Dark Sector Pvp Is Rendered Pointless By Lack Of Reward Or Payment From Clans

[Neocyberman]

Dear DE,

 

I hear, from you, that you have great community presence and given the nature of some features incomplete state you try to stay on top of feedback. So I need to ask a question. Why play Dark Sector PvP?

 

Ignoring the severely unpolished nature of the gameplay of Dark Sector and how frustrating PvP can be without any balance changes DSPVP has a severe problem. One that, and I must say aside from the lack of unique UI elements, map design and mod balance, makes DSPVP not worth playing

 

I must say before I post these examples I am not complaining about the high rate of taxes. But there are underlying system elements that make such a thing possible and profitable. The first issue is payment or rather the lack thereof. The second is as well as what information is withheld from the player who has to pick a side to fight on.

 

Rewards

 

So Warframe is a game that has loads of grind. You grind to level up, you grind to get weapon blueprints, you grind for your mods so that you can fight enemies in levels where you grind to complete the map. People choose the most efficient path there is often ignoring missions where output of mods, credits and exp are less than others. In a game where these things have been constants for some time Dark Sector PvP is a part of the game that is necessary in order to keep areas of the map open and keep the grind going for themselves and others. Unfortunately because clans both invading 

 

But why? Surely if the aim is to attract players to act as mercenaries and aid your side, then offering people cash to play for them is a win as long as you attract enough people. But that isn't what happens. What happens is no one pays and no one is reimbursed for their time playing this mode, despite it being incomplete.

 

Now you might say, this is a tactic that saves cash but surely one clan can just give out cash and clearly end the other clan's attempt to claim the node through greater population. But this is not what happens. What happens is that if neither clan pays a single credit both sides win. 

 

This happens every

 

single

 

time.

 

And there is no reason for clans that are in the business of earning rails to pay those who work to keep them up. 

 

Tax History

 

The second issue plaguing DSPVP aside from issues with gameplay is the lack of information concerning factors that influence the players decision to support a side. As it is there is no information about previous taxation 

 

The result of both these factors is that clans have no obligation to offer people rewards as it cuts into their resources. They also have no obligation to inform players of their tax policy or history controlling the node. Without a record of these things fully or even partially available to the player ingame this happens:

 

 

Suggestions

 

I suggest a base reward clan's must comply to. Otherwise mods given out at the end of a mission based on performance independent of drain to the participating clan's resources.

 

Warframe is a game about grind. For many players the availability of Dark Sectors as a farm spot is absolutely vital to the ability to progress through the game. DSPVP adds a level of user interaction with the state of the game in the form of clan sponsored combat that results in a change of control over the node with the added possibility of changes to tax and reward policy. As it is very simple features that would support this are missing. With no minimum required payment clans can simply keep their riches and constantly wage conflict after conflict and there is no point to choosing a clan to support. With no record of taxes new players have no information to base their decision of a side on and clans with high taxes can impose high taxes. This is both frustrating and above all an issue that deprive the community of resources to continue play.

 

Please consider taking a second pass on this mode or at the very least add non-clan resource based rewards and a tax history.

[RoboticApplesWithLasers]

reward should be subtracted from prize pool at the start of a mission, if the player fails to complete the mission the credits are returned, and if the player successfully finishes (win or lose) they get the reward.  

[R34LM]

Generally, the game took a nasty turn when the option to fight against our own faction came to play.

 

Conclaves were close, but it was too small of a scale to gripe about.

 

With DS, you have competing control over one node, politics, monopolies and very upset players.

[DarkRedeemer]

finally screenshot of this. the clans defending are the ones who own and charge a 50% tax or higher but yet they dont  return it to us during the DSPVP conflict. this is very unfair to us and should be looked at. the clan owning each dark sector should have a max amount they can charge for tax that is say maybe 50% at most. this way they cant become filthy rich and not pay back what they take from players running the rails. also the resource tax should be removed or locked at 5%. im sorry but if some of these problems are not fixed the new plyers will never beable to acquire the materials or credits needed for crafting there items in the foundry.

Edited September 14, 2014 by DarkRedeemer

[R34LM]

finally screenshot of this. the clans defending are the ones who own and charge a 50% tax or higher but yet they dont  return it to us during the DSPVP conflict. this is very unfair to us and should be looked at. the clan owning each dark sector should have a max amount they can charge for tax that is say maybe 50% at most. this way they cant become filthy rich and not pay back what they take from players running the rails. also the resource tax should be removed or locked at 5%. im sorry but if some of these problems are not fixed the new plyers will never beable to acquire the materials or credits needed for crafting there items in the foundry.

They get a stockpile of credits....but what are they really doing with it? Sure, it helps with fusion, foundry items and the like, but not much else. If it isn't going back to the fighters, what are they doing with it then?

[TennoSimons]

My biggest problem with Dark Sectors is actually not when there is no battle pay posted, but rather there is some luxurious amount of battle pay. Sometimes it even looks like there is enough in the coffers for a good 30 battles or something, and yet when you finish 20 minutes later, you DON'T GET THE BATTLE PAY because the coffers drained out while you were in PVP. Infuriatingly, sometimes minutes later, there is some lavish promised reward again. 

 

This should likely be in the community hot topics feedback for this week to make sure these kinds of suggestions reach the ears of Dev. 

[outlawstar1982]

There is tons of information about previous taxation, conflict history, and amount of credits spent.  It's your best friend called deathsnacks:

 

http://deathsnacks.com/wf/index.html'>http://deathsnacks.com/wf/index.html

 

 

Also, as for payouts, it happens more than you think. Its a matter of being in the right place at the right time. 

I will refer you to the following conflict. .  600 million.  That's a lot of rich tenno.

 

http://deathsnacks.com/wf/bl_history.html#5348d13606c56ff360394139_1409639126'>http://deathsnacks.com/wf/bl_history.html#5348d13606c56ff360394139_1409639126

 

or this one: 

 

http://deathsnacks.com/wf/bl_history.html#5348d22406c56fa93d7b242a_1405124260'>http://deathsnacks.com/wf/bl_history.html#5348d22406c56fa93d7b242a_1405124260

 

one side 243 million, other side 308 million.  Just have to be around for the good fights.  This can't happen every day. it would be unsustainable. 

Edited September 14, 2014 by outlawstar1982

[outlawstar1982]

They get a stockpile of credits....but what are they really doing with it? Sure, it helps with fusion, foundry items and the like, but not much else. If it isn't going back to the fighters, what are they doing with it then?

 

 

   I certainly hope you realize that credits acquired from taxing a Dark Sector node can not be given to individual players within a clan or alliance.  That isn't how it works. 

[R34LM]

   I certainly hope you realize that credits acquired from taxing a Dark Sector node can not be given to individual players within a clan or alliance.  That isn't how it works. 

Yea, just remembered that. But that only furthers my concern. What arey the doing with all those credits, if not giving it back through battle pay?

Edited September 14, 2014 by R34LM

[Cleesus]

Good thread, I was writing something about this earlier that I hope to post sometime this week.

 

Clan/Alliance members can receive their clans battlepay now so I guess that is a way for them to kind of reward their members, tho not the best. I included this in the pvp megathread.

[REDHOOOD]

My reward is the thrill of a good fight and punishing the greedy players!

[Rakshal]

My reward is the thrill of a good fight and punishing the greedy players!

While that is nice I would like battle pay, especially since I am a merc (ninjas are basically mercs).

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

With no record of taxes new players have no information to base their decision of a side on and clans with high taxes can impose high taxes. This is both frustrating and above all an issue that deprive the community of resources to continue play.

 

 

Your whole statement has a critical mistake: DS is created for veterans and endgame ppl. New players aren't considered in any of the decisions there. 

 

Your second main misunderstanding: DS is not created for farming credits or resources in the first place. For the mass of the playerbase those are XP gathering nodes. Political games need time - everybody who play this game long enough, knows all of the main alliances and chose his or her favorite.

 

So in a nutshell:

- Average players are the fuel of this system by absolving the missions and feeding the vaults. They get XP as reward for their easier leveling.

- The vets are involved in the political games and play the wars, when there is a serious fight.

- The vets get the rewards that are worth their participation (150k++). The average player is not meant to get this high pay out course it would lead to high credit clusters on the wrong player level.

 

> The only argument for moaning is the effective synergy of the defenders right now. However there are tons of ideas and discussions with solutions for the attackers. 

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[Neocyberman]

Before I get into it, I'm trying to understand. Are you saying that the PvP section of DS is meant only for those who are veterans and have greater knowledge of 

 

Are you also saying then that only certain conflicts are meant to have payout whether or not this has an effect on the clan's stash?

[elele]

Before I get into it, I'm trying to understand. Are you saying that the PvP section of DS is meant only for those who are veterans and have greater knowledge of 

 

?

Pretty much yes. You can't expect a new player to compete with someone with maxed serration, vitality, fleeting expertise and other OP endgame gear in DS conflicts. New players don't play a significant part in DS wars. From a veteran's point of view, DS conflicts pay fine. It's my main source of income. The only problem I have is the known bug that mods dropped by specters are not saved, making it difficult to farm RAGE and MAster Thief.

[MoonlightAngel]

 Infinite battle (fight for each other) loop without any single pay?  are you serious? That impossible for uncorrupted  alliance to fight the ton of these Dxxs

 

 

Is this what are you so called politic (without rival)? I seen no point for a political anymore when you dont even have enemy to fight.

 

This is just a Cheap win.   What s point of dark sector here when Alliances didnt fight against each other?

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

 Infinite battle (fight for each other) loop without any single pay?  are you serious? That impossible for uncorrupted  alliance to fight the ton of these Dxxs

 

 

Is this what are you so called politic (without rival)? I seen no point for a political anymore when you dont even have enemy to fight.

 

Yes it is the beginning state of politics. There is absolutely no limitations for the attackers. Everything is kept in a fair play manner.

 

The alliances are free to create synergies -  for defence or attack (attacking synergies came first btw - and nobody cried about it ;).

 

There are thousands of rival clans and alliances and only one laughable small group that has success over them - a point that you should think about. There is nothing "cheap" included in this tactic - it needs good coordination and much effort, something that the attackers still haven't learned, if they think that there is no way out of this situation.

 

 

Before I get into it, I'm trying to understand. Are you saying that the PvP section of DS is meant only for those who are veterans and have greater knowledge of 

 

Are you also saying then that only certain conflicts are meant to have payout whether or not this has an effect on the clan's stash?

 

1. Yes - Vets only.That's why it is called endgame. If you play as a newbe in those fights, it is your decision - however there is no space for complains afterwards.

2. Not sure if I answer your question properly: The nodes should have high enough taxes for serious BPs while the conflicts. Veterans are not interested in 20-30k rewards - they search 100k-300k wars. If we keep in mind, that this is who we want to attract, some conflicts may have zero-pay wars to gather enough credits for those expensive ones (600millions on a good war is not a rare value). 

[osheroth]

Your whole statement has a critical mistake: DS is created for veterans and endgame ppl. New players aren't considered in any of the decisions there. 

 

Your second main misunderstanding: DS is not created for farming credits or resources in the fist place. For the mass of the playerbase those are XP gathering nodes. Political games need time - everybody who play this game long enough, knows all of the main alliances and chose his or her favorite.

 

So in a nutshell:

- Average players are the fuel of this system by absolving the missions and feeding the vaults. They get XP as reward for their easier leveling.

- The vets are involved in the political games and play the wars, when there is a serious fight.

- The vets get the rewards that are worth their participation (150k++). The average player is not meant to get this high pay out course it would lead to high credit clusters on the wrong player level.

 

> The only argument for moaning is the effective synergy of the defenders right now. However there are tons of ideas and discussions with solutions for the attackers. 

You forgot to mention the fact that exploiting some abilities (ash's shuriken, rhino stomp, valkyr hysteria, every single nyx skill ever) renders "the endgame gear" useless. PvP is extremely unbalanced in Warframe.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

You forgot to mention the fact that exploiting some abilities (ash's shuriken, rhino stomp, valkyr hysteria, every single nyx skill ever) renders "the endgame gear" useless. PvP is extremely unbalanced in Warframe.

 

I agree to 100% on this one. This annoys me, too. There is much work to do, however DE had not really the perfect requirements for a PvP system, having a completely PvE orientated grind-game.

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[elele]

Just want to point out that Space Confederation just had a big battle against ICE on Pluto. Both offered 200k+ battlepay. If you managed to grab some of that fat money, it's probably worth a whole week of Sechura grinding. 

 

So yes DS Conflict battlepay is fine as is. 

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

There was a fight on Ur where Synergy had to defend really hard^^ - this was the greatest and fastest credit source I have ever experienced. I made myself 11 millions in this one single conflict.

[MoonlightAngel]

Yes it is the beginning state of politics. There is absolutely no limitations for the attackers. Everything is kept in a fair play manner.

 

The alliances are free to create synergies -  for defence or attack (attacking synergies came first btw - and nobody cried about it ;).

 

There are thousands of rival clans and alliances and only one laughable small group that has success over them - a point that you should think about. There is nothing "cheap" included in this tactic - it needs good coordination and much effort, something that the attackers still haven't learned, if they think that there is no way out of this situation.

 

I will never called this trick as a Politic. It s the same like spawn killer and completely unacceptable. And It s not that much need for "Good coordination". 1. Clan (alliance) lord contract each other  2. set the rail then told your alliance members what s your next target. if this is what are you so called "Good coorination" then I mean it.

 

To the point why i hate this "Politic" (Cheap win) Because they joined force and defend each other with a Cheap trick. Look at it by yourself http://deathsnacks.com/wf/   It s rarely to see a Battlepay right now (May get some when Outsider has steped in). Loser was decide from the very begining otherwise it s prevent each other from getting attacked.

It will become infinite loop. X lose the rail to Y (outsider) both side suffered from battle of paybait then Z attacked Y to bring the rail back to X. 

 

I have no problem about Taxation. They cloud rise it to 75% or 999999%  or Whatever as long as they still fight against eachother but "Match fixing" is unacceptable. Feel free to complain about my grammar. Im not good at it.  

 

I will never call this ungraceful trick a Politic. Never!

 

 

 

To REDHOOD. I dont think they will last long from this tactics.  Next day they would get attacked by one of those formal alliance. And the loop will be repeat. 

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

 

To the point why i hate this "Politic" (Cheap win) Because they joined force and defend each other with a Cheap trick. Look at it by yourself http://deathsnacks.com/wf/   It s rarely to see a Battlepay right now (May get some when Outsider has steped in). Loser was decide from the very begining otherwise it s prevent each other from getting attacked.

It will become infinite loop. X lose the rail to Y (outsider) both side suffered from battle of paybait then Z attacked Y to bring the rail back to X. 

 

Oh well do it yourself with your own number of strong alliances, if it is so easy for you ;))) I love naive ppl.

 

Fact is - everything is absolutely fair. If the attackers can't win any click-war they don't deserve a chance for proceeding.

 

Synergies of attackers are the same - they band together to attack one target. Synergies of defender band together to defend each other - basics of any political actions.

 

About the SC - you are right ofc. They will last one day. ICE had no point in wasting more than 500 millions on a fight (ages away from a "run dry" though). 

[MoonlightAngel]

Oh well do it yourself with your own number of strong alliances, if it is so easy for you ;))) I love naive ppl.

 

Fact is - everything is absolutely fair. If the attackers can't win any click-war they don't deserve a chance for proceeding.

 

Synergies of attackers are the same - they band together to attack one target. Synergies of defender band together to defend each other - basics of any political actions.

 

About the SC - you are right ofc. They will last one day. ICE had no point in wasting more than 500 millions on a fight (ages away from a "run dry" though). 

Absolutely fair. seriously? I also love Naive ppl too. Yes it s hard to form an alliances. But what are we talking about is Current alliance that try to defend each other.aren't we?  It s not hard to made a friend if you have the same goal you know?.  If it s real life. This trick is a crime. Even in sport game.  If we found out that football match was fixed. both of them will get punishment.   Maybe you should asked yourself. I know it s not the real life. BUT the rule shouldnt be that much different.

 

 

you oppinion made me suspected you for One of these formal alliance. pradron me if i was Wrong.

 

 

This is not about 2 vs 1. This is Entry rail (rich) vs Outsider (1 or 2 alliance + Poor). Nothing to talk about Greedy Cause and  0 battlepay.  Open your eyes dude. 

If this is fair.. SURE it is. Maybe I (perhaps) have to check My brain.

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

-snip-

 

So give ICE the Hieracon back immediately(?) - SC attacked with the help of several other alliances. It is a crime. Even in every sport game.

 

People think that only those elements are "fair" that fit into their own needs. This is not how politics work - not even a specified democracy. You are only comfortable if the alliances do what you want them to do and work for...who? you (point at a random guy on the forums)? 

Alliances are parties - parties define themselves with having a concrete point of view that they represent. If the mass of players don't like a party, then they will join an other one, that fits their needs. Parties rise and fall - course the times and requirements change. For now the synergy of alliances is the best way to go for veterans. And this is all what matters.

 

Changes will come and show other solutions.

Edited September 15, 2014 by (PS4)IIIDevoidIII
Removed flammability