I Heard That All The Big Alliances Fix The Dark Sector Fights And Do Favors For Each Other Behind The Scenes To Have Monopolies And High Taxes.

[Arabaxus]

I love the DS PVP. Not sure why it's a problem that nobody has attacked and had huge battles, they are players who rely strictly on high tax to pay out battle pay and without a node they simply won't put in the effort to earn the credits the hard way.

The real issue is people expect everything to be handed to them and don't want to work for it. The system needs a few tweaks but is far from broken.

 

The thing is, owning a node has literally no benefits other than prestige, if clans/alliances did not get their investment back, why would they continue to funnel money into a useless object?

[-InV-Skitz0]

Conclaves are nice though, its the DS that have problems probably because of the MOBA-style they use

While the unbalance of PvP plays a large part of why this form of PvP is more controversial then conclave that is far from the only reason it has problems.

 

DS PvP has a direct impact on PvE farming as well. DS was meant as but one of many long term playable content added for future replay ability. In concept it is designed only for those who opt into participating within it. When future in game content is released that provides players alternatives that are just as rewarding both in desire and profit for players to participate in we will see the burden of taxes lessen on the player base overall.

 

Those who dislike PvP can go do there thing, and DS will be left for those wanting to conquer and those wanting to set it free. Also I believe resetting the amount of pay from voids could greatly lessen this burden. If t1 nets 15k t2 30k t3 45k t4 60k, the burden of credits is less on the player base, void become the undeniable best grind for credits.  DS nodes still retain High traffic because of xp boost and mat boost.

.

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-Skitz0

[vaugahn]

As I mentioned, it was a quote of the dev. This means, that they had to recreate the whole system from the wrong starting point.

 

The disaster of DS is the same as of PvP. Nobody mind if you enjoy it though.

 

Source on that quote please?

 

The thing is, owning a node has literally no benefits other than prestige, if clans/alliances did not get their investment back, why would they continue to funnel money into a useless object?

 

I'm hoping there will be more stuff to do with a rail in the future. I'd also like the rail to be a persistent object clans fight over, rather than whatever it is now.

[(PSN)D4rk50ul-v2]

The thing is, owning a node has literally no benefits other than prestige, if clans/alliances did not get their investment back, why would they continue to funnel money into a useless object?

For us it's about keeping the node low tax for all to enjoy. We just love this game and want to keep it fair for all. The tax we do collect goes towards defending the nodes from high tax threats. An alliance name is just a banner, no personal glory comes from it. If you believe in what we do, fight for us. If you attack us prepare for war as we won't risk the node going 25%-100% tax again.

The community isn't organized enough alone to mount an attack, but if they know you fight for them they will throw down runs to keep things on the level. All you need to do is stick to your word and be fair.

[LostCody]

that would be cool if it were happening.

[ElHefe]

(edit) ... monopolies and the taxes are just a symptom, really.

 

... the devs miscalculated the way people in this game treat clans

 

Given time, I have confidence that the devs will set things right.

 

A polished polemic with solid pearls:

1. Symptoms are not disease ... in fact, most of the time they are an exaggerated reaction to it

2. Rugged individualism remains alive and well, even in simulated environments

3. Patience remains the highest virtue ... particularly when it comes to the gaming industry

 

IMHO this post exemplifies excellence in exposition ...

It serves as a reminder that every member of this community is capable of the same

It also demonstrates how cool reason can guide controversy into useful discovery and thus lay the groundwork for rationale adjustment

 

Well done sir, well done indeed ... !+

Edited September 15, 2014 by ElHefe

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

Quote of the dev? Nah those are your opinions. 

 

I admit those are my opinions, TOO, but as I mentioned, the devs stated it over and over again one year ago on several streams. Give it a shot and search a bit.

[SSI_Kryptix]

I admit those are my opinions, TOO, but as I mentioned, the devs stated it over and over again one year ago on several streams. Give it a shot and search a bit.

And that was 1 year ago, now its better

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

And that was 1 year ago, now its better

 

It wasn't even planed one year ago. My whole point is that the core of PvP and trading was forced by the forums into the game - it was not the intention of the devs themseves. They try to minimize the damage brought with it since then.

[.Talia.]

It wasn't even planed one year ago. My whole point is that the core of PvP and trading was forced by the forums into the game - it was not the intention of the devs themseves. They try to minimize the damage brought with it since then.

 

Again with false claims...

 

This interview with DE Steve is from 2 years ago. http://mmohuts.com/editorials/warframe-qa-with-steve-sinclair-warframe-creative-director

 

"So PvE are the roots of the experience. That being said, the future of Warframe is growth. More bosses, greater enemies, more factions, but eventually we will be reaching outward into giving Clans greater meaning and yes, eventually, PvP."

 

It was always in their plans.

[BigPopaj]

Those who dislike PvP can go do there thing, and DS will be left for those wanting to conquer and those wanting to set it free. Also I believe resetting the amount of pay from voids could greatly lessen this burden. If t1 nets 15k t2 30k t3 45k t4 60k.

 

 

The 75k rewards of T3 missions were erased for a reason. DE have a problem to keep reasonable amounts in the credit-wallets on every player-level. Creating an extraordinary farming spot will break the economical balance even more. 

 

I think the void rewards are good as they are now - the only thing, that the players should try to understand, is that those maximal possible credit amounts of DS missions are not designed to be recieved 24/7 by those that rush those missions. 

 

But the comprehension of the DS system is quite poor anyway - this is not the only point, that should have been explained to the ppl.

[BigPopaj]

"So PvE are the roots of the experience. That being said, the future of Warframe is growth. More bosses, greater enemies, more factions, but eventually we will be reaching outward into giving Clans greater meaning and yes, eventually, PvP."

 

While working on it, they warned that pvp will have long term issues by overall design of Warframe. They tried to take time for it, but the forum got louder every month.

However, it is the past indeed - Warframes Community got a huge impact after the implementation of this systems - I think it is obvious to everyone who observed the change. To complain about it now after so long, makes no sense - but I keep those great memories in mind.

[.Talia.]

While working on it, they warned that pvp will have long term issues by overall design of Warframe. They tried to take time for it, but the forum got louder every month.

However, it is the past indeed - Warframes Community got a huge impact after the implementation of this systems - I think it is obvious to everyone who observed the change. To complain about it now after so long, makes no sense - but I keep those great memories in mind.

 

My point is that it was always their plans. Saying that this game would be PvE forever, and PvP was forced, is a lie.

Edited September 15, 2014 by RexSol

[Aimop95]

So what if there are ridiculous taxes? We farmed just fine before DS, if they want to tax 100%, guess what, no one will fight, and how long can they maintain a rail with no one fighting in the DS? Those things decay.

[RiouHotaru]

Is it a practice for alliances that are friends with one another to perform "blocks" on rails that another alliance/clan-within-an-alliance to allow a clan/alliance to continue holding a rail.

 

What I mean by "block" is what is described in the OP, a clan/alliance will drop a rail to start a conflict for the sole purpose of making sure no one can take that Dark Sector away from it's owner, and give them the 24 hour grace period afterwards where no-one can take the rail away from them.

 

It's not an exploit though.  Nobody said it was against the rules to drop a rail and then not fight.

 

However, there are some shady practices in terms of taxation.  A clan currently owns two of the highest XP/Credit earning rails, and purposefully has taxes higher on one rail than the other, with their message openly stating they want you to use the other rail.  In perhaps a bit of ironic comedy, said other rail they want you to use drops Orokin cells, which would go to the clan via the resource tax.

 

Sneaky way to get resources you want by trying to subtly push people into using the rail you want farmed.

[BrazilianJoe]

Is it a practice for alliances that are friends with one another to perform "blocks" on rails that another alliance/clan-within-an-alliance to allow a clan/alliance to continue holding a rail.

 

What I mean by "block" is what is described in the OP, a clan/alliance will drop a rail to start a conflict for the sole purpose of making sure no one can take that Dark Sector away from it's owner, and give them the 24 hour grace period afterwards where no-one can take the rail away from them.

 

It's not an exploit though.  Nobody said it was against the rules to drop a rail and then not fight.

 

However, there are some shady practices in terms of taxation.  A clan currently owns two of the highest XP/Credit earning rails, and purposefully has taxes higher on one rail than the other, with their message openly stating they want you to use the other rail.  In perhaps a bit of ironic comedy, said other rail they want you to use drops Orokin cells, which would go to the clan via the resource tax.

 

Sneaky way to get resources you want by trying to subtly push people into using the rail you want farmed.

 

 

Warframe may not be an e-sport. And even though it's not against the  current rules, rail blocking is anti-competitive behaviour. It's not sportsmanly, and it's not fun. It reduces competition artificially by having a non-competitive match where a) both sides agree to draw (not possible on DS) or b) one of the sides intended to lose all along. 

 

In professional sports a team caught doing this could be expelled from a championship and even be blacklisted for some years until it is able to compete again.

 

It's bad for sports, and bad for our game too. 

 

The shady taxing is a cartel (which in the real world is a crime, I have said it so many times already), which is also a huge detractor from the whole DS PvP. 

 

So yes, we have to keep talking until DE gets DS more e-sporty. 

 

Doubling the number of nodes per planet would help a lot too.

Limiting the number of owned nodes to 1 per clan/alliance would also be great. 

Edited September 15, 2014 by BrazilianJoe

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

 

Limiting the number of owned nodes to 1 per clan/alliance would also be great. 

 

Booring. No tension at all.

[Edahsinmo]

This sounds like fun.

Anyone up for some Gurren-Lagann crap?

[RoboDoge]

Booring. No tension at all.

Agree.

 

 

Increasing reapiring cost exponentionally by how many nodes do you own. And caping % of the repair after every assault to +25 % ( nodes cannot repair for more than 25 % after the attack ).

[MoonlightAngel]

It s will alway be the same. X losed the rail to Y (outsider) then getting attacked by Z... Z bring the rail to X. They keep attacked each other to prevent the rail from Outsider. Winner had been decided from the begining. Cheap win ever.  (without any single paid) 

[SmokinDevil]

It s will alway be the same. X losed the rail to Y (outsider) then getting attacked by Z... Z bring the rail to X. They keep attacked each other to prevent the rail from Outsider. Winner had been decided from the begining. Cheap win ever.  (without any single paid) 

 

With that attitude, of course.

[RiouHotaru]

Warframe may not be an e-sport. And even though it's not against the  current rules, rail blocking is anti-competitive behaviour. It's not sportsmanly, and it's not fun. It reduces competition artificially by having a non-competitive match where a) both sides agree to draw (not possible on DS) or b) one of the sides intended to lose all along. 

 

In professional sports a team caught doing this could be expelled from a championship and even be blacklisted for some years until it is able to compete again.

 

It's bad for sports, and bad for our game too. 

 

The shady taxing is a cartel (which in the real world is a crime, I have said it so many times already), which is also a huge detractor from the whole DS PvP. 

 

So yes, we have to keep talking until DE gets DS more e-sporty. 

 

Doubling the number of nodes per planet would help a lot too.

Limiting the number of owned nodes to 1 per clan/alliance would also be great. 

 

But Warframe isn't an E-Sport.  Again, there are no rules and regulations as to how Dark Sectors and Rails are to be handled.  If there were, DE would've addressed it many updates ago.  You keep comparing the whole Dark Sector thing to an e-sport when really it's like a game of Risk, or like playing a 4X game (Civilization, Endless Space, etc).  This sort of diplomacy and politicking is nothing new.

 

Besides, Rail Blocking still costs one clan/alliance an entire rail, and to my knowledge, rails aren't cheap, especially when you're making a lot of them simultaneously.  So any clan/alliance performing blocks still has to regularly contribute resources.

 

The shady taxing is a pain for sure, and underhanded.  Though most folks who run Sechura for XP/Credits will continue to do so regardless of changes.

 

Again, if there was legitimate exploitation going on, DE would've stomped it out.

[Blatantfool]

Again, if there was legitimate exploitation going on, DE would've stomped it out.

 

 Popping in to point out that just because we've heard of no solution being worked on doesn't necessarily mean there isn't one being worked on.

[RiouHotaru]

 Popping in to point out that just because we've heard of no solution being worked on doesn't necessarily mean there isn't one being worked on.

 

But surely they'd have mentioned it.  For example, how the Excal rework of RB was accidentally released.  I think by now, if there was some measure of exploitation, something would have been mentioned.

[Blatantfool]

But surely they'd have mentioned it.  For example, how the Excal rework of RB was accidentally released.  I think by now, if there was some measure of exploitation, something would have been mentioned.

 

 DE is weird about that stuff. They'd mention it if they had a solution they liked and figured they could have in the game fairly soon, sure. But if they're doing a lot of background testing out of sight and haven't settled on a solution they might not bring it up.