was fixed right now, thanks for reporting it.
16 Apr 2021, 4:03pm
ArtieKrikieuHi,
I found a bug since a few days (probably since last update).
I noticed that a commander's cargo&inventory isn't showing correctly anymore when it is not your own commander.
Hello, it was fixed right now, thanks for reporting it.
WOW! THAT WAS FAST!!!!!!!
Thanks!
16 Apr 2021, 4:06pm
DragoCubXArtieActually, he will see it more clearly now, because before such information was possible to deduce just from the supporters numbers there, but now it's clearly flagged.
Okay, I must be blind then, where is this flag shown exactly?
I think I'm blind too, because I can't see it either
Brian Solutions is still supported today, maybe not quite to the same extent as years ago.
Personally, I think the biggest issue is that if you look in the system state (eg. https://inara.cz/starsystem/15269/) then it's not immediately obvious there are two player factions in there. I agree that the ADOPTED flag seems redundant, but how about a faction automatically saying "SUPPORTED" (or something similar) in place of "PLAYER" if there is a squadron and/or supporting players? At least then it's more obvious when looking at the overall state of a system?
16 Apr 2021, 8:03pm
Artie
On top of the minor faction page, "Player faction: yes/no/related/supported".
I missed this
But Brian Solutions shows "Player Faction: No" even though there's a squadron attached with at least 2 members and it's clearly supported?17 Apr 2021, 1:24am
The faction info page used to include the name of the squadron who has set that faction as "Related to".
It now just says Player Faction: Related but with no indication of who is claiming this.
In the already muddy world of BGS and faction claims this makes communication much harder. Unless measures are in place it also opens that system up for abuse. Is there anything to stop a group from claiming that every system they have their eyes on is "Player Related" ?
edit: OK looks like there might be some talk about this above..... I will try and read back, maybe this has already been answered.
edit2: This specific thing was not addressed. More so it was said that "BUT, the minor faction detail pages are unaffected" which is not the case as they now have less information.
In my opinion removing the name of the squadron who has set the faction as Related is a potential problem. I understand that technically an actual player faction does not have to link their squad to their player faction. But the PMF tag is less fluid than the Related tag, so I think that the possible loss of secrecy when using the Related tag is an acceptable burden for those squads who choose to adopt factions.
edit3: If it has to be possible to hide, id suggest it be an opt out rather than opt in. But of course Id prefer the previous list remain visible. As it is it is now there might not even be a way to opt in to having your squad shown on the faction page if you wanted that, which I'd bet most squads would prefer.
Last edit: 17 Apr 2021, 2:34am
17 Apr 2021, 9:29am
DribNairbArtie
On top of the minor faction page, "Player faction: yes/no/related/supported".
I missed this But Brian Solutions shows "Player Faction: No" even though there's a squadron attached with at least 2 members and it's clearly supported?
Not here, I suggest your other squadron members to join Inara and your squadron here.
Alvia DelcranoisiWhy does the info page for non player Minor Factions who have been adopted by player groups no longer list which player group is making the claim?
The faction info page used to include the name of the squadron who has set that faction as "Related to".
Fixed.
Last edit: 17 Apr 2021, 9:39am
17 Apr 2021, 2:44pm
[old] Guardian Starship Blueprint Fragment
[new] Guardian Vessel Blueprint Fragment
17 Apr 2021, 9:36pm
Artie
Not here, I suggest your other squadron members to join Inara and your squadron here.
Oh, I hadn't realised Inara doesn't update squadron members from in game applications
However, it still doesn't show anything against the faction name on the starsystem pages like it does with a Player faction. I think is where most people look to see if a system already contains a player (or in this case "related") faction. Is there any chance that can be added back in so it works like the previous "Adopted" flag and the existing "Player" flag?
Link to Inara Discord: https://discord.gg/qfkFWTr