Archeyef Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 -snip- This is not a conspiracy, it's real. I can share more info over PM or something but I will be punished for naming and shaming if I were to say anything else. I'm sorry, but my own thoughts on this notwithstanding, I have to correct this. This is by definition a conspiracy, whether or not it's real. A conspiracy involves multiple parties working probably in secret (conspiring!) to achieve a goal. In this case the monopolization of the dark sectors. And a conspiracy theory, which I assume you may have meant, is... well, the theory that there is a conspiracy. Which again is what this is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
011100110110000101101101 Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Yep, this sort of stuff happens all the time. The only way to stop it would be to have everyone fight these guys, but I doubt that'll happen. It's just Eclipse round 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domesticon Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Yep, this sort of stuff happens all the time. The only way to stop it would be to have everyone fight these guys, but I doubt that'll happen. It's just Eclipse round 2. Sadly, yes, yes it is. Back when we first made Eclipse we were supposed to be the good guys, making sure this kind of S#&$ didn't happen. Gotta love how that turned out, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunamaniac Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Working as intended. This is the end game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolarDwagon Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) DE can't do anything about it without changing the way Dark Sectors work since it's not against the rules I'd say it would be impossible for one clan/alliance to topple these Goliaths so many of them would be needed. And IF they do overthrow the current kings the cycle would just restart soon after. You mean like put it back to the way it was before where it was actually possible to topple an alliance without grinding worse than an event, which means noone does anything for less than ridiculous battlepay? As it is, they've basically killed Dark Sectors as lively conflicts and playable zones. Edited August 31, 2014 by SolarDwagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-CM-Asmud Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 I don't mind the tax. It's just that when these big alliances fight one another, they don't even set battle pays and just let the timer finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azour Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Greedy politicians in my Warframe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)starlyes Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 So that's what PC is like huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubbi Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 This would be better preventable if a clans were limited to one node but nope. A chance to control all dark sectors sure is fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MechaTails Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) What if you guys stop playing on the rails? At that point DE would have to do something because then there would be a big chunk of the game not being used by anyone. Edited August 31, 2014 by DarkTails Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dualstar Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 What if you guys stop playing on the rails? At that point DE would have to do something because then there would be a big chunk of the game not being used by anyone. If that was the case then they would have done something to Conclave by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MechaTails Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 I dont think pvp is as colossal an undertaking as it was to implement the rails, could be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-CM-Asmud Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 What if you guys stop playing on the rails? At that point DE would have to do something because then there would be a big chunk of the game not being used by anyone. Players find it hard to refuse 100k credits per run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)skip2435 Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Well I'd say that's playing it smart not shady planning profit share over controlled sectors actually doesn't seem like a bad idea to stop attack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-XeqtR Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Welcome to capitalism. This sort of things happens all the friggin time IRL. Almost all countries have a form of anti-trust laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law) Two companies colluding together to eliminate competition in a market is an illegal activity in the real world. You easily apply this same principle to this situation if you were to compare alliances/clans to companies. They are avoiding competition by "fake" fighting their friends to fool the public (which also prevents any new clans/alliance from entering the competition), much like a company could collude with another to set their prices in a way that would be impossible for another company to enter that market. One is openly accepted by a game developer and one is punishable by law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letter13 Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 If this is happening, it wouldn't exactly be against the rules. Political shenanigans are (generally) allowed. Pretty much how I feel on the matter. If a bunch of alliances want to work together and do political shenanigans, let them. If they want to act scummy and make ludicrously high taxes, that's not DE's problem. It might be "exploiting" in some sense, but it isn't really the form of exploiting that warrants them to be punished or the system to be changed (such as if they were exploiting a bug, which is tantamount to cheating). Seems to work well enough in EVE Online. I'm of the mind that DE should follow CCP's example when it comes to alliance/clan/solar rail politics. If you guys are so upset by how some clans or alliances are conducting themselves, then do something about it. Band together to form an anti-corruption alliance and give the "shadow" alliance a run for its money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinDevil Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 It's basically one of the best parts of DS. The only time DE should jump in is with evident cheating. Otherwise, everything is left completely up to the player. Those controlling the DS are not the majority. Just a group of people that enjoy DS. It's all in your hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraank Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 the big alliances put up battle pay. that s why i have a lot of credits. and if they had an arrangement it wouldnt be the problem. I got paid. The problem is that the dark sector isn't attractive at all. There is a lack of competition because it isn't very well explained, unattractive,unbalanced and only credits as battlepay no resources, mods, gear, etc. Why do we have the option to tax resources if we dont need them at all? every alliance/clan have 0% resource tax(afaik there is one exception) In my opinion it is never the fault of alliances/clans. It is the system itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-XeqtR Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Pretty much how I feel on the matter. If a bunch of alliances want to work together and do political shenanigans, let them. If they want to act scummy and make ludicrously high taxes, that's not DE's problem. It might be "exploiting" in some sense, but it isn't really the form of exploiting that warrants them to be punished or the system to be changed (such as if they were exploiting a bug, which is tantamount to cheating). Seems to work well enough in EVE Online. I'm of the mind that DE should follow CCP's example when it comes to alliance/clan/solar rail politics. If you guys are so upset by how some clans or alliances are conducting themselves, then do something about it. Band together to form an anti-corruption alliance and give the "shadow" alliance a run for its money. Yeah but in the breeding grounds event, players were never cheating but yet just playing the game and the enemies eventually de-spawned. It was in the game, but yet they didn't "intend" them to despawn and it was declared an exploit. The players never did anything different than playing normal and were crucified as exploiters. In this case, if DE had really intended for this kind of activity to happen, then they would have allowed alliances to attack themselves to conduct that same activity. Simply having the most "alternate" clans shouldn't be the basis on being successful. Band together to form an anti-alliance? The problem isn't that they're so strong and big that they can always win rail conflicts, it's that they hide behind their blocks so no one can actually get a chance to fight them legitimately. By the time a clan gets a chance to fight them legitamately, they've already built up their vaults by having 12 no-competition rail conflicts. Do you understand how they gain an unfair advantage now? Is the skill of dark sector really who has the most alt accounts and clans to click on the rail to stop a real conflict? How can that be intended? It isn't; hence, an exploit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinDevil Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Yeah but in the breeding grounds event, players were never cheating but yet just playing the game and the enemies eventually de-spawned. It was in the game, but yet they didn't "intend" them to despawn and it was declared an exploit. The players never did anything different than playing normal and were crucified as exploiters. In this case, if DE had really intended for this kind of activity to happen, then they would have allowed alliances to attack themselves to conduct that same activity. Simply having the most "alternate" clans shouldn't be the basis on being successful. Band together to form an anti-alliance? The problem isn't that they're so strong and big that they can always win rail conflicts, it's that they hide behind their blocks so no one can actually get a chance to fight them legitimately. By the time a clan gets a chance to fight them legitamately, they've already built up their vaults by having 12 no-competition rail conflicts. Do you understand how they gain an unfair advantage now? Is the skill of dark sector really who has the most alt accounts and clans to click on the rail to stop a real conflict? How can that be intended? It isn't; hence, an exploit. It's not the same at all. It's pretty damn obvious that enemies were suppose to be there. It was just a few wise guys who thought they were smarter than they actually were. In otherwords, did you really think after passing a certain amount of points, that strong enemies would STOP spawning so it could just be easier to get points? No, that doesn't even make sense. And then when the exploiters got checked they all pretended to act stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokkania Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Yeah but in the breeding grounds event, players were never cheating but yet just playing the game and the enemies eventually de-spawned. It was in the game, but yet they didn't "intend" them to despawn and it was declared an exploit. The players never did anything different than playing normal and were crucified as exploiters. don't go there lol In this case, if DE had really intended for this kind of activity to happen, then they would have allowed alliances to attack themselves to conduct that same activity. Simply having the most "alternate" clans shouldn't be the basis on being successful. Band together to form an anti-alliance? The problem isn't that they're so strong and big that they can always win rail conflicts, it's that they hide behind their blocks so no one can actually get a chance to fight them legitimately. By the time a clan gets a chance to fight them legitamately, they've already built up their vaults by having 12 no-competition rail conflicts. Do you understand how they gain an unfair advantage now? Is the skill of dark sector really who has the most alt accounts and clans to click on the rail to stop a real conflict? How can that be intended? It isn't; hence, an exploit. If Dark Sektors really were that important for the game maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-XeqtR Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 It's not the same at all. It's pretty damn obvious that enemies were suppose to be there. It was just a few wise guys who thought they were smarter than they actually were. In otherwords, did you really think after passing a certain amount of points, that strong enemies would STOP spawning so it could just be easier to get points? No, that doesn't even make sense. And then when the exploiters got checked they all pretended to act stupid. Well I don't really want to derail this thread but I am using it as an example of past situations where DE deemed something an exploit. So in your argument, it's an exploit if the players know that it's not right? They didn't go out of their way to exploit, it naturally happened when you did so many missions. The only thing they're guilty of is continuing to play once the enemies de-spawned. Now in your same logic, did you really think that DE wanted there to be people that completely take out all competition of their PvP system (which is solely meant for competition). Do you think these players think that this is an intended practice, or fair? The difference here, is that they are purposely playing the game that way in order to gain an advantage, whereas in the event, the players didn't have to do anything different but yet play normally and it happened naturally. People don't naturally set up fake fights so they don't have to fight other alliances. They do it on purpose. It's abusing a flaw in the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letter13 Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 breeding grounds event No, the fact that enemies didn't spawn beyond that point was a bug in the game's mechanics. This is entirely different. There are no bugs in the game's mechanics being exploited. There's no one cheating. I am using it as an example of past situations where DE deemed something an exploit. Yes, IT was an exploit because of a bug in the game's code. This is not an exploit, it's simple politics. DE can't "intend" players to act a certain way through the game's mechanics when it comes to alliances treaties and agreements. Now in your same logic, did you really think that DE wanted there to be people that completely take out all competition of their PvP system (which is solely meant for competition). I honestly think that DE doesn't care (and they really shouldn't care) how alliances act with one another as long as they don't break the rules (i.e. harassment, EULA violations, etc). If they did care they would have created rules that said "No friends allowed between alliances; you are mortal enemies, act like it or you'll be punished". Do you think CCP really intended for corporations in EVE Online to work together to monopolize null-sec systems? Do you think they should punish the players if all of the players suddenly decided "Hey let's not fight anymore and work as a single entity because MASSIVE PROFITS"? Even in the real world there are "rival" companies that actually work together on joint projects or form partnerships; for example Subaru and Toyota. Two entirely different car companies, but they've partnered up to produce (and share) projects and their profits (Subaru BRZ/Toyota GT-86). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Talia. Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 I think DE should limit the number of Rails owned by each Alliance by 1 at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegetableBasket Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) Pretty much how I feel on the matter. If a bunch of alliances want to work together and do political shenanigans, let them. If they want to act scummy and make ludicrously high taxes, that's not DE's problem. It might be "exploiting" in some sense, but it isn't really the form of exploiting that warrants them to be punished or the system to be changed (such as if they were exploiting a bug, which is tantamount to cheating). Seems to work well enough in EVE Online. I'm of the mind that DE should follow CCP's example when it comes to alliance/clan/solar rail politics. If you guys are so upset by how some clans or alliances are conducting themselves, then do something about it. Band together to form an anti-corruption alliance and give the "shadow" alliance a run for its money. You cannot attack yourself as an alliance of 1000 people, but that same alliance of 1000 people can split into two alliances of 500 people and attack each other to block the node so other people can't compete over it. Do you honestly think that's intended? Why would DE implement the rule of not attacking yourself if they didn't care if players found a way to bypass it? Players having the ability to bypass a rule of the game IS a bug. They are literally exploiting a bug by rail blocking. Using this exploit they have earned the most money, and in the old system were able to leverage that to attain the most control. They leveraged that control to strong arm other players and alliances into either joining them or losing their nodes on the star chart. They can't be stopped by normal players at this point because: 1. No one really realizes it's even happening, just look through this thread. 2. Everyone who remotely cares about dark sectors are already in the shadow alliance 3. They have so many credits for being uncontested for so long, it's not even funny. 4. To beat them you'd have to utilize the same exploits they are, which isn't exactly appealing to players who are trying to oppose people exploiting the system. CCP has rolled back exploiters in the past, too. Edited August 31, 2014 by VegetableBasket 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