How about them Solar Rails?

[(XBOX)Aeries Vendetta]

There were rumors of Solar Rails coming back in December but sadly it turned out to be another false rumor. We are still waiting on solar rails and many of us would like a legitimate update on the progress of the rails and an estimated time of arrival. 

Any legitimate information would be appreciated. 

[(XBOX)calvina]

Yeah, I wanna bust out my troll blast/magnetic glaxion and 100% status every tenno I see.

[(XBOX)Aeries Vendetta]

Except I know with all the work de put in those easy kills and statuses are going to be corrected. No more easy wins lol

[Omega-ZX]

1 hour ago, (Xbox One)Aeries Vendetta said:

were rumors of Solar Rails coming back in December

Dont trust the rumors.

No official Statement = no Solar Rails.

And... Read the patchnotes.

[(XBOX)Aeries Vendetta]

I'm here because there is no information so I am asking. If you have information please share. 

[(XBOX)Tylers Legend]

I never had the chance to play with solar rails, I would like to. I hope they give me a big experience, if brought back.

[Loxyen]

Didn't they mention Dark Sectors to be work in progress (2017) in DevStream #85?

[(XBOX)Aeries Vendetta]

They have been saying that for the last year. I am looking for them to come in here and give us an estimated time or at least include an estimated time. If enough of us ask for a time we will probably get one. 

[-BG-StormFighter117]

On 1/7/2017 at 5:48 AM, (Xbox One)Aeries Vendetta said:

There were rumors of Solar Rails coming back in December but sadly it turned out to be another false rumor.

There has been rumors of Solar Rails coming back almost everything Month and Year for the past 2 Years... With the future of This year plus the next >.>

December 2015 we said, "for sure, yes, 100% Dark Sectors next year"... Last year December (2016) We said, "for sure, yes, 100% Dark Sectors, confirmed!!!" Nothing has changed... Hope shattered, Dreams stepped on, space aids taking over.... Death..

Edited January 9, 2017 by -BG-StormFighter117

[Trimaxsingi]

Rip Dark Sector Confflicts....

 

#WeAreStillHere

#SaveDarkSectors

#CanYouFeelTheCold?

#TasteTheSalt?

[JustAnotherNormalPerson]

"My Alias is StormFighter117 and my questions is Dark Sectors"   

-TennoCon 2016

#BringDarkSectors 

[(PSN)Flaming_Recon1]

I agree guys. Solar rails were so much fun and just incredible. My clan dominated on PS4 and the battles were such a rush! I hope DE does something sometime soon because it would be nice to battle other clans in PvP again. Man.. those were the days lol. 

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

On 1/7/2017 at 6:16 AM, (Xbox One)Aeries Vendetta said:

I'm here because there is no information so I am asking. If you have information please share. 

I dont think DE has released any information. We'd definitely know it if they released some. Even a vague statement about the general direction they are taking the new system in would be more than enough for me.

[(XBOX)Aeries Vendetta]

2 hours ago, (Xbox One)CFE Discord said:

I dont think DE has released any information. We'd definitely know it if they released some. Even a vague statement about the general direction they are taking the new system in would be more than enough for me.

That's why I want to keep this topic here and open and maybe they would be so inclined as to give us some sort of time hack. 

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

On 1/9/2017 at 2:34 PM, -BG-StormFighter117 said:

There has been rumors of Solar Rails coming back almost everything Month and Year for the past 2 Years... With the future of This year plus the next >.>

December 2015 we said, "for sure, yes, 100% Dark Sectors next year"... Last year December (2016) We said, "for sure, yes, 100% Dark Sectors, confirmed!!!" Nothing has changed... Hope shattered, Dreams stepped on, space aids taking over.... Death..

That twitter poll they did a while back for Solar Rails really frustrated me for exactly those reasons. I thought that because they did a poll they were finally working on the return of Solar Rails. As of now, I no longer think that is the case.

[(PSN)mahoshonenfox]

I was wondering what armistice meant. Apparently it just means the feature is disabled.

I don't play conclave except for that time the snow ball fight thing had a reactor or catalyst as a reward. I didn't enjoy it as much because there were too few targets, its easy to die, and matches takes too long. Dark Sector pvp, at least from what I've seen on videos, seem to have pvp mixed in with pve. And instead of focused on killing each other, you're focused on either defending or destroying a structure. And the players ranked up unlocking their mods over time getting stronger. That sounds like DotA to me.

The only thing I saw unbalanced about it was the use of pve mods instead of pvp specific mods. I wish conclave had a solar rails or dark sector style game mode. I'd probably play it.

[Heckzu]

16 hours ago, (PS4)mahoshonenfox said:

The only thing I saw unbalanced about it was the use of pve mods instead of pvp specific mods. I wish conclave had a solar rails or dark sector style game mode. I'd probably play it.

On PC, it was a complete disaster. The use of PvE mods for PvP was Conclave 1.0, which was scrapped and reworked into the current Conclave.

Balancing was one issue, but another was having a player controlled entity controlling a node on the Star Chart. PC Solar Rails saw heavy amounts of abuse. Tax rates would go as high as 99%, so the clans owning the node would essentially steal everything players earned. Players couldn't retaliate against it because of how unbalanced the game mode was, heavily favoring defense such that only one in 50 offenses might succeed, allowing defending clans to hold a node almost indefinitely. Eventually, only a minority of clan alliances held almost all of the Solar Rail nodes, like a monopoly.

The gameplay from Solar Rail conflicts could be reintroduced as a Conclave game mode, but the concept of players ruling over territory has been proven to be a huge disaster.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Heckzu
Edited a mistake I made when trying to recall what happened back then

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

7 hours ago, Heckzu said:

On PC, it was a complete disaster. The use of PvE mods for PvP was Conclave 1.0, which was scrapped and reworked into the current Conclave.

Balancing was one issue, but another was having a player controlled entity controlling a node on the Star Chart. PC Solar Rails saw heavy amounts of abuse. Tax rates would go as high as 99%, so the clans owning the node would essentially steal everything players earned. Players couldn't retaliate against it because defending clans abused the peer-to-peer system by Alt-F4'ing whenever they started losing a Solar Rail defense, causing a Connection-to-Host-Lost error and terminating the mission with no progress ever recorded, allowing defending clans to hold a node indefinitely. Eventually, only a minority of clan alliances held almost all of the Solar Rail nodes, like a monopoly.

The gameplay from Solar Rail conflicts could be reintroduced as a Conclave game mode, but the concept of players ruling over territory has been proven to be a huge disaster.

I do not believe you have as much knowledge of the system as you think you do. It was the attacking team that hosted the match, not the defending team. The attackers would Alt-F4 (dashboard for Xbox One) so the defenders could not defend correctly. It was much easier to take a rail than it was to defend it. 

Taxes were getting progressively lower over time because of the community. No High Tax nodes stayed up for long and the community didn't play them anyway, so the alliances that did that withered away. Alliances put lower taxes on their nodes so that other alliances wouldn't get as many people playing on their nodes. The latter alliances would then lower their taxes to compete with the former alliances, this trend continued until armistice, with 2/3 "big alliances" having 0% on some nodes. We were reaching a point where there would have been 0% across the board.  

[Heckzu]

1 hour ago, (Xbox One)CFE Discord said:

I do not believe you have as much knowledge of the system as you think you do. It was the attacking team that hosted the match, not the defending team. The attackers would Alt-F4 (dashboard for Xbox One) so the defenders could not defend correctly. It was much easier to take a rail than it was to defend it. 

Taxes were getting progressively lower over time because of the community. No High Tax nodes stayed up for long and the community didn't play them anyway, so the alliances that did that withered away. Alliances put lower taxes on their nodes so that other alliances wouldn't get as many people playing on their nodes. The latter alliances would then lower their taxes to compete with the former alliances, this trend continued until armistice, with 2/3 "big alliances" having 0% on some nodes. We were reaching a point where there would have been 0% across the board.  

On PC, it was the other way around in which it was almost impossible for attackers to succeed.

There was another thread where the OP wanted Solar Rail Conflicts back, but because he wanted to keep the concept of players having possession of a node in the Star Map, the thread became a collection of why Solar Rails became a failure and the OP then did something stupid which lead to the thread getting locked:

 

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

1 hour ago, Heckzu said:

On PC, it was the other way around in which it was almost impossible for attackers to succeed.

There was another thread where the OP wanted Solar Rail Conflicts back, but because he wanted to keep the concept of players having possession of a node in the Star Map, the thread became a collection of why Solar Rails became a failure and the OP then did something stupid which lead to the thread getting locked:

 

Consider this,

If you were correct, and so the defense hosted the Rail battles, we would come down to a very serious problem. All the Defense had to do to win, was not to play. By not hosting the rail, nobody could join to attack.

That is how I know your statement is false, not counting my 1600 hours of Rail experience of course. If you wish to become enlightened on the subject, please avoid using the player edited wiki, and just ask @(Xbox One) Xodus03 or @Phasedragon about it. I am sure they would be happy to help you.

Edited January 13, 2017 by (XB1)CFE Discord

[Heckzu]

1 hour ago, (Xbox One)CFE Discord said:

Consider this,

If you were correct, and so the defense hosted the Rail battles, we would come down to a very serious problem. All the Defense had to do to win, was not to play. By not hosting the rail, nobody could join to attack.

That is how I know your statement is false, not counting my 1600 hours of Rail experience of course. If you wish to become enlightened on the subject, please avoid using the player edited wiki, and just ask @(Xbox One) Xodus03 or @Phasedragon about it. I am sure they would be happy to help you.

My bad, my memory from back then is hazy since it has been over 2 years since Solar Rails were released. Nevertheless, on PC, the defending clans rarely lost due poor balancing in the original PvP.

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

44 minutes ago, Heckzu said:

My bad, my memory from back then is hazy since it has been over 2 years since Solar Rails were released. Nevertheless, on PC, the defending clans rarely lost due poor balancing in the original PvP.

 

13 hours ago, Heckzu said:

On PC, it was a complete disaster. The use of PvE mods for PvP was Conclave 1.0, which was scrapped and reworked into the current Conclave.

Balancing was one issue, but another was having a player controlled entity controlling a node on the Star Chart. PC Solar Rails saw heavy amounts of abuse. Tax rates would go as high as 99%, so the clans owning the node would essentially steal everything players earned. Players couldn't retaliate against it because of how unbalanced the game mode was, heavily favoring defense such that only one in 50 offenses might succeed, allowing defending clans to hold a node almost indefinitely. Eventually, only a minority of clan alliances held almost all of the Solar Rail nodes, like a monopoly.

The gameplay from Solar Rail conflicts could be reintroduced as a Conclave game mode, but the concept of players ruling over territory has been proven to be a huge disaster.

I will enlighten you again. Offensives were almost always more successful than defenses because getting 750 wins ain't a big deal if you're clan is worth its salt. Coordination,Determination, and Motivation are the keys to winning. 

To entertain your line of reasoning for a moment, consider the following: (I'm using "You" as a generality, not directed at you)

Offense:

>Can be accomplished as soon as you can do 750 wins

>Can be done anytime regardless if there are players on the otherside

>Requires only basic coordination to kill core 

>Will never fight an opponent of ping limit is set to 50

Defense:

>Have to endure 12 hours

>Can only play against enemy team

>Requires Advanced Coordination to kill player who has out leveled you by killing specters 

>Always have to fight a player that has been there longer  

Do you see now? Defense is a joke to beat if you are a coordinated offense. The reason the "Evil Alliances" on PC beat the opposition was because those "Tax Stealing Tyrants" were taking the fight more seriously than their opponents. The people on PC were not fighting objectively. They were fighting with blind rage and anger at the "Credit Stealers" who were all too happy to capitalize on the enemies lack of foresight.

Instead of redirecting the sting of defeat into motivation, you motivated it into degradation. They no longer saw themselves being brave warriors fighting against powerful enemies, you saw yourselves as prey being exploited by those more powerful than you.

They didn't analyze the reasons why they were defeated time and time again. They couldn't consider the possibility that MAYBE, just MAYBE, that they were not as skilled or as competent  as those they were fighting.

All those hours wasted complaining about taxes on the forums could have been dedicated to planning and preparation. That is why your offense failed. 

You might consider a DE enforced 0% tax a victory a serious achievement, but remember that you never fought the battle to earn that victory. You gave those "Oppressive Fat Cats" indefinite invulnerability just for the comfort of 0% taxes. You played yourself.

In the end, who wins ? The Alliances who will fly their flag forever on the nodes they conquered or the people who farm credits through raids anyway ? 

 

 

Edited January 13, 2017 by (XB1)CFE Discord

[(XBOX)Aeries Vendetta]

I was a merc for solar rails. I did my part and the only thing I came across was balancing issues in both aspects pc and xbox as i played both....a few bugs but nothing as bad as people talk about. 

Edited January 14, 2017 by (XB1)Aeries Vendetta

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

On January 14, 2017 at 5:58 AM, (Xbox One)Aeries Vendetta said:

I was a merc for solar rails. I did my part and the only thing I came across was balancing issues in both aspects pc and xbox as i played both....a few bugs but nothing as bad as people talk about. 

You're absolutely right. It shouldn't take two years to fix some very minor balancing issues. 

[-BG-StormFighter117]

On 1/13/2017 at 2:56 AM, Heckzu said:

Balancing was one issue, but another was having a player controlled entity controlling a node on the Star Chart. PC Solar Rails saw heavy amounts of abuse. Tax rates would go as high as 99%, so the clans owning the node would essentially steal everything players earned. Players couldn't retaliate against it because of how unbalanced the game mode was, heavily favoring defense such that only one in 50 offenses might succeed, allowing defending clans to hold a node almost indefinitely. Eventually, only a minority of clan alliances held almost all of the Solar Rail nodes, like a monopoly.

The gameplay from Solar Rail conflicts could be reintroduced as a Conclave game mode, but the concept of players ruling over territory has been proven to be a huge disaster.

Balancing issues did happen. Not as much as some really express. Everything had its counter. Mesa PeaceMaker, Excal SuperJump, and Acrid was by far the hardest.

Tax Rates could be whatever the owner of the Dark Sector wanted. That's how they where intended and stated by a DE member in a long forgotten Dark Sector Thread.

On 1/13/2017 at 10:57 AM, (Xbox One)CFE Discord said:

It was the attacking team that hosted the match, not the defending team. The attackers would Alt-F4 (dashboard for Xbox One) so the defenders could not defend correctly. It was much easier to take a rail than it was to defend it. 

100% correct. We have Data on deathsnacks where This was abused and Orion spent about 2 billion credits losing the rail. (If memory servers correct this was Vs Space Confederation on Romula-Venus) Attackers would wait for 4 Defenders to join then leave. Defenders would receive half the promised battle pay thus draining credits.

Players can Retaliate. Its because you think 10 guys can take and hold a rail. It takes Hundreds ACTIVE. That means maybe a whole entity of a few Thousand to account of Timezone differences and player activity.

To build on Retaliation. Those on PC Dark Sectors have held it practically since Dark Sectors moved to PvP. We know how to use Teamwork, we have builds to counter the imbalances, and know ALL the game functions (None of these are even stated on the Wiki. That's how unknown they are to the public). There where many Alliances that contested us and formed an alliance of alliances. They did succeed with brute force short term, however, they eventually failed because they didn't know the game mechanics; blindly swinging into the darkness.

On 1/13/2017 at 4:49 PM, (Xbox One)CFE Discord said:

Offensives were almost always more successful than defenses because getting 750 wins ain't a big deal if you're clan is worth its salt. Coordination,Determination, and Motivation are the keys to winning. 

>Will never fight an opponent of ping limit is set to 50

Also 100% True.... Good luck fighting someone in Russia when you are located in the Americas when they limit ping set to 50.

The Dark Sector system did need fixing/changing. But should not of been taken down. Especially for 2 Years continuing. (I understand taking Dark Sectors down was also to perhaps introduce Movement 2.0 more smoothly) --- When they transitioned Dark Sectors PvE -> PvP it was smooth and fast. No 2-3 Year downtime. They could of done the same with whatever future system they had planned. 

CFE Discord has pretty much been 100% on his information.

 Sincerely, An Orion Commander. <-- This means I know my stuff (PC)

Edited January 20, 2017 by -BG-StormFighter117