Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 I believe creating a queue for Dark Sectors is the only solution for being able to give every clan and alliance out there a chance at owning a Dark Sector or getting a good whack at the current owners. The current system is exploitable by those with the perfect/perfect connection to attack bigger alliances with small clans to prevent other alliances from attacking them! But with a limitless queue of attackers for these dark sectors with the option to leave queue would be perfect. After winning the solar rail there will still be the armistice to repair, however the line of attackers will continue and the new winners will have to take over defending wherever the previous defenders left off. The deploy button is useless, cause face it there's far too little amounts of dark sectors out there while there's thousands of clans and alliances trying to take them. Instead of rapid button smashing destruction bashing to be the first to deploy against thousands of other clans trying to deploy and losing to the one with the perfect connection, we can all be civil and line up in queue. As for the reduced time for joining in and supporting a side to get reduced deploy time, that really doesn't solve the issue now does it? So please consider the queue instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirNerdsAlot5 Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 still...the system is a rocky one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 still...the system is a rocky one Then help me improve it! POINT OUT ITS FLAWS! BECAUSE EITHER WAY ITS STILL BETTER THAN THE CURRENT ONE! TRUST ME THESE ATTACKS ON THE DARK SECTORS WILL NEVER CEASE ANYWAYS! AND REDUCING THE TIME FOR DEPLOYING BY SUPPPORTING ONE SIDE ISN'T A REAL SOLUTION EITHER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 Anyways I await constructive criticism. Please tell me how this will fail. Because this system gives every clan and alliance a chance to attack and take over a Dark Sector rather than never being able to get one because of those millions with perfect perfect connections who has the most fastest connections out of all those with perfect perfect connections, will get it first or those who live close to the servers. Seriously. The current defenders of the dark sectors are also using cheap tactics, like deliberately having a smaller clan from their own alliance or some outside clan with a superiorly faster connection deploy against them so they don't fight huge alliances like us that can grind them into anti-matter, the current system is basically shielding them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Ozymandias- Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 As a hardcore player from other online games, i can tell that most of the times, when it comes to PVP, it turns into something like "cheat" "feeding" with smaller accounts/clans in order to win...im sure this game is not the exception...this is a perfect solution since it gives the rest of clans/alliances a real CHANCE of participating on the dark sectors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 We must bring this idea and suggestion to the DE!!! THEY MUST SEE IT! AND THEY MUST USE IT! IT IS THE BEST SOLUTION IF NOT THE PERFECT SOLUTION! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beladric Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 It's honestly kind of a bad solution to a problem with no good solution. The problem you should be addressing is that, in their current state, Dark Sectors are at best flawed and worst a abject failure. That said, its a solution, which is a start. Personally, I'd split the Dark Sectors regionwise into about 40-50 towers per sector, so that there's simply more people in them. I was genuinely surprised that Dark Sectors weren't at least region specific, since there's only, what, 20 of them, give or take? No offense, DE, but you dropped the ball there when there's several thousands of clans and at least a few hundred alliances, and I'm being generously pessimistic there. Admittedly, my solution is ultimately no better then yours. A queing system at least guarentees a chance at the Dark Sector fight, though, so you have me there. I have to say, though, the problem is really with the poorly designed system than anything on our end. You can't blame the alliances for taking advantage of loopholes in the system. It's not nice that they do so, no, but there's no real way to stop it either. Sorry, I don't really have a better solution for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENIAK_Prime Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 The only thing I could come up with was perhaps making it a rule that no clan or alliance can own more than one Dark Sector at one time (Eclipse, anyone?).And if your clan is in an alliance that owns a dark sector, you'd be disallowed to own a dark sector yourself, individually (if that's possible). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beladric Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 It wouldn't be difficult to add in, certainly, since I'm sure every clan/alliance has its own index in the game code. Comparisons of that sort of nature are what computers do best. I'm not sure of its fairness, admittedly. Maybe the real issue of Dark Sectors is the reward is nil and the barrier of entry is far too low? I just don't know. The Dark Sectors have been wrought with odd decisions, and I'm not entirely sure they function as DE hoped they would. In fairness to them, their test server contains SIGNIFICANTLY less players then the actual server does, so it would be difficult to predict something like the current mess in its entirety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirNerdsAlot5 Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Then help me improve it! POINT OUT ITS FLAWS! BECAUSE EITHER WAY ITS STILL BETTER THAN THE CURRENT ONE! TRUST ME THESE ATTACKS ON THE DARK SECTORS WILL NEVER CEASE ANYWAYS! AND REDUCING THE TIME FOR DEPLOYING BY SUPPPORTING ONE SIDE ISN'T A REAL SOLUTION EITHER! A que isn't really a solution either. That doesn't prevent the fact that every 2 days the nodes are in conflict. It just provides another way to get to that point. What they should do is add ways for the occupant to pick up bonuses that extend the armistice. Ingame they can activate consoles or something that can put up a shield or something. Then the opposition will have to try to prevent them from activating them, for if the opposition wins and the occupant activates them [insert negative effect for opposed]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 A que isn't really a solution either. That doesn't prevent the fact that every 2 days the nodes are in conflict. It just provides another way to get to that point. What they should do is add ways for the occupant to pick up bonuses that extend the armistice. Ingame they can activate consoles or something that can put up a shield or something. Then the opposition will have to try to prevent them from activating them, for if the opposition wins and the occupant activates them [insert negative effect for opposed]. Every 1 and a half days the nodes will be in conflict anyways or either have a rail being deployed against them! You won't find a single day other than armistice, that the nodes won't have someone deploying against them as soon as armistice is over! Extending the armistice will only make things worse for those who want to contest it. Then it wouldn't be fair to everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 It's honestly kind of a bad solution to a problem with no good solution. The problem you should be addressing is that, in their current state, Dark Sectors are at best flawed and worst a abject failure. That said, its a solution, which is a start. Personally, I'd split the Dark Sectors regionwise into about 40-50 towers per sector, so that there's simply more people in them. I was genuinely surprised that Dark Sectors weren't at least region specific, since there's only, what, 20 of them, give or take? No offense, DE, but you dropped the ball there when there's several thousands of clans and at least a few hundred alliances, and I'm being generously pessimistic there. Admittedly, my solution is ultimately no better then yours. A queing system at least guarentees a chance at the Dark Sector fight, though, so you have me there. I have to say, though, the problem is really with the poorly designed system than anything on our end. You can't blame the alliances for taking advantage of loopholes in the system. It's not nice that they do so, no, but there's no real way to stop it either. Sorry, I don't really have a better solution for you. Then trust me on my solution. Its better than any other solution out there, since the dark sectors will always be contested. You will never find a second that the nodes aren't being attacked and the deploy button hasn't been pressed with a rail already deploying. A queue with a long line ensures that everyone who wants to fight for the dark sector gets a chance to! This also prevents these current alliances holding the nodes from having smaller clans deploy against them to prevent bigger alliances that can easily crush them from taking the node from them! Which is why this solution is perfect! The wait might be long but it guarantees a 100% chance at the dark sector! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 The only thing I could come up with was perhaps making it a rule that no clan or alliance can own more than one Dark Sector at one time (Eclipse, anyone?). And if your clan is in an alliance that owns a dark sector, you'd be disallowed to own a dark sector yourself, individually (if that's possible). You just gave me another idea. Clans already in an alliance owning a dark sector cannot deploy against the alliance it is in. That way there will be no exploits. Thank you good sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 It wouldn't be difficult to add in, certainly, since I'm sure every clan/alliance has its own index in the game code. Comparisons of that sort of nature are what computers do best. I'm not sure of its fairness, admittedly. Maybe the real issue of Dark Sectors is the reward is nil and the barrier of entry is far too low? I just don't know. The Dark Sectors have been wrought with odd decisions, and I'm not entirely sure they function as DE hoped they would. In fairness to them, their test server contains SIGNIFICANTLY less players then the actual server does, so it would be difficult to predict something like the current mess in its entirety. You're starting to get the idea. But basically you just admitted that this is the perfect solution, only now we need better rewards for fighting and owning one. The fight itself is a great reward to many, victory and pride is another. But the best reward IMO IS BEING ABLE TO FACE A LONG LINE OF CLANS AND ALLIANCES TRYING TO DEFEND YOUR RAIL FROM THEM IN AN ON GOING ONSLAUGHT! Those current holders having small clans with people who have PERFECT PERFECT CONNECTIONS deploying against them on purpose to prevent everyone else from attacking them are nothing more than cowards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirNerdsAlot5 Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Every 1 and a half days the nodes will be in conflict anyways or either have a rail being deployed against them! You won't find a single day other than armistice, that the nodes won't have someone deploying against them as soon as armistice is over! Extending the armistice will only make things worse for those who want to contest it. Then it wouldn't be fair to everyone else. But at least that idea actually changes the situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 But at least that idea actually changes the situation More like it can be abused to make those who want to attack have to wait longer. I have this intuition that says you are from one of those alliances who currently hold a node and wish to implement that so it can be exploited. Either that or you are a troll. A queue would be much more fairer to everyone and even to those with low-spec PCs or those without perfect perfect connections who live in EU or in Asia who also want to contest the rails but never get a chance to because of the connection preventing them from deploying first. This solution is definitely the best one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 AND I AM 10,00000% SURE OF IT TOO! I AM ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT MY SOLUTION WILL WORK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirNerdsAlot5 Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 More like it can be abused to make those who want to attack have to wait longer. I have this intuition that says you are from one of those alliances who currently hold a node and wish to implement that so it can be exploited. Either that or you are a troll. A queue would be much more fairer to everyone and even to those with low-spec PCs or those without perfect perfect connections who live in EU or in Asia who also want to contest the rails but never get a chance to because of the connection preventing them from deploying first. This solution is definitely the best one. No eager internet child....my alliance does not own a node. And no I am not trolling. Also...you've got my idea wrong. The opposed team can prevent the "defenses" from being activated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 No eager internet child....my alliance does not own a node. And no I am not trolling. Also...you've got my idea wrong. The opposed team can prevent the "defenses" from being activated. Then how does that solution guarantee that every clan/alliance will get a chance to deploy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirNerdsAlot5 Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Then how does that solution guarantee that every clan/alliance will get a chance to deploy? In conjunction with their already existing idea? it will work very well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 In conjunction with their already existing idea? it will work very well What? I seriously think you are just trolling now. It won't change how its still a button mashing race to deploy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 27, 2014 Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 Surely someone here can see how this idea will work out perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirNerdsAlot5 Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 What? I seriously think you are just trolling now. It won't change how its still a button mashing race to deploy. Nothing will, not even a que. A que just forms a line of button mashers. However it's still better than the current system. And stfu with this "you're a troll" bs. Obviously you've never debated with someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 28, 2014 Author Share Posted May 28, 2014 Nothing will, not even a que. A que just forms a line of button mashers. However it's still better than the current system. And stfu with this "you're a troll" bs. Obviously you've never debated with someone. Tell me how a que won't fix the issue. And "Nothing will"? What kind of attitude is that? Even if it is a line it guarantees each and every single clan and alliance a shot at getting rails instead of those with the fastest connection. You obviously don't no what a debate is and you certainly don't know what the focus of the main issue is, which is why you brought up a random solution that is irrelevant to the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarozian Posted May 28, 2014 Author Share Posted May 28, 2014 If you can't come up with a better solution than this for this problem then why bring up your solution which solves nothing? The fact that you told me to "stfu" tells me that you're not worth my time and you can't handle a serious debate, instead you dance around the problem by talking about different things bringing your own solution into this topic which isn't even a solution at all but rather an annoying add-on to what already exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now