The Dark Sectors - Let's Get It Done Right

[(PSN)D4rk50ul-v2]

I just want to give a bit of background before this thread gets started, I've been involved with them since they launched on PS4 and have read threads from the launch on PC all the way up until that point.  I've also kept close track of how things operate on both sides and how they are currently won/lost.  I don't agree with any of it, from the perspective of being both the unstoppable juggernaut and the little clan that never gets a chance.

 

The idea of PVP and building the rail defenses ourselves is 100% awesome, I hope to see this be developed further and balanced as needed.  I just don't see how it will ever change things for anyone as the Dark sectors themselves are completely dominated by Taxes and Politics and only accessible to a select few.

 

I will list things that currently happen and a possible solution to these issues, and look forward to feedback and possibly a community direction on such things.

 

1. Battle pay rules all.  If someone is able to get enough tax income they are quite literally impossible to beat until the entire community revolts against them.

 

1a. Reward the players with exclusive parts/mods that ONLY drop during conflicts as a reward for completeing the mission.  Make the mission itself pay out double what that particular Dark sector pays out when not in conflict, no matter who plays it.  This will encourage people to play for the side they want to win, not the side who pays them the most.

 

2. Alliances use their own clans and other allied alliances to deploy against themselves to prevent being attacked.

 

2a.  This kills the entire spirit of the Dark Sectors.  Remove the ability for an allied clan to deploy against its own alliance for 7 days after leaving the alliance.  Also do not allow them to rejoin an alliance they leave for 7 days.  Keep the system of whoever does the most damage to the rail gets early access to deployment.

 

3.  No room for the little guys.

 

3a. Add more Dark Sector Nodes, and add Clan only nodes that Alliance rails cannot be deployed on.  Do not allow any Alliance or Clan to hold more than (X) nodes at a time.  (X= a reasonable number)

 

4. The David vs Goliath fights that happen on a regular basis, where a small dedicated group takes on a huge player base.

 

4a. Make the PVP variant of the rail system count for MUCH more damage than simple mobile defense runs.  Give the advantage to the clans/alliances that have dedicated skilled members instead of those with just sheer numbers.

 

5. Alliances are so large that it is virtually impossible to compete unless you get 50+ clans.

 

5a. Set the max number of members to 2000 per Alliance instead of 4000 to diversify the scene and allow smaller groups of clans to compete with each other.

 

6. The motivation to even hold a rail if all this was to happen would change, so how do you make it desirable?

 

6a. Offer the occupying clan/alliance an increased boost to the credits/resources that drop from the node when not in conflict.  Along with having their name on a rail they would enjoy an enhanced node while not imposing taxes on the public. This would completely eliminate almost all of the shady politics and spying that happens in the game right now and put it back to a fun PVP oriented end game activity.

 

This just scratches the surface of the problems that plague what many of us consider our "end game" content.  I hope DE really looks hard into the current state of the Dark Sectors as it has ruined the game for many people, to the point that many clans and alliances simply won't participate due to all the issues.

 

Thanks for your comments and suggestions.

[(PSN)JacktheBlack47]

I like the idea

[(PSN)D4rk50ul-v2]

Bump for buried in Kubrows

[Evanescent]

I like this.

[Tr1ples1xer]

PVP forum ------>

[Haldos]

Moved to a more appropriate section.

[(PSN)D4rk50ul-v2]

Sorry for posting in wrong forums, saw conclave and figured this was more general than pvp.

It's just one guys ideas, but I hope the dev team takes a look and sees the potential long term benefits this would have on the game.

[NoeleVeerod]

1a. Reward the players with exclusive parts/mods that ONLY drop during conflicts as a reward for completeing the mission.

 

This is a terrible suggestion. Let's not lock gear behind Dark Sectors. RNG walls alone are already sort of discouraging for a good portion of the playerbase.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Vintovka

[(PSN)D4rk50ul-v2]

This is a terrible suggestion. Let's not lock gear behind Dark Sectors. RNG walls alone are already sort of discouraging for a good portion of the playerbase.

Decisive Judgement drops elsewhere? It's already there I'm just suggesting they spice up the rewards and pay out an equal amount of credits to do away with tax and make it fun for all involved. It's just like any other mission, you play it you get a reward, I doubt anyone would mind doing one conflict mission to get a unique mod.

[NoeleVeerod]

Decisive Judgement drops elsewhere? It's already there I'm just suggesting they spice up the rewards and pay out an equal amount of credits to do away with tax and make it fun for all involved. It's just like any other mission, you play it you get a reward, I doubt anyone would mind doing one conflict mission to get a unique mod.

Decisive Judgement drops from Spectres, which are AI enemies. I'm talking about PvP matches, which you suggested they should have exclusive rewards. Several players expressed their concern to keep rewards from being acquired by playing PvP matches only.

Now, if there isn't an option to opt out of PvP and play the PvE version (although I believe PvE in Dark Sectors has been replaced completely), with this suggestion said players would have only two choices: play PvP even though they don't want, or forget about the reward.

Supposing said reward is of a certain interest, you easily manage to piss off non-PvP players.

[(PSN)D4rk50ul-v2]

OK so conflicts are 100% pvp, so let's eliminate the mod part and the like rest still fixes most of the issues in the dark sectors.

I'd love to see this thread worked out thoroughly talked out and refined. Hopefully it can help the dev team get a feel for what is good and bad about the current system. There is a lot of things you just can't see in a database or chats.

[Phatose]

1 just really isn't a problem.  That's proper functioning - strike a successful balance between income for battle pay, and keeping taxes low enough you don't face a massive tax revolt, and you're in the clear.  That's a skill in the metagame, and it's a good thing. 

 

2 is a good suggestion to prevent cheesing.

 

3 is unneeded, as there's already a solution for the little guys - create an alliance. 

 

4 is irrelevant, since there are no PvE runs in the new conflicts.

 

5 is inappropriate.  It's nothing more then a change of where the line is drawn - having to form group of 25 clans instead of 50 is subject to the exact same protest.  A change that doesn't actually change anything is pointless.

 

6 is unneeded.  The rewards for rail ownership are potential profits from taxes.  That's fine and good, not a problem to be solved - dark sectors aren't meant as simple bonus zones where otherwise disinterested players can get up to 40% bonus xp and 20k credits a run.  If players want no taxes, they have to take on the responsibility of defending the rail with no tax income for battle pay.  If they can't do that, then they lose the rail - that's how it's supposed to work.