Was Taking Out The Dark Sector A Good Idea, When The 2.0(3.0) Version Is No Where To Be Seen?

[VarCarion]

Really now. If the best argument all of you can throw together is some chopped-up bits of idealized capitalism - I suppose there really is nothing to worry about, and the popcorn will just keep flowing until this thread dies or is locked.

 

Even the Wikipedia article on free market economy points out the huge, gaping holes. Was this really a scenario of perfect competition? Low barriers to entry, no economic privilege, no monopolies, no artificial scarcities? None of those issues whatsoever?

 

I love it when people try to justify an imperfect capitalist economy... using principles that only apply to perfect hypothetical scenarios, then accuse others of being idealistic.

You are off point. What is being said in this thread is not to debate whether or not the system DE put in place was perfect, but that it was a focal point for seasoned players. It was an objective that these people could play with, even if it was not a perfect system. This thread is about how taking away that objective effects the community. If you wanna rag on capitalism go to /pol.

[-BG-FishGuruStrikerSaint]

Really now. If the best argument all of you can throw together is some chopped-up bits of idealized capitalism - I suppose there really is nothing to worry about, and the popcorn will just keep flowing until this thread dies or is locked.

 

Even the Wikipedia article on free market economy points out the huge, gaping holes. Was this really a scenario of perfect competition? Low barriers to entry, no economic privilege, no monopolies, no artificial scarcities? None of those issues whatsoever?

 

I love it when people try to justify an imperfect capitalist economy... using principles that only apply to perfect hypothetical scenarios, then accuse others of being idealistic.

One thing I find flawed with this is that you use Wikipedia... and as well as I'm not trying to justify what these guys are doing right now we aren't in a perfect or nearly perfect economy. Yes we are all idealistic I'm saying that your ideas on power is wrong in some parts is all.

[-BG-FishGuruStrikerSaint]

BUT TO THE OP yes I would agree that stopping the Sectors to revamp it was a bad idea. I would prefer that they let it continue and once they have a new one just roll that one in place instead of taking it all offline. Lets be honest all 3 platforms suffered some kind of loss in the community due to the Dark Sectors being off. Lets forget about taxes, tyrants and all that but the fact that Dark Sectors created a community now being lost due to it being offline for this "rework"

[--FS--Sofros]

Really now. If the best argument all of you can throw together is some chopped-up bits of idealized capitalism - I suppose there really is nothing to worry about, and the popcorn will just keep flowing until this thread dies or is locked.

 

Even the Wikipedia article on free market economy points out the huge, gaping holes. Was this really a scenario of perfect competition? Low barriers to entry, no economic privilege, no monopolies, no artificial scarcities? None of those issues whatsoever?

 

I love it when people try to justify an imperfect capitalist economy... using principles that only apply to perfect hypothetical scenarios, then accuse others of being idealistic.

That's your opinion ok I respect it... But the fact is DE take away an end game contenant (the only one?) and left nothing behind...

Now I've got a question... What actually bind together thousans of players from 3 mounth ago? 

The answer is nothing... But solar rail was doing it, even if they was not perfect...

Edited June 3, 2015 by Sofros

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

more like you don't need to know why we do what we do. Feel free to generate rumours and opinions.

Isn't this entire thread about "why we do what we do" ? (Loosely, anyway)

[-BG-FishGuruStrikerSaint]

Isn't this entire thread about "why we do what we do" ? (Loosely, anyway)

Well kinda, but the situation at hand is that Dark Sectors regardless of how people though about it, actually created another part of a community that was really close together. And due to this rework we lost some people and we're just seeing the ideas on how we can make this a better situation then it already is.

[FelisImpurrator]

You are off point. What is being said in this thread is not to debate whether or not the system DE put in place was perfect, but that it was a focal point for seasoned players. It was an objective that these people could play with, even if it was not a perfect system. This thread is about how taking away that objective effects the community. If you wanna rag on capitalism go to /pol.

You do realize I'm not the one who first brought up "lol it's fine because capitalism"? I'm pointing out the starship-sized holes in that argument. That's all I'm doing and it's all I have to do in a response.

 

One thing I find flawed with this is that you use Wikipedia... and as well as I'm not trying to justify what these guys are doing right now we aren't in a perfect or nearly perfect economy. Yes we are all idealistic I'm saying that your ideas on power is wrong in some parts is all.

One thing I find flawed with this is that you use no source whatsoever, but complain about my using the quickest source (which does have its own citations; this was a rather well-maintained article) instead of Hardcore Nolife digging up an economics textbook for direct quotations in academic citation format. Must I do that? I'm countering an unproven assertion.

 

And my views on power? They're adjusted to compensate for the imperfections of a system, taking into account both theory and execution. Are yours?

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

Well kinda, but the situation at hand is that Dark Sectors regardless of how people though about it, actually created another part of a community that was really close together. And due to this rework we lost some people and we're just seeing the ideas on how we can make this a better situation then it already is.

Quite right. I wasn't around a DS community for very long before the armistice but I can still say there was a significant drop in players when the armistice began. It's impressive actually how many we've been able to hold onto.

[-BG-FishGuruStrikerSaint]

You do realize I'm not the one who first brought up "lol it's fine because capitalism"? I'm pointing out the starship-sized holes in that argument. That's all I'm doing and it's all I have to do in a response.

 

One thing I find flawed with this is that you use no source whatsoever, but complain about my using the quickest source (which does have its own citations; this was a rather well-maintained article) instead of Hardcore Nolife digging up an economics textbook for direct quotations in academic citation format. Must I do that? I'm countering an unproven assertion.

 

And my views on power? They're adjusted to compensate for the imperfections of a system, taking into account both theory and execution. Are yours?

Actually I would love a proper citation and it would be perfect if you did nolife dig up a economics textbook! See we all can have a debate in a scholarly manner. Though I don't remember talking about any economies except for your ideas on power which can be defined multiple ways. Why yes it is. We can talk about imperfections in a system and how in theory something could work but in execution it failed, but honestly we derailed the conversation. I would prefer if we talked about how Dark Sectors regardless of taxes and all that built another side of a community. Now you can say we're poisonous or greedy, but that's a broad generalization which in psychology we call it hasty generalization, but besides the point I agree with the OP in some retrospect. It's not about government or different styles of ideologies of sovereignty, I do agree that some points on this thread were without sources, but in a game like Warframe where we have to use political theories to convey how PvP works and how alliances are. Well then this just turned into a college lecture nonetheless.  

[FelisImpurrator]

Actually I would love a proper citation and it would be perfect if you did nolife dig up a economics textbook! See we all can have a debate in a scholarly manner. Though I don't remember talking about any economies except for your ideas on power which can be defined multiple ways. Why yes it is. We can talk about imperfections in a system and how in theory something could work but in execution it failed, but honestly we derailed the conversation. I would prefer if we talked about how Dark Sectors regardless of taxes and all that built another side of a community. Now you can say we're poisonous or greedy, but that's a broad generalization which in psychology we call it hasty generalization, but besides the point I agree with the OP in some retrospect. It's not about government or different styles of ideologies of sovereignty, I do agree that some points on this thread were without sources, but in a game like Warframe where we have to use political theories to convey how PvP works and how alliances are. Well then this just turned into a college lecture nonetheless.  

I would really rather not. I'm not an economist. It isn't my job to do that when the onus of actually proving a point isn't supposed to be shoved at me to begin with. And admittedly - it was the other poster who mentioned economics. Probably should have partitioned that response more neatly, so that bit is my oversight.

 

Really, though, strictly speaking? I have nothing against the idea of it. It was actually fun, when it worked. And as I've already acknowledged, there were times when it was done right, and more or less fairly. My problem - the start and end of it - is in the execution, the room for exploits that has been seized with reckless abandon and constantly gloated about when people do manage to cheat their way to the top. It lies in the point where fun is sucked away by the endless greed of a few who taint the whole. I desire only for the proud to have their fall - if there really was something good there, underneath all the dreck, that is unfortunate. But what has not been shown is simply this: Whether the loss was truly greater than the gain.

 

And much of that is because I have, in fact, heard of a time when it was measurably, demonstrably better. That, I wouldn't mind having.

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

You do realize I'm not the one who first brought up "lol it's fine because capitalism"? I'm pointing out the starship-sized holes in that argument. That's all I'm doing and it's all I have to do in a response.

One thing I find flawed with this is that you use no source whatsoever, but complain about my using the quickest source (which does have its own citations; this was a rather well-maintained article) instead of Hardcore Nolife digging up an economics textbook for direct quotations in academic citation format. Must I do that? I'm countering an unproven assertion.

And my views on power? They're adjusted to compensate for the imperfections of a system, taking into account both theory and execution. Are yours?

Felis, I have a question; let's say that it's currently the time before the Armistice. What would you personally do to disrupt the control that the alliances have on the DS nodes?

[-BG-FishGuruStrikerSaint]

I would really rather not. I'm not an economist. It isn't my job to do that when the onus of actually proving a point isn't supposed to be shoved at me to begin with. And admittedly - it was the other poster who mentioned economics. Probably should have partitioned that response more neatly, so that bit is my oversight.

 

Really, though, strictly speaking? I have nothing against the idea of it. It was actually fun, when it worked. And as I've already acknowledged, there were times when it was done right, and more or less fairly. My problem - the start and end of it - is in the execution, the room for exploits that has been seized with reckless abandon and constantly gloated about when people do manage to cheat their way to the top. It lies in the point where fun is sucked away by the endless greed of a few who taint the whole. I desire only for the proud to have their fall - if there really was something good there, underneath all the dreck, that is unfortunate. But what has not been shown is simply this: Whether the loss was truly greater than the gain.

 

And much of that is because I have, in fact, heard of a time when it was measurably, demonstrably better. That, I wouldn't mind having.

I finally do agree with some points you mentioned on execution. I don't know about the exploits and all of it, it's really all about perspective and how each person look at things. But truly I feel that the loss between 3 platforms not only PC was great in my opinion. Now I don't know how other platforms worked or how their Dark Sectors were set up, but there was someone in this thread that said that their community is also suffering. So really execution could have been better and fixed I do agree on that.

[FelisImpurrator]

Felis, I have a question; let's say that it's currently the time before the Armistice. What would you personally do to disrupt the control that the alliances have on the DS nodes?

What would I do? Well, what could I do?

 

I am a new player. And a solo player, at that; I stay in a small ghost clan and stay out of massive, endgame political conflicts. I have a life outside Warframe that for most of the year takes up far more time than what I spend in-game. I have no connections, no money, no hardcore farming time, no desire to be some sort of big damn hero or leader of some full-scale group.

 

I'm only here saying my piece because, operating within those parameters, the execution of this system has hindered my ability to play and enjoy the game to the fullest extent. Absurdly over-walled content might as well not be there, after all. And on top of that, I hear that once upon a time it was better, that it was fairer, that - to use an in-game analogy - profit flowed the Perrin way, not the Corpus way, and people were content.

 

So - you tell me. What was I supposed to have done? Hauled together my vast store of 100,000 credits and cheap Boar Prime receivers, and forged a mighty rebellion of thousands of Tenno to bring justice to the system? You tell me.

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

What would I do? Well, what could I do?

I am a new player. And a solo player, at that; I stay in a small ghost clan and stay out of massive, endgame political conflicts. I have a life outside Warframe that for most of the year takes up far more time than what I spend in-game. I have no connections, no money, no hardcore farming time, no desire to be some sort of big damn hero or leader of some full-scale group.

I'm only here saying my piece because, operating within those parameters, the execution of this system has hindered my ability to play and enjoy the game to the fullest extent. Absurdly over-walled content might as well not be there, after all. And on top of that, I hear that once upon a time it was better, that it was fairer, that - to use an in-game analogy - profit flowed the Perrin way, not the Corpus way, and people were content.

So - you tell me. What was I supposed to have done? Hauled together my vast store of 100,000 credits and cheap Boar Prime receivers, and forged a mighty rebellion of thousands of Tenno to bring justice to the system? You tell me.

So to understand where you're coming from.... How are the Dark Sectors hindering your in game experience?

[Ishki88]

>Talked crap about DS Conflicts

>Man Up

>Joins DS Conflict

>Runs 3 steps forward

>=Valkyr Slide Attacks with Kronen 

>Ded

>I've played enough Team Fortress ONE to see where this is going

 

 

Edit:  Minus breaking lore, I did like fighting AI Specters that dropped BEAUTIFUL LOOT.  I'm still 95% against PVP in WF.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Ishki88

[--FS--Sofros]

So - you tell me. What was I supposed to have done? Hauled together my vast store of 100,000 credits and cheap Boar Prime receivers, and forged a mighty rebellion of thousands of Tenno to bring justice to the system? You tell me.

The fact is that even if you wasn't in any side... you should had more than 400k credit battle pay just by participating dark sectors during 1 hour.. AND  you didn't even had to pick a side just go to the highest reserve side insure you a all bunch of cedits... 

 

I am a new player. And a solo player, at that; I stay in a small ghost clan and stay out of massive, endgame political conflicts. I have a life outside Warframe that for most of the year takes up far more time than what I spend in-game. I have no connections, no money, no hardcore farming time, no desire to be some sort of big damn hero or leader of some full-scale group.

 

I'm only here saying my piece because, operating within those parameters, the execution of this system has hindered my ability to play and enjoy the game to the fullest extent. Absurdly over-walled content might as well not be there, after all. And on top of that, I hear that once upon a time it was better, that it was fairer, that - to use an in-game analogy - profit flowed the Perrin way, not the Corpus way, and people were content.

How a solo player can have his "ability to play hindered" because of 2 mission in a bunch of at least 15 others mission of 14 planets? ._.

Isn't there 15 other mission you can play waiting the conflict to end? ._. 

[--FS--Sofros]

>Talked crap about DS Conflicts

>Man Up

>Joins DS Conflict

>Runs 3 steps forward

>=Valkyr Slide Attacks with Kronen 

 

> Avoid her slide attack with a roll

> Kill her with you gun

> Do it again and win the match...

That's how the history is suppose to pass.. Execpt if you're not experienced enough => See page 1... 

Edited June 3, 2015 by Sofros

[FelisImpurrator]

So to understand where you're coming from.... How are the Dark Sectors hindering your in game experience?

They aren't now, because taxes are dead.

 

Previously? They were a crapshoot. Effectively, one could be locked out of running the node for the one thing dark sectors are used for, profit (and theoretically they are among the most profitable nodes, with their bonuses and enemy lineup) - purely as a function of taxes, decided by the whims of the alliance in charge that week.

 

In theory, there would be a wide variety of controlling parties charging a variety of rates, and if one thought taxes were unfair for one node, another would always be an option. Others would be forced to lower their tributes to a level acceptable to players, with the net result being steady traffic to all such nodes; profit to the alliances, small but gradual, and profit to the Tenno running missions there. Ideal free market equilibrium.

 

In practice, only a handful of alliances - who charge more or less consistent rates across all of their nodes - held the entire system, dividing nodes into huge chunks of this tax rate or that - and nearly all of these alliances charged far, far higher than what is practical, rates that effectively minimized return on investment for running the node and therefore removed basically all incentive to do so. Thus no one would bother running those nodes, instead flocking to the scant handful of reasonable ones, and so I fail to see how anyone could conceivably have profited from raising the numbers to that extent.

 

Additionally, conflicts were virtually always dishonest about those tax rates - draw people in with promises of 15% or lower, and once the conflict was won, those numbers would be raised. Twice that. Three times. Six times. Battle pay would be inconsistent - one million credits posted, causing a rush of players, but such a small reserve that the offer was effectively false hope from the beginning. Or else payouts slashed to a fourth of the original only after everyone started on the conflicts, or not getting the posted pay at all - although that, I can sometimes understand as simply not having enough reserves to keep up.

 

It's not as simple as "don't run the nodes", either. In that scenario it's an arbitrary content lock: "Don't like our taxes? Don't want to fight for half an hour to receive only 60% or 70% of your reward? Get out and go do one of those other nodes... which, ah, are all owned by the same alliance, or similar ones with the same or worse taxes. Or you can just not do Dark Sectors at all, and instead go to those regular nodes, most of which are only a better choice because we're sitting here making this one useless. Ah, and if you want to kick us out, we hope you have four billion credits, or the time to find thousands of soldiers willing to fight us for less, because we already have all of that."

 

And again. I have been told about a time when >10%, >15%, was considered high. When you didn't have to have that four billion credits of battle pay, or a half dozen moon clans, just to challenge a rail and have a snowball's chance in Ember Prime's fancy animated helmet of winning - and to be able to hold it for more than the next week. When people could and did band together to kick out the worst clans and alliances in town. When there was actual fighting for these things, not a long string of smackdowns interspersed with a few outliers. So the rail holders got to rack up their tributes over time, but everyone still got to run the missions they wanted. Doesn't sound bad to me, so what happened? Or was that never really a thing?

 

(On an unrelated note. I don't think I ever got the AI specters to let me keep the loot they dropped.)

 

(It's not about the conflicts, it's about what happens after the conflicts are over and those 15% taxes shoot up to 35%. Or 99%.)

Edited June 3, 2015 by [DE]Danielle
Removed maliciousness

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

They aren't now, because taxes are dead.

Previously? They were a crapshoot. Effectively, one could be locked out of running the node for the one thing dark sectors are used for, profit (and theoretically they are among the most profitable nodes, with their bonuses and enemy lineup) - purely as a function of taxes, decided by the whims of the alliance in charge that week.

In theory, there would be a wide variety of controlling parties charging a variety of rates, and if one thought taxes were unfair for one node, another would always be an option. Others would be forced to lower their tributes to a level acceptable to players, with the net result being steady traffic to all such nodes; profit to the alliances, small but gradual, and profit to the Tenno running missions there. Ideal free market equilibrium.

In practice, only a handful of alliances - who charge more or less consistent rates across all of their nodes - held the entire system, dividing nodes into huge chunks of this tax rate or that - and nearly all of these alliances charged far, far higher than what is practical, rates that effectively minimized return on investment for running the node and therefore removed basically all incentive to do so. Thus no one would bother running those nodes, instead flocking to the scant handful of reasonable ones, and so I fail to see how anyone could conceivably have profited from raising the numbers to that extent.

Additionally, conflicts were virtually always dishonest about those tax rates - draw people in with promises of 15% or lower, and once the conflict was won, those numbers would be raised. Twice that. Three times. Six times. Battle pay would be inconsistent - one million credits posted, causing a rush of players, but such a small reserve that the offer was effectively false hope from the beginning. Or else payouts slashed to a fourth of the original only after everyone started on the conflicts, or not getting the posted pay at all - although that, I can sometimes understand as simply not having enough reserves to keep up.

It's not as simple as "don't run the nodes", either. In that scenario it's an arbitrary content lock: "Don't like our taxes? Don't want to fight for half an hour to receive only 60% or 70% of your reward? Get out and go do one of those other nodes... which, ah, are all owned by the same alliance, or similar ones with the same or worse taxes. Or you can just not do Dark Sectors at all, and instead go to those regular nodes, most of which are only a better choice because we're sitting here making this one useless. Ah, and if you want to kick us out, we hope you have four billion credits, or the time to find thousands of soldiers willing to fight us for less, because we already have all of that."

And again. I have been told about a time when >10%, >15%, was considered high. When you didn't have to have that four billion credits of battle pay, or a half dozen moon clans, just to challenge a rail and have a snowball's chance in Ember Prime's fancy animated helmet of winning - and to be able to hold it for more than the next week. When people could and did band together to kick out the worst clans and alliances in town. When there was actual fighting for these things, not a long string of smackdowns interspersed with a few outliers. So the rail holders got to rack up their tributes over time, but everyone still got to run the missions they wanted. Doesn't sound bad to me, so what happened? Or was that never really a thing?

(On an unrelated note. I don't think I ever got the AI specters to let me keep the loot they dropped.)

(It's not about the conflicts, it's about what happens after the conflicts are over and those 15% taxes shoot up to 35%. Or 99%.)

I do see where you are coming from in some respects, but I suppose the reason that I never have had too massive an issue with DS tax is because I usually only used DS for the one thing that is untaxable; Affinity. Any resources or credits I picked up along the way we're a bonus. I found other ways, other places to get resources. And, with the addition of Augments like Pilfering Swarm and Greedy Pull and such, farming isn't as hard.

I guess my POV is that DS nodes don't have to be the go to nodes for everything. Sure, they're highly useful, but it's also rather broken. If it weren't, DE wouldn't be changing the Star Chart. I'm finding these days that I care more about what IS available to use than what isn't. It's honestly a simpler way of thinking for me.

[Comrade]

wait, dark sectors are gone? They're still showing up in my game. Or was this an announcement that they WOULD be removing them? so confused.

[FelisImpurrator]

I do see where you are coming from in some respects, but I suppose the reason that I never have had too massive an issue with DS tax is because I usually only used DS for the one thing that is untaxable; Affinity. Any resources or credits I picked up along the way we're a bonus. I found other ways, other places to get resources. And, with the addition of Augments like Pilfering Swarm and Greedy Pull and such, farming isn't as hard.

I guess my POV is that DS nodes don't have to be the go to nodes for everything. Sure, they're highly useful, but it's also rather broken. If it weren't, DE wouldn't be changing the Star Chart. I'm finding these days that I care more about what IS available to use than what isn't. It's honestly a simpler way of thinking for me.

Unfortunately, that approach doesn't get anything in the game fixed. It's going around the problem, not addressing it. And they don't have to be the go-to for everything - they just have to be some sort of viable option at any given point, and with the way things were going, over half of them weren't even a considerable option for anything beyond raw affinity farming at all. (Also, Pilfdroid and Gmag? Not a solution in the slightest. They're already an overused band-aid to the grind as is - the reason I do Seimeni or Gabii over Draco is because I actually get to fight things instead of GMAG NEKROS MESA FROST 4-mashing on boxes all day.)

 

DE had to do something about all the griefing on these. All right, I'll give you that there was a large community built around these, and that, well, there was actual conflict as opposed to just rigging who got which node this week. But it got to a point where that couldn't exist without concurrently allowing mass abuse, and something had to give. If a new system comes up - a better one, a fairer one that allows for less trolling - and people still want to rebuild that community, bringing back the conflicts and all - more power to them, unless they're the trolls from last time, in which case screw those guys. But otherwise... critical mass was hit, or this had to be done well in advance of the starchart 3.0 rollout to be extra sure, or both.

[--FS--Sofros]

wait, dark sectors are gone? They're still showing up in my game. Or was this an announcement that they WOULD be removing them? so confused.

While we say dark sectors we are talking about solar rail conflicts. 

Edited June 3, 2015 by Sofros

[-BG-FishGuruStrikerSaint]

But if this whole talk is about taxes and lets be frank it is evident that you're leaning towards the taxes being unfair well honestly In all respect don't do them, yes it is actually simple to not run the node. There are better ways to make credits, gather resoucres, and all of that. Credits just go do some capture keys in void with a credit booster bam easy credits. Looking for resoucres? i.e Orikin Cell? Do Draco or a mission on Ceres and just farm. Look you don't need to run dark sectors as a mean of gathering resources. I made and gathered a bunch of resoucres by doing what I described. Even before they took sectors off I did the same thing. See the taxes how I see them can be better okay fair enough, but it's not for us to gloat on how much credit we accumlated over time, it's for rail building, upkeeping the rail maintenance. Theres a bunch of factors that taxes have not only to piss off the next person. Look as much we can discuss about taxes lets try to keep on track with OP idea.

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

But if this whole talk is about taxes and lets be frank it is evident that you're leaning towards the taxes being unfair well honestly In all respect don't do them, yes it is actually simple to not run the node. There are better ways to make credits, gather resoucres, and all of that. Credits just go do some capture keys in void with a credit booster bam easy credits. Looking for resoucres? i.e Orikin Cell? Do Draco or a mission on Ceres and just farm. Look you don't need to run dark sectors as a mean of gathering resources. I made and gathered a bunch of resoucres by doing what I described. Even before they took sectors off I did the same thing. See the taxes how I see them can be better okay fair enough, but it's not for us to gloat on how much credit we accumlated over time, it's for rail building, upkeeping the rail maintenance. Theres a bunch of factors that taxes have not only to piss off the next person. Look as much we can discuss about taxes lets try to keep on track with OP idea.

To answer the thread question, I'll have to go back and see what was happening when the armistice began, but my first inclination is no; they should have continued.

[-BG-Siran_Kari]

Aha; they began PVP 2.0.