Dark Sector Monopoly

[R34LM]

Now, I have nothing against the clans and alliances that are controlling the dark sectors right now: I hardly play the conflict missions anyway, just the regular dark sector missions. But there is something I need to note.

 

Current owners of dark sectors have been around for too long. Here's why:

 

Even if you have just a 10% tax of credits, millions of players will play on the dark sectors. Since it is survival and defense, which can be endless, you will be getting a crap ton of credits.

 

When you go into conflict, you will have that crap ton of credits to dangle in front of the players, making defending you more appealing than attacking you.

 

The longer the clan or alliance stays, the more solidified their place is due to the endless flow of credits that they can use for battle pay.

 

So, the people who have been controlling the dark sectors right now are most likely going to stay there because, let's face it, people will battle for the one with the most credits. I've seen Eclipse (again, nothing against them) since dark sectors began. 

 

This leaves no chance for other clans or alliances to experience what it is like to actually control dark sectors, rather than just fight for it. In terms of the new PvE system coming out, the only ones who will be able to do the level design are the ones who have to defend their own tower, which are the current dark sector owners. This almost makes the feature exlcusive to them. I don't know what really should be done, but all I am going to say is that something needs to be fixed so other clans and alliances can have a go.

 

Now, there are a few dark sectors are getting new alliances and clans to control them, which is good. It's the ones that haven't changed that I speak of mainly.

 

EDIT: After a recent viewing of control, I'm seeing that it is pretty evenly spaced now. Still, this is a possible issue that can happen.

Edited May 27, 2014 by R34LM

[botbot123321]

I have seen eclipse around a lot also, maybe having a limit to amount of solar rails you can have at a time.

[AureusVulpes]

Those will fall eventually too. Look at how hard Eclipse fell when they got too big.

 

Additionally, if the defending team has weaker specters than the attacking team, you might find that people will opt for the attackers instead since the credits may not be as plentiful, but they will be far easier.

[R34LM]

Those will fall eventually too. Look at how hard Eclipse fell when they got too big.

 

Additionally, if the defending team has weaker specters than the attacking team, you might find that people will opt for the attackers instead since the credits may not be as plentiful, but they will be far easier.

This is true, but I've seen some pretty crazy battle pay offers.

[Rydian]

I hardly play the conflict missions anyway, just the regular dark sector missions.

[...]

Current owners of dark sectors have been around for too long.

Well there's the problem.

 

You do know that the conflicts, which are runnable by outside players such as yourself, are what determine who gains control of the dark sector at the end of the conflict, right?

 

Seriously if I had a nickel for every thread I saw like this...

 

The system is set up so that you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT if you don't like it.

But that something you do is NOT on the forums.  It's in-game.

[DirkDeadeye]

Those will fall eventually too. Look at how hard Eclipse fell when they got too big.

 

Additionally, if the defending team has weaker specters than the attacking team, you might find that people will opt for the attackers instead since the credits may not be as plentiful, but they will be far easier.

 

When did they last lose a rail? i'm curious.

[Zarozian]

I have solution: https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/237367-the-perfect-solution-queue-for-dark-sectors/

 

Come on~

[R34LM]

Well there's the problem.

 

You do know that the conflicts, which are runnable by outside players such as yourself, are what determine who gains control of the dark sector at the end of the conflict, right?

 

Seriously if I had a nickel for every thread I saw like this...

 

The system is set up so that you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT if you don't like it.

But that something you do is NOT on the forums.  It's in-game.

What I do know is that those outside players very rarely choose the side with less credits. Do something about that. But hey, I could care less about who wins. What I do know is that people are going to want the control more when the new system comes out.

 

 

Here's a quarter for your trouble.

Edited May 27, 2014 by R34LM

[Phatose]

Well there's the problem.

 

You do know that the conflicts, which are runnable by outside players such as yourself, are what determine who gains control of the dark sector at the end of the conflict, right?

 

Seriously if I had a nickel for every thread I saw like this...

 

The system is set up so that you can DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT if you don't like it.

But that something you do is NOT on the forums.  It's in-game.

 

Given the very limited effect a single player can have in the game, he's almost certainly better off here. 

 

By way of analogy, you can reduce crime in your town by hitting the streets and playing Batman, but you'll make a bigger impact spending your time politically then street heroics.  Which is why we have so many politicians and so few Batmen.

[Beladric]

There's also the minor issue of being Batman is outright illegal. Vigilantes are still criminals and the law treats them as such.

 

Anyway, Dark Sector's and monopolies on them are a result of DE underestimating just how many Dark Sectors they'd reall need for any competition, and the barrier of entry is probably far beneath what it should be. If you haven't noticed, there's only about 20 dark sectors. Just how many alliances do we have, let alone clans?

 

Dark Sectors are in this spot where they don't really work, but at the same time the fix is not apparent. Then there's the problem of owning one has no real benefit at all, since its a cycle that can only self sustain; taxes and resurces from the dark sectors can only go towards the dark sectors.

 

It needs more work.

[Rydian]

The issue with the Batman thing is that's not how the system works.  If you see crime you can call the cops or report it in most situations, and try to stop it yourself in extreme or time-sensitive situations.

 

But big alliances and clans holding sectors for a long time is not a crime, this is actually how the dark sectors were designed.  Certain clans and alliances continue to hold sectors because individual players only care enough to make forum threads and not enough to actually do something about it.  The system is LITERALLY DESIGNED BY DE so that outside players can push an alliance/clan off of a sector if they care enough to actually do something about it.

 

You know, other than complain on the forums, which doesn't get anything in-game accomplished.

 

Like... let's say that there's a Grineer in front of you in the mission.  Do you go complain on the forums to try to get that Grineer removed, or do you shoot it in the face? :P

[R34LM]

I'm not saying it is a crime, nor am I complaining about it. I'm merely stating a possible issue. But why would I mention it if someone could do something about it? I don't post to complain, I post to discuss, contrary to most posts giving feedback on these forums.

Edited May 27, 2014 by R34LM

[Keltik0ne]

The situation will change when DE introduces the PVP version from the last live stream.

 

It wont be any better, but it'll be change at least.

[ClaireWithBlankie]

 

Hope its not too late 

[(PSN)Dan_The_Noob]

the current battle pay system is busted and basically allows you to make a rail owner bankrupt by never doing dark sectors and then taking all battlepay. 

they need to implement a auto-calculate for "per player" but let clan/alliance put a X amount into the rail which is divides by number of battlepays left.

[Liverslices]

Now, I have nothing against the clans and alliances that are controlling the dark sectors right now: I hardly play the conflict missions anyway, just the regular dark sector missions. But there is something I need to note.

 

Current owners of dark sectors have been around for too long. Here's why:

 

Even if you have just a 10% tax of credits, millions of players will play on the dark sectors. Since it is survival and defense, which can be endless, you will be getting a crap ton of credits.

 

When you go into conflict, you will have that crap ton of credits to dangle in front of the players, making defending you more appealing than attacking you.

 

The longer the clan or alliance stays, the more solidified their place is due to the endless flow of credits that they can use for battle pay.

 

So, the people who have been controlling the dark sectors right now are most likely going to stay there because, let's face it, people will battle for the one with the most credits. I've seen Eclipse (again, nothing against them) since dark sectors began. 

 

This leaves no chance for other clans or alliances to experience what it is like to actually control dark sectors, rather than just fight for it. In terms of the new PvE system coming out, the only ones who will be able to do the level design are the ones who have to defend their own tower, which are the current dark sector owners. This almost makes the feature exlcusive to them. I don't know what really should be done, but all I am going to say is that something needs to be fixed so other clans and alliances can have a go.

 

Now, there are a few dark sectors are getting new alliances and clans to control them, which is good. It's the ones that haven't changed that I speak of mainly.

 

EDIT: After a recent viewing of control, I'm seeing that it is pretty evenly spaced now. Still, this is a possible issue that can happen.

This isnt a problem, this is a mechanic. Its all about clans and alliances gaining more and more power. The more powerful a clan, the more it can do. Dont like it? Make an alliance and overthrow it.

[BloodArmoredApostle]

And you don't see this as a potential problem?

 

[Phatose]

The issue with the Batman thing is that's not how the system works.  If you see crime you can call the cops or report it in most situations, and try to stop it yourself in extreme or time-sensitive situations.

 

But big alliances and clans holding sectors for a long time is not a crime, this is actually how the dark sectors were designed.  Certain clans and alliances continue to hold sectors because individual players only care enough to make forum threads and not enough to actually do something about it.  The system is LITERALLY DESIGNED BY DE so that outside players can push an alliance/clan off of a sector if they care enough to actually do something about it.

 

You know, other than complain on the forums, which doesn't get anything in-game accomplished.

 

Like... let's say that there's a Grineer in front of you in the mission.  Do you go complain on the forums to try to get that Grineer removed, or do you shoot it in the face? :P

 

The key problem is that a single player can't actually make a significant difference.  They haven't actually given us a way where we can make a difference.  The quantity of runs required is too great for actually playing them to have a meaningful impacts - you have to either drum up massive support or get the system changed.  Both are social activities, not something you do in the game.

 

As for the grineer....well, if it's a regular grineer which I can shoot and actually have something happen, then I shoot it.  If, however, the grineer has 10 trillion hps and no amount of shooting I do is going to have an appreciable effect, I come here. 

[(PSN)Dan_The_Noob]

And you don't see this as a potential problem?

 

---49% credit picture---

big tax means big battle pay

the dark sectors give significantly more credits than normal missions for this exact reason anyway.

[R34LM]

This isnt a problem, this is a mechanic. Its all about clans and alliances gaining more and more power. The more powerful a clan, the more it can do. Dont like it? Make an alliance and overthrow it.

The issue I am getting across here is, if it was so easy and I was sure to overthrow them, I would have done it already. I won't have the ability to overthrow them becaue they will have more battle play available from the taxes. I'll only win if enough people follow the same ideology as I do, but when people have a 50,000 battle pay, no one is going to attack that.

 

Phatose solidifies my point.

[Zeromanicus]

This is pretty much how it ends up in most MMOs. It was always inevitable a group of large alliances would dominate. 

 

Edited May 27, 2014 by Zeromanicus

[Archistopheles]

millions of players will play on the dark sectors.

 

Your thread is based on hyperbole.

[R34LM]

Your thread is based on hyperbole.

I expect there are at least a couple million players. The point is that there are enough people to play missions that the dark sector owners can get a substantial amount of credits, even with a low tax.

[Weird_Stealth]

I strongly believe that the solar rails should be restricted so a clan/alliance can only hold so many at a time, and they can't own the same dark sector every time, they'll have to wait until that dark sector has been owned by one or two other clans/alliances before it can be controlled again. Also there should be a cool down period of a few days before a clan/alliance can redeploy their solar rail. Thus causing more clans/alliances to have equal chances at any dark sector, rather than just a small percentage because some large clan/alliance with a ton of members owns 50% of the dark sectors in the whole star chart.

[R34LM]

That would be a nice way to do it. Just the fact that they can't regain lost ground until some time has passed. You might see the same clans/alliances coming back, but they would have to work still since the current owner would have, most likely, built up some credits to use in battle pay.