Jump to content
The Lotus Eaters: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Sechura And Heiracon Are No More

Nijuroku

By Nijuroku,
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

StinkyPygmy

StinkyPygmy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Being a "white knight" or "white knighting" is a term used for when someone on the internet defends a person who they A, do not know, B, is female, and C, gains nothing from defending them, especially when that person is arguably in the wrong. The term "White Knight" is used when a perceived male is defending a perceived female for no other reason than to do such and when that female is doing something people are criticizing her for. It is not used when someone is just doing something nice(ie. running a free solar rail) or defending something in general(ie. a decision DE made).

 

I've mentioned this before, but the whole Warframe community seems to have replaced the word "defend" in their vocabulary with "White Knight" for no reason and they frequently use it wrong.

 

 

^QFT

 

White-Knight has become another buzzword, replacing ones that came before it. These types of rails used to be called Care-Bear rails before that. Another term used in the wrong context.

 

Using either term does not really lend credence to a post or an argument, FYI.

Should be pinned somewhere in the forums.

People need to know the absurdity of it all.

Edited by StinkyPygmy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SirAuron

SirAuron

Posted
Posted

Being a "white knight" or "white knighting" is a term used for when someone on the internet defends a person who they A, do not know, B, is female, and C, gains nothing from defending them, especially when that person is arguably in the wrong. The term "White Knight" is used when a perceived male is defending a perceived female for no other reason than to do such and when that female is doing something people are criticizing her for. It is not used when someone is just doing something nice(ie. running a free solar rail) or defending something in general(ie. a decision DE made).

 

I've mentioned this before, but the whole Warframe community seems to have replaced the word "defend" in their vocabulary with "White Knight" for no reason and they frequently use it wrong.

Aren't you a touche one...How about calling it warframe slang...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokinDevil

SmokinDevil

Posted
Posted
 

From what I've read, as well as my own experience, a lot of them were stuck on the sidelines due to the server instability.

 

 

Where are the 0% people now? Where were they then? Like I have always said. All bark, no bite.

 

 

Dark Sectors isn't something new. It's been here for well over a month. What happen to all those threads pre-U13 about how all the nodes would be free, all the hard work they would be putting in to defend it? Anyone putting taxes will be kicked out?

 

Just look at all the other threads WITHOUT ICE or Eclipse mentioned in it. Like I have always said. Less talking, more doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PachTrick

PachTrick

Posted
Posted

Well, with the current DS mechanism, we can still take them back, but we need to take it back right be4 they balance it.

Defenders actually have no advantage at all, for now.

 

We can still ice them like last time we eclipse them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JerZeyCJ

JerZeyCJ

Posted
Posted (edited)

Aren't you a touche one...How about calling it warframe slang...

Uhh, I don't exactly see how I'm being "touche"(nor do I remember hitting you, or that we were fencing, don't know what hit your acknowledging)

 

And it isn't "Warframe slang" it is people completely misusing a phrase and not actually knowing what it means.

Edited by JerZeyCJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chroia

Chroia

Posted
Posted (edited)
 

I am one of those who see 0%-nodes as exploits of a not well balanced system.

Could you elaborate on that, please?

What, specifically, do you find 'not well balanced'?

(PvP balance, the possibility of a 0% tax, the mechanics of the Rail conflicts, etc.

I assume you're referring to the fact that tax can be set to 0%, but would rather make sure.)

 

 

 

To my mind there should be a minimum at 10% that can be set by clans and I will fight for reasonable taxes and no direct credit-exploits.

I understand the sentiment, but if I'd think that if DE agreed there'd be a minimum tax rate.
 

 


 

The credit amounts on all DS are set with an idea for taxing and don't meant to be fully used by farmers.

I don't follow.

Given the faction-specific nature (melee-centric) in a shooter, on top of the credit, exp and resource bonuses that DSes inherently have... how are DSes not "meant to be fully used by farmers"?

 

 

My great reason for running DS at all is (and has always been) the XP on that nodes.

 

Everything has a price, and I am comfortable with it.

DS offer 3 rewards: Exp, credits, resources.

You only need the one that can't be taxed.

Which is fine, but not true for everyone. And I don't know how you mean it, but that comes across as 'screw you, got mine'.

Which -I may be wrong, but- I don't think is an enormously compelling argument.

 

=====

 

 

Is this general discussion?

 

Do people outside of rail clans actually care about this?

 

Can we please have a Rail section in the forums?

Yes.

Yes, because the ****ery involved directly affects my gameplay options.

I believe that the PvP section is supposed to cover that.

Edited by Chroia
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fractal_magnets

fractal_magnets

Posted
Posted

Yes.

Yes, because the ****ery involved directly affects my gameplay options.

I believe that the PvP section is supposed to cover that.

 

 

Um, so you're saying a bunch of teenagers make some decision in your game and it directly affects your gaming experience?

Don't you think that is fundamentally broken on many levels?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gammaion

Gammaion

Posted
Posted (edited)

I will be supporting Lords of the East in their goal of wiping out the last white knight alliance rail.

A "White Knight" is someone who defends females over the internet expecting a reward in return.

 

Doing nice things for the community (such as being the ONLY Alliance that doesn't tax their rails) is not white knighting. Its being nice. You are making it sound like being nice to other people online is some sort of taboo that should be frowned upon.

Edited by Gammaion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
-VS-AtLasVegas

-VS-AtLasVegas

Posted
Posted

Well, with the current DS mechanism, we can still take them back, but we need to take it back right be4 they balance it.

Defenders actually have no advantage at all, for now.

 

We can still ice them like last time we eclipse them.

 

Nobody eclipsed Eclipse^^ Eclipse eclipsed on their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SirAuron

SirAuron

Posted
Posted (edited)

Uhh, I don't exactly see how I'm being "touche"(nor do I remember hitting you, or that we were fencing, don't know what hit your acknowledging)

 

And it isn't "Warframe slang" it is people completely misusing a phrase and not actually giving a damn what it means.

Letting "white knight" get to you...

Edited by SirAuron
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MlRAGE

MlRAGE

Posted
Posted

Well, with the current DS mechanism, we can still take them back, but we need the o take it back right be4 they balance it.

Defenders actually have no advantage at all, for now.

 

We can still ice them like last time we eclipse them.

Eclipse disbanded, some went their separate ways while some migrated to ICE

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WrathAscending

WrathAscending

Posted
Posted

It's actually been two rail conflicts (at least) now, and if you're unlucky enough to be someone whose free time to play the game coincides with the DDoS attacks, it means you can't really play the game at all.

 

You might be able to start a mission and finish it here or there, but the majority of the time you'll either be kicked back to the login screen or loose whatever mission rewards you had accrued. Which, on a Void run for high-rarity Prime parts or, worse yet for new players who are just getting into the game, is going to be extremely frustrating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
-VS-AtLasVegas

-VS-AtLasVegas

Posted
Posted

Could you elaborate on that, please?

What, specifically, do you find 'not well balanced'?

(PvP balance, the possibility of a 0% tax, the mechanics of the Rail conflicts, etc.

I assume you're referring to the fact that tax can be set to 0%, but would rather make sure.)

 

 

Effort < Reward. No balance at all. This nodes aren't planed for strict credit farming. It should give as much "more" credits as it gives more XP or mats. So take a normal Pluto level and add 30% to the credit reward - this is the amount that should be expected while playing a Pluto node.

 

 

 

I understand the sentiment, but if I'd think that if DE agreed there'd be a minimum tax rate.
 

 

I am quite sure there will be an equivalent to this action after reworking the DS system.

 

 

I don't follow.

Given the faction-specific nature (melee-centric) in a shooter, on top of the credit, exp and resource bonuses that DSes inherently have... how are DSes not "meant to be fully used by farmers"?

 

 

You can't follow indeed. The whole post dealt with the issue of excessive credit farming. This sentence underlined, that the amounts of DS nodes are calculated to split them up and not to exploit the whole sum for concentrated farming. The nodes should not be a new version of the old T3-2.0 system with 75k per mission, as it used to be.

 

 

 

 

DS offer 3 rewards: Exp, credits, resources.

You only need the one that can't be taxed.

Which is fine, but not true for everyone. And I don't know how you mean it, but that comes across as 'screw you, got mine'.

Which -I may be wrong, but- I don't think is an enormously compelling argument.

 

 

 

I actualy really care to USE the system and not to exploit it. I want vivid DS-wars with good opponents, that possess enough resources to handle that situation - not placeholder that can't move without ruining their whole household. By demanding 0% rails the ppl act really  selfish by saying "screw you, I want all the credits - I don't care that you are so dumb and build a rail, spend time/money/recources to attack and defend it". 

 

See it as a street that you are using every day on your way to work - this street was build and you are able to use it every time to get to your destination (=XP). When you came to work on time using this street you could earn money (=credits). On your way home you can drive comfortable and fast to a nearby store (=mats). The government builds and owns this streets. They are NOT your property - you pay taxes for using them and their maintenance. The government also protect their citizens from attacks of other countries, which could destroy the infrastructure and your beloved street. 

 

tl;dr -> Pay your taxes and don't worry to be nuked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
achromos

achromos

Posted
Posted (edited)

I actualy really care to USE the system and not to exploit it. I want vivid DS-wars with good opponents, that possess enough resources to handle that situation - not placeholder that can't move without ruining their whole household. By demanding 0% rails the ppl act really  selfish by saying "screw you, I want all the credits - I don't care that you are so dumb and build a rail, spend time/money/recources to attack and defend it". 

 

See it as a street that you are using every day on your way to work - this street was build and you are able to use it every time to get to your destination (=XP). When you came to work on time using this street you could earn money (=credits). On your way home you can drive comfortable and fast to a nearby store (=mats). The government builds and owns this streets. They are NOT your property - you pay taxes for using them and their maintenance. The government also protect their citizens from attacks of other countries, which could destroy the infrastructure and your beloved street. 

 

tl;dr -> Pay your taxes and don't worry to be nuked.

 

I actually care to use the system, I want vivid DS wars TOO, but I DON'T want the Defenders to be punching bags. (YOU hold a node for 10+ hours strait with no ability to actually fight back other than 'defend' and see how fair that is.)  The credit payout is fine, and the fact that they didn't have the resources to handle the situation was fine when the public (the people who used the node that appreciated the freedom from the greedy tax) stepped in and lent a hand. 

 

People love to act like we are "Demanding" 0% and that we are selfish by saying that 0% is best.  No, we never demanded from SC 0%, but we appreciated it and supported them tooth and nail all the same.  It's selfish to look at a rail that is offering EVERYONE free passage and say that they should be charging.  So don't act like they didn't have public support, LOOK at the history of their victory's, the ONLY reason why SC lost was because the DDosing keeping a majority of players off (don't pull the 'but everyone had the same issues' the matter is that general public support was DISABLED from being able to get on which is what effected this outcome) and some rich moneybags coming by and inciting people that would have left it alone with completely crazy amounts of battle pay.

 

Real life =/= Game, so while your analogy is good, it is completely off in left field.  Alliances are not governments and even if they were, SC was able to do it for free, out of kindness EASILY for how long due to public support?  And before that it was 0% too.

Edited by Sibarian
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...