Helch0rn Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 (edited) 52 minutes ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 1. Issue on DE's part. Only tangentially related to Solar Rails. the issue of excessive taxes still stands (or rather stood) Quote 2. You are unironically complaining that DE acted with haste to fix an issue with the game. yes. because I liked all 4 clones of mirage shooting, and I liked the Kohm being a projectile weapon (not in that combination but I still liked it) Quote 3. Simple. Stop fighting for battlepay. Fight for glory or ideals. Battlepay was just a bonus to my men and I. so I stop fighting for battlepay. but what about all the others? should I really hope that every player does the same in the hope of forcing a change of ownership? Quote 4. Screenshot taken from before U14 where only the defensive rail could take damage. Out of all of this pointless complaining you found an issue that could easily be patched with some additions to UI. I agree that this should be altered. did we see the same screenshot? because I see the offensive rail at 56% health. it clearly took damage Quote 5. It was actually extremely easy. I could do 10% of a rails health just by myself without the support of my clan mates. so could I if I tried but at the same time, people lured in by the promise of high battle pay destroyed the attacking rail Quote 6. Different communities produced different results? Probability very high. Issue lies with pc community, not Solar Rails. so PC should have to suffer from a half baked system designed for lower participation rates just because it happend that it worked pretty okay on the much smaller console communities? Quote 7. By fighting on the offensive Rail so that the shell clan takes it. Ive explained this several times in my posts. so the shell takes ownership and the main alliance just spam clicks the attack button and retakes ownership. which lands us back on square one Quote 8. Make an alliance with 4 very active moon clans. Bigger ocean with more water. alliances are limited to 3 clans and I won't abandon a clan full of friends to fight a stupid battle over stupid taxation that should not be in the game in the first place Quote Convince them to leave alliance? Politics very important in Solar Rails. before spectres of the rail PC had clans with thousands of members the update implemented a max size of 1000 for clans and clans above that were split up do you think an alliance that originated from the same original clan can be split up easily? Quote Attacking them at odd times where the majority of members will be offline? Many such cases of this happening. Offenses were drastically easier than defenses. how often do I have to say that the shell alliances attacked as soon as the countdown reached 0? how can I attack at odd times if there either is an attack ongoing or I literally can not attack because of the cooldown? Edited October 7, 2019 by Helch0rn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Lollybomb Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Out of all the problems I see people talking about with battlepay, taxes, shell alliances, etc. there's just one thing that I do remember seeing regarding the conflict. Something that screams out "don't even bother" about the whole thing. The battle history. The battle history for every node was an endless stream of "Solar rail successfully defended by [clan]." Every. Single. Node. It was clear that for one reason or another there was little reason to mount an assault of my own simply because the clan or alliance that had the rail, would always have the rail. Maybe once or twice I'd see "[clan a] successfully defeated [clan b]." but the next entry in the log would go right back to [clan b] taking the rail back. So if other, presumably much larger, clans and alliances had no chance of taking them, why should I, or really the majority of the player base care to even try? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)The Repo Man151 Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 4 hours ago, Helch0rn said: 1.the issue of excessive taxes still stands (or rather stood) 2. yes. because I liked all 4 clones of mirage shooting, and I liked the Kohm being a projectile weapon (not in that combination but I still liked it) 3.so I stop fighting for battlepay. but what about all the others? should I really hope that every player does the same in the hope of forcing a change of ownership? 4.did we see the same screenshot? because I see the offensive rail at 56% health. it clearly took damage 5.so could I if I tried but at the same time, people lured in by the promise of high battle pay destroyed the attacking rail 6.so PC should have to suffer from a half baked system designed for lower participation rates just because it happend that it worked pretty okay on the much smaller console communities? 7.so the shell takes ownership and the main alliance just spam clicks the attack button and retakes ownership. which lands us back on square one 8.alliances are limited to 3 clans and I won't abandon a clan full of friends to fight a stupid battle over stupid taxation that should not be in the game in the first place 9.before spectres of the rail PC had clans with thousands of members 10.the update implemented a max size of 1000 for clans and clans above that were split up 11. do you think an alliance that originated from the same original clan can be split up easily? 12.how often do I have to say that the shell alliances attacked as soon as the countdown reached 0? 13. how can I attack at odd times if there either is an attack ongoing or I literally can not attack because of the cooldown? 1. You had the power to change taxes but were too lazy to change them. Outside of that, I'd be happy if instead of there being a tax on nodes, it would just reward the owners with 5k credits and some resources if a person just played on their node. No resources have to be taken from the player. 2. Mirage clones affected the balance of the game and kohm as a projectile weapons affected the performance of the game drastically enough that DE made it hitscan. I don't think those two in conjunction in Solar Rails what caused them to be altered into their current states. If they were crashing peoples' games in Rail battles, they were most certainly crashing games in PvE, where most people played. 3. Yes. If you can't convince the members of your clan to fight for you and the clan, then I don't know what to tell you. Hek, you could even provide the battlepay yourself. Lots of options here. 4. So, english isnt my first language. What I meant is that after U14, only the defensive rail took damage. If the attackers were unable to succeed in destroying the core 750 times in 12 hours, their Rail would be destroyed instantly. 5. That was before the update that made offensive Rails invulnerable. 6. No. It is entirely possible to rework the system so that everyone can enjoy it. 7. Why do we always work with the assumption that the shell clan gets to deploy? That doesn't have a 100% chance to succeed if you are diligent about watching the timer and pressing the deploy button with all of your warlords. A queue system could fix this I believe. Rails weren't perfect but the concept behind them was decades ahead of its time. 8.this is a screenshot of my friend's current alliance on PS4. During Rails, I was in Arbiters Rage on Xbox. We had at least 10 clans in the alliance but I dont have any screenshots from that far back in time of the alliance roster. Alliances are instead limited by a member capacity of 4000 members. This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read on the forums. 9. No. The highest clan tier has always been moon clan. The capacity of moon clan's has always been 1000 members. 10. No. That update did not set a cap of 1000 members on moon clans. It has always been like that. No clans were split up because of this imaginary change. 11. Yes. Even minor fractures between people can be exploited and lead to the dissolution of alliances that have been together for years. 12. You have as much chance as them getting it as you. If you do not try, you will never get it. 13. By forcing the assaults to end at odd times, therefore setting the armistice to end at odd times. This is just direct continuity in a line of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helch0rn Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 2. Mirage clones affected the balance of the game and kohm as a projectile weapons affected the performance of the game drastically enough that DE made it hitscan. I don't think those two in conjunction in Solar Rails what caused them to be altered into their current states. If they were crashing peoples' games in Rail battles, they were most certainly crashing games in PvE, where most people played. the build needed to crash others was not even remotely useful. apart from the odd troll it was mostly used to crash solar rail conflicts 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 3. Yes. If you can't convince the members of your clan to fight for you and the clan, then I don't know what to tell you. Hek, you could even provide the battlepay yourself. Lots of options here. ok so now my clan fights the idiots that have the rail. how do I convince the idiots that fight for the owners and don't realize they won't get any battlepay because the clan vault is empty? 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 4. So, english isnt my first language. What I meant is that after U14, only the defensive rail took damage. If the attackers were unable to succeed in destroying the core 750 times in 12 hours, their Rail would be destroyed instantly. 5. That was before the update that made offensive Rails invulnerable. 6. No. It is entirely possible to rework the system so that everyone can enjoy it. why bother reworking it? there is no benefit for a clan to get a rail other than collecting resources that are already available in excess 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 7. Why do we always work with the assumption that the shell clan gets to deploy? That doesn't have a 100% chance to succeed if you are diligent about watching the timer and pressing the deploy button with all of your warlords. A queue system could fix this I believe. Rails weren't perfect but the concept behind them was decades ahead of its time. because that's what it boiled down to. I have barely seen a clan other than the shell clans seen attacking the rails why? damned if I know but I guess it's because they used some macro or something 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 8.this is a screenshot of my friend's current alliance on PS4. During Rails, I was in Arbiters Rage on Xbox. We had at least 10 clans in the alliance but I dont have any screenshots from that far back in time of the alliance roster. Alliances are instead limited by a member capacity of 4000 members. This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read on the forums. ok I was wrong here 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 9. No. The highest clan tier has always been moon clan. The capacity of moon clan's has always been 1000 members. 10. No. That update did not set a cap of 1000 members on moon clans. It has always been like that. No clans were split up because of this imaginary change. are you calling DE Rebecca a liar? ok it was not update 14 but update 9 added the 1000 members cap update 9.6 split clans with more than 1000 into alliances of smaller clans 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 11. Yes. Even minor fractures between people can be exploited and lead to the dissolution of alliances that have been together for years. I want to play a game and not plan a coup 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 12. You have as much chance as them getting it as you. If you do not try, you will never get it. our clan tried a lot of times. a lot of clans tried or else the froum back then wouldn't have been filled with complaints about this stupid system 8 hours ago, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 13. By forcing the assaults to end at odd times, therefore setting the armistice to end at odd times. This is just direct continuity in a line of thinking. forcing them to end at odd times... against giant alliances probably with members all around the globe.... offering battlepay in excess of 1million credits (deapite the empty vault so that noone gets paid)... there will always be enough people fighting for them and a rather small clan of friends can not compete against that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)The Repo Man151 Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 4 hours ago, Helch0rn said: 1.the build needed to crash others was not even remotely useful. apart from the odd troll it was mostly used to crash solar rail conflicts 2. ok so now my clan fights the idiots that have the rail. how do I convince the idiots that fight for the owners and don't realize they won't get any battlepay because the clan vault is empty? 3.why bother reworking it? 4.there is no benefit for a clan to get a rail other than collecting resources that are already available in excess 5.because that's what it boiled down to. I have barely seen a clan other than the shell clans seen attacking the rails 6.why? damned if I know but I guess it's because they used some macro or something 7.ok I was wrong here 8. are you calling DE Rebecca a liar? ok it was not update 14 but update 9 added the 1000 members cap update 9.6 split clans with more than 1000 into alliances of smaller clans 9.I want to play a game and not plan a coup 10. our clan tried a lot of times. a lot of clans tried or else the froum back then wouldn't have been filled with complaints about this stupid system 11. forcing them to end at odd times... against giant alliances probably with members all around the globe.... 12.offering battlepay in excess of 1million credits (deapite the empty vault so that noone gets paid)... 13.there will always be enough people fighting for them and a rather small clan of friends can not compete against that 1. It was fixed a long, long time ago. 2. Convincing them to stop fighting for them is unnecessary. All that is needed is that you and your people fight on the rail. All you really need to take a Solar Rail is 10 people. If I did it with a 40 person storm clan with Stealth Squad back in 2015, so could you. 3. More content for the game. Interpersonal rivalries and player driven narratives are all the rage right now. It would provide the rewarding, sustainable endgame that players are always looking for because it isn't a one and done game mode. You have to continually fight to protect your assets or else they could go to someone else. They provide free advertising for your clan/alliance. It gives clans and alliances an actual reason to exist. DE could relax on the content grind because the players would effectively be creating their own content by engaging in the system against other groups of players. 4. Yes, actually. There were several benefits. You could set your own tax rate to 0%, for starts. You could advertise for your clan and alliance by using the message on the screen. You just have to get creative. 5. That was because the other people gave up too easily. We overthrew our "oppressors" on xbox after the series of conflicts that lasted about 4 months. 6. I could see that being a thing. Which is all the more reason the system should be reworked and brought back. 7. Don't worry about it. Thanks for showing me the information about the old clans. I never knew they reached over 1,000 members at one point. 8. I stand corrected. I fail to see how this is relevant to Rails in their last reincarnation, however. 9. Coups and politics and shenanigans is what made Solar Rails so fun, aside from the glory of victory. It gave clan warlords genuine power, now they are just a title with roles attached. 10. It is obvious to me that they did not try hard enough. My clan was able to do it just fine even with shell clans and block rails. 11. Yes. It was far easier to take a Rail than to hold one. Thats why block rails could either be a blessing or a curse. You just gotta know how to work the system. Making the conflict end at a 6am instead of a 10am can have huge strategic repercussions. It was usually the difference between having all of your guys online and only having a few people on to fight. A few hours is all it takes to win Solar Rail battles. 12. So if no one is getting paid, what is the issue? Just take it without battlepay. You'll be making more than enough credits if you are successful. And if you are not? Put all of the battlepay you and your clan mates collected back into the vault. It's rough but that is what it takes to win. 13. Yes. Your hypothetical small clan of friends could absolutely take Rails in the old system, provided you worked together and put the time in. Rails were so easy to take once you knew what to do and had people to work with. If you are looking for a more casual experience, than the rest of the game is available to you. Rails are endgame content. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)Chroma Prime Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 Who’s ready for armistice to be lifted, and for the glorious Solar Rails return?! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysus41 Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 The Dark Sector battles were probably the first time Warframe players ever tasted actual defeat. They did not handle it well. At all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)The Repo Man151 Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 On 2019-10-11 at 9:37 AM, Jaysus41 said: The Dark Sector battles were probably the first time Warframe players ever tasted actual defeat. They did not handle it well. At all. They will also simultaneously complain about how easy the rest of the game is and how there is no endgame. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oreades Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 Let me begin this by being I'm both perplexed that this topic is still going and impressed at a certain someones seeming one man defense of a system that was so widely enjoyed by the bulk of the playerbase (sarcasm in case ya missed it) that it was literally removed from the game by the developers. And because I feel that if I don't go into needless detail with regard to that statement I'm going to get a "well thought out reply" as to how the armistice isn't technically removal because it's still "in the game".... yeah I am well aware it's just been on permanent suspension for the last some odd years, same difference. Needless to say I'd decided to just allow this topic to die a quite dignified death but nope top of the whoozle so I figured I'd read the reply I received for a giggle while I waited to head out to breakfast. On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 1. The point of that part of his post was that whoever clicked first got ownership of the node, which isn't true. They still have to fight for it. No, they got just dibsies on challenging it. which means literally any other clan that might be interested in that node was simply locked out for the duration. So it very much was a first come first serve system, so if you weren't the first one that was sitting on a timer with however many people where able to spamclick the node as it became available, you just didn't get to challenge it. On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 2. Yes. If you didn't like the taxes, you could beat them off the rail. You had the power in your hands to prevent these allegedly high taxes. Oh hey if you didn't like the taxes imposed "just git gud", unsurprising stance from someone who's spend several posts chestbeating about how their clan was awesome at the rails and therefor the system was right and just. Tho I still feel that I should point up to one of the 800;b gorillas in the room with respect to that, ya'll better be the one who's timer went off so you could log in and spam click that node so you got t he "privilege" of being that singular challenger~ On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 3. Playing or not playing on the node has no bearing on who owns it when the conflicts is not in session. The clan that owns it could play 10,000,000,000 matches on that nodes and then have it conquered the very next day by another clan or alliance. There was no mechanics that involved "refreshing ownership". Again, it doesn't seem that you know how they functioned. I guess it's good that you agree with me that a clan can essentially ignore (read: not play) the node and reap the sweet delicious taxes from the rest of the game playing on that node until it was time to refresh (read: defend) their ownership of said node. I dunno seems like I have a pretty decent grasp of how the system functioned~ On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 4. Similar to raids... Ironic that conclave has lasted much longer than raids have. That's a thought that I will savor. I'm honestly not surprised that you don't understand why Raids where removed while conclave is still in the game. But here let me elaborate for you because you've probably either made or seriously thought about making a shrill demand that DE bring back raids without understanding why conclave is still a thing and they aren't. Quit simply raids required constant fixing when changes where made to the core game because they where essentially integrated into the core game, unlike conclave. In short a change somewhere else in Warframe was not unlikely to have a negative impact on a raid mechanic that then required development time to go in and fix before the newest patch went live. An issue that Conclave does not suffer from because it is so far removed from the core game that it could functionally be it's own. So changing something in Warframe does essentially nothing to Conclave. As can be evidenced by the removal of Raids because the path of least resistance if they where not a technical problem that required constant fixing would be to leave them in the game until a replacement could be cobbled together at which point they would just be seamlessly swapped out. Since that isn't what happened, since DE bit the bullet knowing full well that there would be massive whining from certain segments of the playerbase, it's pretty easy to assess that the reason Raids where removed while Conclave remained.... is because Raids where a technical mess on top of being generally unpopular. On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: Because you are so willfully ignorant of rails, I will explain them to you. In detail. Oh after willfully ignoring this topic and writing it off as dead for the last week or so I'm sure dis gun be good On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: To construct a Solar Rail, a clan needs to construct an orokin lab. To construct an orokin lab, the players in the clan need to contribute 1000 Credits, 800 Ferrite, 350 Circuits, 350 Polymer Bundle, and 1 forma. Truly a herculean task, considering many peoples' reactions to the hema research costs. From this point forward, the clan could choose to research a Tower-Class Solar Rail. For clans to research a Tower-Class Solar Rail the players in the clan need to contribute 10,000 Credits, 500 Alloy Plates, 600 Circuits, 750 Ferrite, and a single forma. Once the clan has the research completed, they can begin construction on the actual Solar Rail. To construct the Solar Rail, clan members need to contribute 500000 Credits, 25 Gallium, 15000 Rubedo, 15000 Plastids, and 25 Control Modules.You also would have to begin creating the schema for your solar rail, this is sort of like dojo decorating with energy shields and rocket turrets instead of rocks and floofs. The leaders of the clan could then choose to deploy their Solar Rail on the dark sectors. There are four possible states of a dark sector in which a clan will be unable to deploy on it. That's a lot of words that boil down to "I could solo fund the rails from now until the end of time" (hyperbolic modifier just incase you missed it) glad to know the rails cost next to nothing..... I mean there was a brief moment where I was taken aback.... and then I realized I read Rubedo and initially thought of Tellurium .... But way to dredge up the hema in a simultaneous one two punch of more chest beating while dismissing peoples issues with and all in a topic that doesn't involve it in any way shape and or form, jolly good show. On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: 2. If the node is already in conflict, a third rail can not be deployed. That would be stupid and would just lead to endless third partying. I respect DE's choice in this design. The conflict could last up to 12 hours. If the offensive rail successfully makes 750 attacks on the defending rail in that 12 hours period, the conflict could potentially end earlier. My alliance actually held the world record for the fastest successful conquest of a Solar Rail. Our record was destroying the Rail in just under 2 hours. Fun Fact, we did that conflict without battlepay as a display of power against a rival alliance. We did not whine on the forums of how it was unfair that the other alliance had taken our node. Instead, we martialed our forces in the game and subsequently fought the greatest assault in the history of the dark sector conflicts to retake our territory. I'm just going to single this one out because it amuses me, not for yet another instance of chest beating but for the mention of third partying. Because the very concept that in a massive multiplayer game that somehow things should always be 1V1, it just tickles me because I can never help reading it as anything more than whining. Story time, I want to say it was a hand full of months back Fortnite implemented a system where you would regain a portion of health and shields upon killing another player. Any guess at what the primary defense was from the sweat crowd? "It's right and just because I shouldn't ever get 3rd Partied in a 1v100 game"...... any clue what was removed from Fortnite shortly after because it was a toxic mess that was only really a boon to the sweat players? and even then only until they ran up against another sweat player? Don't worry I'll give you a minute~ Aaaaanyhow back to the topic at hand. On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: We also considered economic factors because the tribute that was collected from the nodes would also be collected from the eom credits reward, so planets that were higher up in the star chart would be much more valuable than the ones towards the bottom. (interestingly, this was inversely true in practice, we discovered. because so much of the Xbox community was still stuck in the lower end of the star chart, nodes like coba could be just as valuable as nodes like sechura even though there was a tremendous difference in the eom rewards.) Another factor to consider was that because much of the community still played on nodes like coba, the potential number of players fighting in the rail conflicts on that node was much higher. So if you deployed on sechura, although there would be fewer players to fight you, those players would be considerably more powerful than the hordes of lower mastery ranked players that would have fought on coba(even though, you could still fight the higher level players.) Once your leaders have deployed the rail, the 24 hour deployment process begins. This is the time where you want to prepare as many people as possible to fight in your war. This can include taxiing them to bosses so they can unlock planets and more nodes, mass messaging your members to make sure they are aware of the conflict, and having last minute credit donation marathons to your clan/alliance treasury. Once all of these preparations complete and you have as many of your members ready to fight as possible, all that is left is to wait is for the deployment timer to reach 0. Once it reaches 0, you can begin the conflict Once the conflict begins, you have to successfully destroy the core of the defending Solar Rail 750 times over the course of the conflict or your offensive rail will be destroyed and the node will enter a state of armistice. You will have 12 hours to achieve these 750 victories. I will not explain the actual battle mechanics because the schema of the solar rail could be customized so there were different types of objectives for every clan you fight so any explanation would have to span dozens and dozens of variations and peculiarities. I will also not discuss specter regiments for the same reason. If you are successful in conquering the node, congratulations. You now have to deal with having a target on your back. But there a huge number of benefits. Free advertising, for starters, because you can put your clan/alliance emblem on the node as well as a message to greet players when they select that node to play one. You also have the option of demanding tribute from the players playing on the node. Yes, even players in your own clan/alliance. Although, there were separate tributes you could set for people you were allied with. If you are not successful, you can construct another solar rail and try again. This is about as good of an explanation of the rail system you are going to get, very few people are around who still remember the mechanics of the old Solar Rails. The irony being if that had been the whole your post, ya might actually have had me rethinking my stance on the Rail system, based on a more human account that came as "what the rails meant to us" tho I doubt that would have ultimately swayed me because I am more concerned to "what the rails meant to the rest of the game". Which are two totally different things. On 2019-10-06 at 1:21 AM, (XB1)Saint Nasim said: Even fewer would waste their time replying to ridiculous forum posts. I hope this enlightens you so that you do not make the same mistake again. Aaaaand we're right back here.... At the end of the day my friend there is only one reality, the proof is in the pudding and the Rails where put on permanent suspension (read: removed) because they where a hot mess with regards to the game at large. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagPrime Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 I do love the determined defense of a painfully flawed system by someone who benefited greatly from said flawed system. Their complete misunderstanding of what's being said is obvious at the goal post moving and insults they're using to put others at fault for a truly bad system that they managed to successfully manipulate to stay in "power" and are convinced it was due to some might makes right mentalitity. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)The Repo Man151 Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 On 2019-10-13 at 10:34 AM, Oreades said: 1. Let me begin this by being I'm both perplexed that this topic is still going and impressed at a certain someones seeming one man defense of a system that was so widely enjoyed by the bulk of the playerbase (sarcasm in case ya missed it) that it was literally removed from the game by the developers. 2. And because I feel that if I don't go into needless detail with regard to that statement I'm going to get a "well thought out reply" as to how the armistice isn't technically removal because it's still "in the game".... yeah I am well aware it's just been on permanent suspension for the last some odd years, same difference. 3. Needless to say I'd decided to just allow this topic to die a quite dignified death but nope top of the whoozle so I figured I'd read the reply I received for a giggle while I waited to head out to breakfast. 4. No, they got just dibsies on challenging it. which means literally any other clan that might be interested in that node was simply locked out for the duration. So it very much was a first come first serve system, so if you weren't the first one that was sitting on a timer with however many people where able to spamclick the node as it became available, you just didn't get to challenge it. 5. Oh hey if you didn't like the taxes imposed "just git gud", unsurprising stance from someone who's spend several posts chestbeating about how their clan was awesome at the rails and therefor the system was right and just. Tho I still feel that I should point up to one of the 800;b gorillas in the room with respect to that, ya'll better be the one who's timer went off so you could log in and spam click that node so you got t he "privilege" of being that singular challenger~ 6. I guess it's good that you agree with me that a clan can essentially ignore (read: not play) the node and reap the sweet delicious taxes from the rest of the game playing on that node until it was time to refresh (read: defend) their ownership of said node. 7. I dunno seems like I have a pretty decent grasp of how the system functioned~ 8. As can be evidenced by the removal of Raids because the path of least resistance if they where not a technical problem that required constant fixing would be to leave them in the game until a replacement could be cobbled together at which point they would just be seamlessly swapped out. Since that isn't what happened, since DE bit the bullet knowing full well that there would be massive whining from certain segments of the playerbase, 9. That's a lot of words that boil down to "I could solo fund the rails from now until the end of time" (hyperbolic modifier just incase you missed it) glad to know the rails cost next to nothing..... I mean there was a brief moment where I was taken aback.... and then I realized I read Rubedo and initially thought of Tellurium .... But way to dredge up the hema in a simultaneous one two punch of more chest beating while dismissing peoples issues with and all in a topic that doesn't involve it in any way shape and or form, jolly good show. 10. I'm just going to single this one out because it amuses me, not for yet another instance of chest beating but for the mention of third partying. Because the very concept that in a massive multiplayer game that somehow things should always be 1V1, it just tickles me because I can never help reading it as anything more than whining. Story time, I want to say it was a hand full of months back Fortnite implemented a system where you would regain a portion of health and shields upon killing another player. Any guess at what the primary defense was from the sweat crowd? "It's right and just because I shouldn't ever get 3rd Partied in a 1v100 game"...... any clue what was removed from Fortnite shortly after because it was a toxic mess that was only really a boon to the sweat players? and even then only until they ran up against another sweat player? Don't worry I'll give you a minute~ Aaaaanyhow back to the topic at hand. 11. The irony being if that had been the whole your post, ya might actually have had me rethinking my stance on the Rail system, based on a more human account that came as "what the rails meant to us" tho I doubt that would have ultimately swayed me because I am more concerned to "what the rails meant to the rest of the game". Which are two totally different things. 1. The Solar Rail Conflicts were something that to this day remain in my heart and thoughts. My clan and I truly love the concept. I don't there is any other game that could come close to capturing the magic we had during those times. Just this evening, I was going back through a clan mate's featured clips and I ran across one from all the way back in March of 2015. It was a montage made during some kill competition we threw. It was just some old 3 minute long clip but I recognized everyone there. I recognized exact what weapons they were using, the frame, the builds, which alliance we were fighting, and even the reason why we were fighting them. It was a huge burst of nostalgia. It reminded me that Rails are worth fighting for, even if they were flawed. Rails being a good system or not is irrelevant of player opinion of them. If there is a Rail thread to post on, and I see it, I will post on it. 2. I don't think anyone here disagrees with you on that point. 3. I await the rest of your post with baited breaths. 4.Yes. That was the way the system worked. It did boil down to whoever clicked it first got the dibs on fighting the current owners of the Rail. But your mistake is assuming that some people had a better chance of getting the deployment than others. In reality, everyone had an equal chance. They knew when the armistice was going to end just by looking at the node. If they didn't click the moment that timer was over, that is their fault. 5. It wasn't a matter of "just git gud". It was a matter of just playing the mode. It didnt matter how good you did the 750 runs to take the node, all that mattered was if you did the 750 runs. You being bad at the system doesn't make it a bad system. 6. Yes. It makes sense. The node would be in a state of armistice so it would be unable to be attacked until the timer is over. Playing on that node during armistice holds no sway on who owns the node and who doesn't. Do you disagree with this aspect of the system? 7. I don't think you do. 8. This broad communal support of DE putting Rail Conflicts into a permanent armistice directly set the precedent for Raids being removed as well. As much as I dislike casual PvE content, I do not agree with Raids being removed from the game. These two events and the lack of community opposition to them has given free reign to DE to remove any content they like (which it is fully within their rights to do so, lets be real here). Who knows which game mode will be removed next? Perhaps you will support that the next removal too? I'm of the belief that no content should be removed from games in this day and age, when detailed feedback can be extracted from prominent members of the community with ease. I think that Raids should have been simply put on pause instead of being removed from the game. If DE can't rework old content to new standards of quality, what makes you think they can bring new to content to those standards? 9. Yes. It was easy to construct the Solar Rails. This was implemented by DE so that anyone could have the opportunity to participate in the system. I don't see a problem with this and I don't think you do either. So far you have just tried to make witty insults towards the system and my people. The hema is very relevant, can't you see? The mutagen samples are easy to get, but nobody wants to put in the work to get all of them. Very similar to how people felt about Rails. 10. My mention of "third-partying" isn't about 1v1 fights in a battle on a Rail Conflict. It is about the feature that only two alliances/clans should be deployed against each other on a single node at a time. If an Alliance owns multiple nodes, and has multiple clans/alliances deployed against them across those nodes, that is okay. But more than two clans/alliances on a single node is chaos and would not work in the old system. Maybe it could work in the new system? 11. What Rails meant to the rest of the game is a horrendous argument because Rails could be altered in any number of ways by DE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blivin420 Posted October 20, 2019 Author Share Posted October 20, 2019 Thank everyone for their knowledge on this subject! I am a relatively new player starting a new clan and dojo and am trying to make sure everyone in my small ghost clan gets the most from the game but more importantly has fun 🙂 thanks for everyone’s time and effort it’s greatly appreciated 🙂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)TheLastDax Posted November 26, 2019 Share Posted November 26, 2019 You know, l got to thinking and I think archwing and Railjack would be cool in these "Solar rails" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts