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

[JakLegendd]

The Dark Sector Conflicts main problem right now is worse than you say.

Its the opposite, in that they pay high, but don't follow through.

I have screenshots, but Idk how to post them.

 

Payment to participating Tenno can be withheld by emptying the war chest before completion of battle. I have been robbed of well earned pay several times from this.

 

This is a dishonorable practice. Warframe would be out of business if people paid for platinum and didn't receive it after.

 

The Alliances are winning nodes easily by fooling all involved on what they are paying.

If an Alliance pays high to defend, then the attacker raises them 100k, then takes it back, Easily allowing better sustainability for less, and gaining a reliable source of income quickly. 

 

Pay should be locked in at time of mission acceptance, so as to prevent battle pay from being dropped.

I noticed that you still receive half pay on mission failure.

I think this should be made into a payment in advance, and then the other half after. 

However, the Tenno must stay to the end to receive either. To prevent jumping and dropping out on purpose for quick pay. Such as receiving a payment contract in the inbox after the mission with whichever pay you earned might help.

 

On another note, payment can be pretty high at times. Half pay on a failure is rather unfair to the Alliance, who get get major losses from conflict lost as whole, and then more on a small scale battles. 

 

I think it should be 10-25% pay on a loss.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

Payment to participating Tenno can be withheld by emptying the war chest before completion of battle. I have been robbed of well earned pay several times from this.

 

This is a dishonorable practice. Warframe would be out of business if people paid for platinum and didn't receive it after.

 

Nobody robbed you^^. The problem is that you don't know/understand the Battle Pay system. The alliances can't fool you with the pay in that active way like you describe. They set an amount X for Y runs and til those aren't fully used, they can't change it. So you are too slow to get the BP that you saw when starting the mission.

To prevent that, always check the reserve value and divide through the mission pay properly - if it is less than 30 runs, there is a high chance that you will get nothing.

 

The pay depends on how many revives of the attackers are left (for defenders) or how much progress on the map is done (for attackers). So even if you face a really strong enemy, you get a reward for trying and NOT leaving the fight on the first sign of difficulties.

 

The alliances keep up the BP as fast as they can - this is a fact. Here an example of the last big fight:

 

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[elele]

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?.  

 

You have to ask yourself this question: 

 

if, say, two non-ICE/V/LoTE etc. clans/alliances have the same goal of overthrowing the evil alliances and keeping the DS permanently at low tax, why can't they band together and do that? For example, after Space Confederation takes over Pluto DS survival node today, another clan that is friendly with Space Confederation can deploy rail, declare war on Space, offer zero battlepay, etc. --basically defending that DS node for Space Con. using the same "cheap" tactics you just condemned ICE etc. of. 

 

There is nothing in the game preventing the white knights from using this tactic against the evil alliances. 

 

This is even more significant when you consider that a while back, a lot of alliances banded together, attacked and successfully got rid of Eclipse, the "big evil" back then. This happened before and could very well happen again. 

 

TL;DR DE wants the Dark Sectors to be a "political" meta-game like EVE and they designed the system this way. The system is working fine. They merely need to balance the OP abilities a little and the DS gamemode would be gold.  

[MoonlightAngel]

My point..Is They shouldnt have to set a "Match fixing" It s dirty. Crime. They could form alliances to fight But not in this way (fake fight to prevent the rail from Outsider)  

 

I will say it again. Fake fight as know as "Match fixing" in order to prevent the rails from outsider is unacceptable.

Battlepay Only happened when Outsider has steped in the rail (in otherword Real Fight)

 

If you guys dont really get this. SO Im done here. Maybe i should Open the thread for vote? to see if this was really a "politic" 

[MoonlightAngel]

You have to ask yourself this question: 

 

if, say, two non-ICE/V/LoTE etc. clans/alliances have the same goal of overthrowing the evil alliances and keeping the DS permanently at low tax, why can't they band together and do that? For example, after Space Confederation takes over Pluto DS survival node today, another clan that is friendly with Space Confederation can deploy rail, declare war on Space, offer zero battlepay, etc. --basically defending that DS node for Space Con. using the same "cheap" tactics you just condemned ICE etc. of. 

 

There is nothing in the game preventing the white knights from using this tactic against the evil alliances. 

 

This is even more significant when you consider that a while back, a lot of alliances banded together, attacked and successfully got rid of Eclipse, the "big evil" back then. This happened before and could very well happen again. 

 

TL;DR DE wants the Dark Sectors to be a "political" meta-game like EVE and they designed the system this way. The system is working fine. They merely need to balance the OP abilities a little and the DS gamemode would be gold.  

are you really get  my point? do you realize that These formal alliance Try to keep thier node at high tax and Not even paid for battle pay?  They keep attacked each other in order to keep thier rail in hands.  BatttlePay are willing to happen when real fight has came.. and i try to point at this cheap trick.   I dont care about tax as long as it snt fake fight.  Stop defending them with blind eyes .

 

 

And SC try to keep tax at 0% they gain nothing but charity . If you called this alliance EVIL.. So im done

 

 

 

BATTLEPAY ONLY HAPPENED WHEN OUTSIDER ALLIANCE HAS SIEGE THIER RAIL

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

It was discussed hundred times - in the end everybody agrees, that is a genuine part of this game that existed from the beginning on.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

And SC try to keep tax at 0% they gain nothing but charity . If you called this alliance EVIL.. So im done

 

BATTLEPAY ONLY HAPPENED WHEN OUTSIDER ALLIANCE HAS SIEGE THIER RAIL

 

I have two points for you - both facts:

 

1). 100% of all alliances with a 0% tax used 99% of their existence rail blocking to survive since the first implementation of DS.

 

2). Demanding and setting a 0% tax is a direct exploit of the Dark Sector system as a unbalanced credit farm spot. Doing this any longer will force DE to nerf the payouts of this missions, because it leads to the same problem like with the old T3 missions - to high credit income on too low player levels.

 

Shouting don't make your points any more genuine. You should bring up some better arguments besides your subjective feelings.

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[MoonlightAngel]

I have two points for you - both facts:

 

1). 100% of all alliances with a 0% tax used 99% of their existence rail blocking to survive since the first implementation of DS.

 

2). Demanding and setting a 0% tax is a direct exploit of the Dark Sector system as a unbalanced credit farm spot. Doing this any longer will force DE to nerf the payouts of this missions, because it leads to the same problem like with the old T3 missions - to high credit income on too low player levels.

 

Shouting don't make your points any more genuine. You should bring up some better arguments besides your subjective feelings.

 

and you still doesnt get my point. Im done here mr. Genius.. supjective feeling hu? what are you talking about?

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

-snip-

 

No presented point with genuine arguments in back up? Nothing to argue about.

 

I quote myself on the rest:

 

 

I see this like following: 

 

You have the end of armistice and the start of the clickwar - > There are dozens of attackers trying to place a rail shown as X.

 

|| XXXXXXXYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ||

And as you seen there are some Y among them. The X want to attack this node and place their own rail. The Y have a contract and want to protect their partners property (yes, as long as they maintain this node - it is their property; that's why there is their name and emblem on it).

 

All of them have exact same chances to place their rails. Everything is fair. Why do you feel like patronizing what the Y have to do with their rails, that they worked hard for? And why the X should have any benefits?

 

I think these are clearly the decisions of the attackers. You can analyze it as often as you wish - but keep in mind that everything is fair play so far.

 

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[Cpl_Facehugger]

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. 

 

If Dark Sectors are meant to be levelling nodes, they should give more of an XP bonus and not give bonus credits/resources at all. With 75% taxes, you're generally better off playing on a normal node. With the XP the way it is, you're generally better off playing on a normal grineer node because of all those heavies.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

-snip-

 

They give more than enough Xp (those are 10-30% more per enemy ... up to 1/3 faster leveling). On survivals e.g. you will have a high rate of eximus enemies after short time, which is way more valuable than the heavies (and ofc much easier than highlvl grineer with explosives).

 

The other elements can be taxed for a reason - they are designed to be taxed. No player is really expected to get 23k credits for 5 fast rounds - this would completely destroy all efforts that DE made after fixing the void amounts.

I can imagine that they planed with average 50% rates (ofc only my expectation concerning their consistent effort/payout ratio).

Edited September 15, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[elele]

They keep attacked each other in order to keep thier rail in hands.  BatttlePay are willing to happen when real fight has came.. and i try to point at this cheap trick.  

 

Not sure which political philosophical school you come from but this is a perfectly legal, ethical and moral practice in everyday politics. I suggest you read about this:

 

"There are usually only two major parties that have the most power in U.S. politics, even though those parties have changed over time. Third party candidates, however, are still able to influence elections. A third party can gain votes from people who would have otherwise voted for one of the major parties, and enough of these votes can cause that major party to lose. One of the most famous times this occurred was in the 1912 presidential election, when Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party gained voters who would have supported the Republican William Taft. The Republican vote was split between Roosevelt and Taft, so the Democrat Woodrow Wilson won the election. )"

 

Now do you think Roosevelt was interested in a "real fight" meaning that he was intending to win the election? 

 

Think of Roosevelt as LoTE, Democrat Wilson as ICE, and Republican Taft as, say, Space Confederation. 

Edited September 15, 2014 by elele

[MoonlightAngel]

No presented point with genuine arguments in back up? Nothing to argue about.

AL

 

I have two points for you - both facts:

 

1). 100% of all alliances with a 0% tax used 99% of their existence rail blocking to survive since the first implementation of DS.

 

2). Demanding and setting a 0% tax is a direct exploit of the Dark Sector system as a unbalanced credit farm spot. Doing this any longer will force DE to nerf the payouts of this missions, because it leads to the same problem like with the old T3 missions - to high credit income on too low player levels.

 

Shouting don't make your points any more genuine. You should bring up some better arguments besides your subjective feelings.

 

Alright. This s my last here. 

1. That s Politic as know as Market Mechanism (Not sure about this one. i was translate it from my language). It was community who choose to support them. Battlebaits too. 

2.  What s most reason for player to play darksector is Credits and XP.  and this is what it made darksector shine in my oppinion. Most popular = most demanding. Rail would be set on fire.  How do you know that they gonna nerf this?   compare this node to T3 was your huge mistaken.  T3 is just the same as other node. But darksector is different story.  Reward/poppular was the point for most people who wanna fight for it.

 

2 fact for you

 

- DarkSector should be the place with varian alliance where the people fight each other with power and politic But These alliance exploit the flaw of dark sector system by "Match Fixing" and own it like eternality land lord. It s cheap win. Not including 75% Tax without Battlepay.

- Darksector should be the place where Market mechanism were born. Match Fixing completely destroy it.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

-snip-

 

Sorry but you still keep on with subjective opinions(?). I brought up the T3 for a reason - it was the adjustment that DE had to make to nerf it from 75k to 20k. It is clear to everybody that they don't want to create the same problem again on an other mission type.

 

Both of your points are already answered in my qouted text in the last answer that was addressed to you.

[MoonlightAngel]

Let DE judge this. dude.. I bet if Community couldnt do anything. DE would be the one who end this in some way. Match Fixing will not last longer:   Bye Bye :P

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[elele]

- Darksector should be the place where Market mechanism were born. Match Fixing completely destroy it.

 

I'd love to have you in my Antitrust Law class. We'd have some fierce argument. 

 

IMO, match fixing is part of the market mechanism, at least in this case. Both parties in the fixed match have NO incentive to stick to their peace treaty forever. -- Think about it: what can an alliance do with all that tax money they collected from holding DS nodes? The only use is to deploy more rails and attack other alliances with high battlepay. Both have incentive to backstab each other when they can. 

 

In short, unlike real-world cartels, Warframe's match-fixing armistice is unstable because Prisoner's Dilemma. 

[MoonlightAngel]

I'd love to have you in my Antitrust Law class. We'd have some fierce argument. 

 

IMO, match fixing is part of the market mechanism, at least in this case. Both parties in the fixed match have NO incentive to stick to their peace treaty forever. -- Think about it: what can an alliance do with all that tax money they collected from holding DS nodes? The only use is to deploy more rails and attack other alliances with high battlepay. Both have incentive to backstab each other when they can. 

 

In short, unlike real-world cartels, Warframe's match-fixing armistice is unstable because Prisoner's Dilemma. 

oh... Im so glade to be on your Antitrust law class. Welcome to my Deaf Class. I will treat you gentlely.

 

Match Fixing or Monopoly does exist in Market mechanism but it s crime in (most)my country. because it s ruined entry of the marketing..Stop this argument. And Let DE decide if they really going to let this cheap trick continuise

 

http://r0.unctad.org/en/subsites/cpolicy/Laws/thailand.htm

Edited September 15, 2014 by MoonlightAngel

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

-snipp-

 

No tricks included - everything is official. DE knows everything from the beginning of DS and is really happy about the intrigues.

[elele]

oh... Im so glade to be on your Antitrust law class. Welcome to my Deaf Class. I will treat you gentlely.

 

Match Fixing or Monopoly does exist in Market mechanism but it s crime in (most)my country. because it s ruined entry of the marketing..Stop this argument. And Let DE decide if they really going to let this cheap trick continuise

 

http://r0.unctad.org/en/subsites/cpolicy/Laws/thailand.htm

 

Dude you need to learn some theories behind antitrust law and then you can properly tell what is bad monopoly and what is not. Sometimes two companies reach armistice but that doesn't necessarily mean they're doing bad stuff per se. 

 

Anyway, enough of this legal stuff. The central point is: "match fixing" appears to be bad but it actually benefits the community in the long run. LoTE does small favors to ICE by "match fixing" with the only purpose to strike ICE in the future. I'm not part of LoTE so I'm not saying this as their spokesman. I say this only as a bystander and a speculator. --However, both this game's mechanism and the game theory dictate that this is only possible outcome. 

 

You can pooh pooh my theory but when the big battle comes as I predict, I'll just go collect some astronomical battlepay and be a happy merc, as I have been. --I've made enough credits from the DS conflicts to max my Vitality, Serration, Steel Fiber and reach 8/10 Heavy Cal. etc. 

 

TL;DR you just need to play this DS Conflict game right to get a lot of benefit from it. 

Edited September 15, 2014 by elele

[RiouHotaru]

I have two points for you - both facts:

 

1). 100% of all alliances with a 0% tax used 99% of their existence rail blocking to survive since the first implementation of DS.

 

2). Demanding and setting a 0% tax is a direct exploit of the Dark Sector system as a unbalanced credit farm spot. Doing this any longer will force DE to nerf the payouts of this missions, because it leads to the same problem like with the old T3 missions - to high credit income on too low player levels.

 

Shouting don't make your points any more genuine. You should bring up some better arguments besides your subjective feelings.

 

So wait, you're saying that setting a 0% Tax on any DS is an exploit, but setting taxes stupidly high or purposefully altering taxes to push players to farm a certain node instead isn't an exploit?

 

And how is the credits an exploit?  What do Credits buy or otherwise provide that gives an unfair advantage?

 

You've not explainted this whatsoever.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

So wait, you're saying that setting a 0% Tax on any DS is an exploit, but setting taxes stupidly high or purposefully altering taxes to push players to farm a certain node instead isn't an exploit?

 

Ofc not - how the alliance handle their strategy for taxes and rates is their own business. They get the right to set them as high as they need to provide a substantial defense and maintenance.

Strict denying of taxes (by themselves or by demand of the community) in terms of exploiting the maximum mission rewards that are possible on a node, is the absence of any strategy and is driven by greed alone.

 

The whole system is designed to have active defense and vault planing - by using it for credit purposes for beginners you destroy the whole point and its right of existence.

 

Farming credits was a problem before - to address this, DE implemented the Void missions. Those are meant to be the non-plus-ultra for credit farming and give the highest values for the least effort in the shortest time. Then DE implemented the DS as an endgame content for political games of vet players. Through the excessive exploit of this new system, it was turned into a serious problem of balancing the credit flow in lower player levels - like the T3 missions some time before, that I mentioned several times.

 

DS is clearly designed to use high enough taxes to keep the reward balance in place with the rest of the planets-missions. The main benefit is given by the greater XP buff. By using this benefit the average player should be aware of contributing to the vault of the possessor of the node that he is using.

 

The rest is already explained more than enough in this thread:

 

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.

Edited September 16, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[RiouHotaru]

You've yet to explain how this "overflow" of credits is an issue.

 

At all.

 

What does the average or "beginning" as you put it, player, gain from having a ton of credits?  You can't buy resources, or boosters, with credits.  You can't buy plat with credits.  You can only buy very particular weapons wholesale, such as the Lato, Lex, or the MK-1 Weapons, which again, really doesn't offer them an explicit advantage.

 

So once again, the question stands: What does a massive flow of credits do to imbalance anything?

[Jufrow]

You must've missed yesterday...

 

100K-300K payouts all morning (might have been 350k at one point).

 

Very good showing by Space Confederation...

 

Even though I'm 100% certain ICE offered far, far greater payouts, the overall support seemed to shift to Space Confederation (who are well known for keeping Pluto 0% tax) when the payouts had dried up, I'm not sure if they just had more players participating or what. I was a total turncoat and played both sides milking all the credits I could, but had a blast, especially as attackers.

 

BTW, Space Confed, I think most people are fine with credit tax outside Pluto (I personally only farm credits or xp on Pluto and occasionally Jupiter), but LotE, ICE, V have gone to far, regardless of how nice their payouts are (outrageous credit taxation and resource tax on almost every planet), and now you reap what you sow. I really hope yesterday was a sign of things to come. Either way the PvP was better than any other day I've done DS wars.

 

Either way, if any of SC are reading this, it was good to see you back in action. DS has sucked lately.

[-VS-AtLasVegas]

-snip-

 

Even if it is simply easier to fuse mods - it is enough to break the whole game mechanic. You can't imagine how much impact it have overall^^. Be more intent about that what I mention - DE has already more than enough experience in what happen, when an overflow appears.

 

If the average player is not intended to get this sums in this short time, there is no point in even discussing this any further.

 

For your better comprehension of the word exploit:

"In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers. Exploits have been classified as a form of cheating[...]"

 

0% Rails are without any doubts a direct exploit of Warframes credit economy. 

Edited September 16, 2014 by -ExT-AtLasVegas

[MoonlightAngel]

self-center hu?.. ha dont made me laugh. I head enough today