Jump to content
Dante Unbound: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

An Idea For Dark Sector Conflict 2.0


(XBOX)PRxHeavyxHitter
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dark Sectors Battle 2.0 Design

Basing on the previous design of the dark sector battles on warframe, many saw how somewhat flawed it was, which is why DE took action to take it out. If you look into it, some of the flaws were:

  • The DS credit system/ battle pay:

This factor completely steamrolled over the ideas of smaller alliances go toe to toe against larger alliances who have couple moon or mountain clans under their belt. This was one of the key factors why the larger alliance would monopolize on nodes because with greater numbers, the alliance vault can dish out more credits for the battle pay for outsiders (that aren’t within the alliance) to influence the flow of the battle. This situation affected people, whether it is for greed or doing for their own cause, by siding with the alliance that had better battle pay. Pretty much hiring mercs to do the alliance’s job to protect “their” node.

  • Quantity over Quality:

Simply put, the numbers of an alliance or outsiders that were influenced by the battle pay end up winning the node almost every time. Whether it be casual player PvE or hardcore PvP players, the more people an alliance has by their side insinuated the idea of more runs in destroying the core/ gaining victories. Thus, the ending result being the opponent’s solar rail health drained in 3 hours or less. This idea in general created a huge gap between up and coming alliances vs the established alliances in greater numbers. Having greater numbers doesn’t mean skillful players as a whole, which alliances/ clans started to have a wrong idea about what PvP should be.

  • (Obvious)The Unbalance Weapons/Modding of WFs:

Pretty much just unbalanced mechanics that separated the new fresh guy on the block to a person who played the game 1000+ hours. Veterans of the game would have a huge overall advantage by having better equipped mods or setups to eliminate or completely wipe out the competition. Which in a sense created “survival of the fittest” scenario.

  • The Gametype Dark Sectors were:

Dark Sector rail battles can be summed up as a one-sided sabotage/defense mission to destroy the other clan & or alliance rails to control the dark sectors. But in a PvP like environment one-sided sabotage/defensive isn’t a good gametype to have to determine which alliance is better than the other. Not only that, but the defenders had to wait for an attacker to “host” a match for the dark sector battle. From this, players on the defending side have to depend whether or not their connection is compatible to the host. This follows into the topic of the attacking side can take advantage of the connection to have “private” games and can easily speed run the rails if they equipped certain warframes/ weapons to destroy the core.

 

While brainstorming an idea that could work as a future “gametype” or a replacement for current Dark Sector layout, I’ll like for your guys’ opinions on the matter of this concept that I and some others conjured as a basic set up for Dark Sector 2.0:

  • Gametype/ Background:

I know from the beginning I’ve pointed out the flaw of the “one-sided” sabotage/defense, where one side defends and the other is on the offensive.  Now what I never understood is how did the attackers’ side of the solar rail battle become destroyed? Lack of reinforcements to supply the offensive, no men on deck to man the rail that’s not there/ visible on map, and or no pilots in the cockpit of the solar rail? What happens to the attacking team’s solar rail after the 12 hour time limit is met and they’ve failed to drop the health bar? Does it get nuke? Team of Limbos banish it to the rift? Too many questions to answer, am I right? Well what if, DE were to adopt some of the concept of Griff ball (for those familiar to halo games). Both teams experience the pressure of defending & sabotaging each of the teams’ generator cores to the solar rail. It’s equal on both sides and fair game. Using Griff ball concepts there is a bomb that spawns in the middle of the map, and one person needs to deliver the bomb to the opposing team’s core. Their teammates will have to choose either to guard the bomb carrier or guard the power core.  To destroy the core/ victory, it would take 1-3 detonations. Specters of both teams spawn, but only act as obstacles, and stay at a balance level while implementing the balance of conclave mechanicals/ conclave mods. This concept is like a modified Cephalon Capture, just with specters to make a bit challenging. The data relay, primary, and secondary generator rooms can be taken out (or they will be disabled for remainder of match if completed) for easier access to core room to deliver bomb. There will be a disabling/arming timer on the bomb similar to the data relay room/ consoles in beginning of solar rail area when near core. There will be matchmaking involved and is only exclusive to clans/ alliances that are participating and are registered to battle within the dark sector battle. NO outside help nor mercenaries involved. Battle pay is modified to a jackpot. Meaning, both opposing parties that part-take in the solar rail battle are subjected to X amount of credits depending on how popular/difficult the main tileset without the conflict. Whoever wins the conflict match by the end of 12 hours, gets the jackpot credits and can be flipped to enter more Dark Sector Conflicts. Little example: Coba, Earth will have a set jackpot fee of 10,000 credits. Both Alliance #1(who controls the sector) and the Alliance #2(the challenger for the DS tile) put 10,000 credits into jackpot from their Alliance vault. Whoever wins the conflict, the one with more solar rail health is the victor and gains 20,000 credits to their Alliance vault. -0.2% of solar rail health = 1 match victory for opposing team, so in total 500 victories of matchmaking matches = solar rail health completely depleted by opposing team. Match will not be made unless there is a complete 4v4 team matchup (would be cool if it can support 5v5 or 6v6 or even better yet 8v8) Since it has built-in conclave mechanics, people will be able to power level the conclave weapons from their conclave loadout in an accelerating pace for these battles. The same DS regulation apply, with 48 hr. armistice for preparation. This might ask too much, but each dark sector tileset can have dedicated servers like the relays for the rail battles so that players do not have connection issues with one another. Also this can prevent the “host” situation, such as quitting and interrupting matches/ canceling the whole progress of the battle, so that the PvP environment can continue without interruptions. In addition to this is no in-game drop-in/ drop-out freatures, meaning no recruiting “better reinforcements” to secure victory within the said alliance/clan or turn the tides. PvP is meant to be played as a competition between players who take consideration of their skill and put it to the test against others. Quality over quantity is what this ideal is trying to create. If they quit, c'est la vie, right? If they lost connection by accident they can reconnect anytime.

  • Layout of the Map:

This map layout design might be a little unique. So for this setup, the two solar rails will interlock at the rail docking station, sort of how pirate ships interlock with other boats in the ol’ days. The bomb will spawn in the middle of rail docking station, and each team spawns on their docking station. From there the battle of two side clash with both teams racing for the bomb in the middle. Adding new pickups on map, balanced power/legendary weapon spawn (cannot pick up ammo for them/ reduced ammo). This can include ogris, opticor, dread, etc. but in a random selection. The spawning weapon at these weapon spawns will be random, meaning at one power weapon spawn can spawn an ogris & at the same time pop out a dread 2 mins later.

 

So in general what do you guys think about this overall idea? Anyways to improve it, all opinions more than welcome :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...