An alliance i can understand but in no war ever fought would your ally attacking you prevent others from doing so.
This x1000. It’s literally stupid for these fake attacks to be denying interested, legitimate attackers.
A compilation of pictures.
Note that the day I took these, there were 34 attacks announced.
18 showed up.
“Oh wow, most of the attackers showed up here today!”
“Huh. Wonder why SCORP left?”
“Ooooh.”
“I see.”
“I wonder what the other sectors are like.”
“Oh.”
“…”
A compilation of pictures.
Note that the day I took these, there were 34 attacks announced.
18 showed up.
“Oh.”
XD we showed up! And then discovered that wpk was defending SRS. dat kurdi doe. 
i still blame ping lol.
This x1000. It’s literally stupid for these fake attacks to be denying interested, legitimate attackers.
Indeed. fake corps launching fake attacks is a huge problem, sure it is in the game’s mechanics, but it is on the virge of cheating.
I mean seriously, there are people out there who actually want to play, but can’t because people are too concerned with losing their sectors that they have to create fake corps to fill the attack slots to cheat other legitimate attacks out of games.
To any corp that does this, man up (or woman up) and don’t be cowards. You can always take back your sector if someone else takes it, that is how the whole system is designed. Corps are supposed to change ownership, not be held on to because you are too cowardly to actually face real opponents.
Regarding temp joining, I have no issue with it if the corps are in an alliance. Outside of alliances, I find temp-joining to be bad. If alliances were fully supported in the game, temp joining wouldn’t even be necessary, and could easily be prevented. I mean, seriously though, why haven’t alliances been supported? They would only benefit this game (provided that you put a limit to the number of corps that can be in an alliance).
XD we showed up! And then discovered that wpk was defending SRS. dat kurdi doe.
so you bailed instead of attacking… right-?
or did you just fall short a guy last second and got the boot from server (not enough players!)
so you bailed instead of attacking… right-?
or did you just fall short a guy last second and got the boot from server (not enough players!)
There’s a thing called reading the post
Perhaps you should try that sometime
If the map had more sectors people might not be so terrified to lose the only one they can get.
If we had custom dread battles at least we could play the damn game mode while this issue got sorted out.
so you bailed instead of attacking… right-?
or did you just fall short a guy last second and got the boot from server (not enough players!)
lost by about 400 points.
Oh.
Now I really miss the old sector conquest, no politic, less time, less work, stright skill, random teamate, more battle, easy reward, fun game. Don’t even have to organize just queue up and get game as less as 3vs3 and as more as 12vs12.
Now I really miss the old sector conquest, no politic, less time, less work, stright skill, random teamate, more battle, easy reward, fun game. Don’t even have to organize just queue up and get game as less as 3vs3 and as more as 12vs12.
they still have that in pvp. *COUGH*
Custom or publicly queueable dreadnought battles would at least let people play the game mode while this got sorted out.
Now I really miss the old sector conquest, no politic, less time, less work, stright skill, random teamate, more battle, easy reward, fun game. Don’t even have to organize just queue up and get game as less as 3vs3 and as more as 12vs12.
I agree with this. While dreadnoughts are cool and all, they pose many problems that old seccon didnt. The big one in my opinion is tactics. Old seccon allowed for a much broader diversity of tactics, as no one tactic was “the tactic” that would always work. Old seccon also required a lot more player skill, and every role had it’s place. In dreads, too many roles are useless, and for the roles that ARE useful, a very specific build is needed to be successful. There was also no way to cheat the system to create fake corps to fill attack queues so no one else could get games.
Custom or publicly queueable dreadnought battles would at least let people play the game mode while this got sorted out.
This really is needed. This could also open up a whole new window of doing tournaments using dreadnought battles. This would also let the newer corps figure out tactics and how to be successful in dreadnoughts without getting roflstomped by a bigger corp that has more experience.
I agree with this. While dreadnoughts are cool and all, they pose many problems that old seccon didnt. The big one in my opinion is tactics. Old seccon allowed for a much broader diversity of tactics, as no one tactic was “the tactic” that would always work. Old seccon also required a lot more player skill, and every role had it’s place. In dreads, too many roles are useless, and for the roles that ARE useful, a very specific build is needed to be successful. There was also no way to cheat the system to create fake corps to fill attack queues so no one else could get games.
If sectors went neutral every day (or every few days, think the old sector-holding system) and each corp had to fight over them through a neutral tournament rather than this whole defense thing, fake attacks wouldn’t exist at all. Plus with that many neutral sectors, corps couldn’t hold massive monopolies over them. And to boot, corps would have to… gasp… play more!
If guards could beat torpedoes again with missile shields (albeit with maybe 3 ticks instead of just one) there might be more room to play the game. Giving guards some playability, especially in t3, would also help quite a bit. Right now there’s just way too much pressure on the ELRF to single handedly make sure the team doesn’t autolose by having one or two torpedoes impact the dread.
This really is needed. This could also open up a whole new window of doing tournaments using dreadnought battles. This would also let the newer corps figure out tactics and how to be successful in dreadnoughts without getting roflstomped by a bigger corp that has more experience.
Has been since 1.1.3 went live.
Yesterday, there were 31 attacks announced. 17 showed up.
Look at all that T4 activity! Wow!
I think this is a new record, folks. Everybody who announced showed up against WPK.
DNO super pro
RELAX, it’s not like any attacks in Jericho space are real…
Aww, there’s only seven attacks? That means SR2 announced for nothing! Wasted iridium. Drat.
Then again, it’s not like SRS cares. They’ve got the allies.
I guess my previous statement was incorrect. Not everybody who announced showed up against WPK.
Today I didn’t bother counting, since I didn’t play.
This represents the state of EU dreadnoughts pretty well, though.
The way I see it, it all boils down to this;
>> Dreadnought battle “rules” are easy to abuse/currupt and this affects the game in grand proportions
These factors are required in order to be succesful in dreadnought battles;
> Skilled ppl (the more the better), tactics, shitloads of iridium, time (queueing for dreads and time spent farming iridium and time spent making second accounts) and alliances/fake corps.
The few who knows how to and can afford the time and effort needed will be successful and they can expect no competition from smaller legitimate corps (since they in many cases lack the veterans) and can also prevent legitimate attacks from bigger corps by making up fake corps filling up attack slots and voila, their sector only lost 10% that day.
>>Current mechanics influence how ppl play the game;
Right now, if you’re not in one of the top corporations owning multiple sectors you are most likely not playing dreadnought battles at all for what’s the point? It’s a long way to go to become a real threat. And a “real threat” in this context means bending the rules to your benefit in so many ways and it doesnt come without a price.
In order for a corporation to be a real threat to the ruling ones they need alliances/fake corps, skilled and time-dedicated, iridiumdonating players. And well executed tactics. Lack one of some of these factors, and you’re pretty much screwed in the long run.
And the trend won’t stop; The strongest will become stronger, and the weaker will stay weak or even perish.
What will this bring?
- You (and your corp) will have to work hard in many aspects to become a competition to the top players and THIS takes time and effort: You need to either recruit and train ppl (and far from all wants to be trained or learn how to work as a team) and/or attract skillful players willing to dedicate their time to be there for dreadnought battles. You will need the numbers, the source of iridium income either from real accounts or alt accounts. And this can be even further dsicussed too; how does the number of alt acc affect the game and in what direction? The way I see it; ppl only have so much time they can give this game and how/where you distribute your time/effort will ofc affect your original corporation (and even more so if the population already is low!!) If this game had more veterans, then the fact that vets make 2nd accounts to fun with would have a lesser impact on the game. So this leads to another question… what is the point of a corp if you can jump around all day long if you like.
- For success in sector conquest; Your corp needs to create fake corps to support you by blocking other legitimate attackers and/or preferably build alliances; games will be a “fix” and thus the rules for fair play are violated. For a game with such a small “veteran” population this will have a great impact on the game in general.
Affects how you wonder?
- If your corp doesnt have what is required to pose a threat to the sector-dominating you will most likely stop playing dreadnought battles, or decrease the dreadnought activity, and voila another potent competitor left the landscape of dreadbattle.
Or this
- You switch corp, you go to the stronger ones to enjoy the location rewards (this scenario will only fuel what already is a problem - the stronger corps become stronger, and the divide between the top and the mediocre will grow which means the top will stay strong, untouchable while all the others remain weak)
Or this
- You ignore dreadnought battle allover and play pvp/pve (this means a drop in the playerbase for dreadnought and if it’s a skillful player doing this it will influence a corporations chances to fight for and win a sector.
As it already is playerbase of veterans is quite low; if frustration grows and veterans leave, other veterans will either leave a weak corporation for a stronger, or stop playing dreadnoughts or drop down to t2 and derp around.
Or this
- You stop playing the game or become less active (Aka a corporation “loses” a player, and iridium income, and if many vets stops playig the game well… the corporation will suffer greately for it in many ways and this will also influence the playerbase in some way especially for those who play this game all because it’s a very social game (if you value this factor).
Summarized… people want a game. People want to win. people want to have fun. They do what they need to do in order to get those things. Bend the rules? yes. Drop down to lower tiers to get faster/easier games? Yes. But should is it suppose to be like this?
This mechanics is corrupted; it’s too much politics involved.
And this new sector conquest depends alot on the veterans. Where the vets end up, how they move, which corp they leave, which corp they chose to fight and not to fight… their choices influence the game, and the unbalanced numbers of vets vs numbers of new players matters.
Some suggestions that came from discussions about this. Looking for feedback, and if anyone wants to float any ideas about it or something related.