Planetary Conquest is Dominated by LARGE Allied guilds

[Racjel]

This complaning that small guilds cant compet with large one is just funny... they are um small why should they... it's there choice but that dosnt stop other to be big and grow.

 

I'm not defending the large ones it's just... LOGIC

 

Also large>small

Just look anywhere

Edited September 6, 2014 by Racjel

[ivanhedgehog]

This complaning that small guilds cant compet with large one is just funny... they are um small why should they... it's there choice but that dosnt stop other to be big and grow.

 

I'm not defending the large ones it's just... LOGIC

 

Also large>small

Just look anywhere

 

It is also logic that BW wants to continue to get money from all the people in small guilds..they need to figure something out or they will not. they are a business. successful businesses do not cut out 70% of their customers.

[Fdzzaigl]

Fix for this is to give alliance-making tools for the players so smaller guilds can team up easily and work towards the same goal.

 

Any other attempt would sort of destroy the point of competition.

[Jeweledleah]

It is also logic that BW wants to continue to get money from all the people in small guilds..they need to figure something out or they will not. they are a business. successful businesses do not cut out 70% of their customers.

 

there's something you need to realize. you will still only have limited number of winners. everyone cannot win when top spots are limited. so the most dedicated will win. again. and we are back to square one.

 

its kinda like pvp leaderboards. for people to be on top, a lot of people have to lose to them. everyone cannot be a winner.

 

so you decide what's important to you. win the planetary titles early one? or stay in a guild you want to stay in.

 

some of us are lucky enough to have both.

 

but you still cannot cater to everyone all the time. plus... reaching your personal conquest goal comes with personal rewards even if you are unguilded. so its not like you get nothing for participation.

[ZGOZZ]

So how about this?

 

If the a guild wins, they can not compete the following weeks.

How does that sound?

[Greyhaws]

As soon as I read about strongholds and conquest I knew this would be a toy for all the top guilds to play with and nobody else.

 

The whole thing is pretty much geared for large, well funded guilds to dominate. There's currently no content for small guilds beyond what BW already have in the game.

 

All MMOs produce targeted content. When I played EQ2 they brought out god avatars to kill which were contested. Small guilds had no chance - it was entirely for the top end raid guilds to play with. It didn't really cause an issue. If you wanted in, you had to do the grind and get a sponsored invite to the guild - after an interview.

 

If you wanted to stay a small guild you had to accept that some content was just not doable.

 

Its the same deal here. If you want to do the content, gear up and qualify to join the guilds that are monopolising the content. If not, just have fun with your mates and let it be.

 

Not really a problem IMO.

[nkarabats]

There is a guild on my server that has 11million points or more now (btw they are not a "Top" guild)

 

I cant see how this conquest thing isn't broken. It doesn't determine the better guild. Its only determining who has the most time on their hands and how large the guild is.

 

2 of the guilds that I am in have placed on the boards the last 2 times. This week we pretty much said f it since its pretty pointless.

 

As for "allied" part, there were a few guilds swiping guilds on the different planets to ensure a conquest...I don't think there is anything wrong with that. That is just a strategic move to help out allies.

Edited September 6, 2014 by nkarabats

[sentawan]

When there are 5 planets, smallish guilds can compete to get in the top 10 on a planet. That is not the problem.

 

My problems include...

 

1) The pve part of the game needs to be made more in line with the points per time spent from the pvp part. The devs have said they will look at further balances of pve to pvp.

 

2) Since mega-griefing-guilds will continue to grief commanders well after they complete their ships in order to sell encriptions and frameworks on the GTN, they need to add additional ways to get either jawa junk or increase the drop rate of crafting materials needed to make encriptions. The other thing they can do is have an instanced commander that only toons that have completed their weekly conquest can group and kill once a week. I really don't want to expand my guildship by giving griefers more incentive to grief in order to sell frameworks and encriptions.

 

So... balance pve part and make it easier to obtain the purple mats to craft encriptions.... would go a long way towards making the system more fair for small PVE focused guilds that want to expand their ships. This system particularly affects RP/PVE guilds that just want their ship for RP purposes, and they can't expand them because it is too difficult to get encriptions.

[Kourage]

Once the top dawgs fully expand their flagships, you will have an easier time killing commanders. Once they have conquered every planet once, they'll likely not push as hard or care so much.

[Grayseven]

When there are 5 planets, smallish guilds can compete to get in the top 10 on a planet. That is not the problem.

 

My problems include...

 

1) The pve part of the game needs to be made more in line with the points per time spent from the pvp part. The devs have said they will look at further balances of pve to pvp.

 

2) Since mega-griefing-guilds will continue to grief commanders well after they complete their ships in order to sell encriptions and frameworks on the GTN, they need to add additional ways to get either jawa junk or increase the drop rate of crafting materials needed to make encriptions. The other thing they can do is have an instanced commander that only toons that have completed their weekly conquest can group and kill once a week. I really don't want to expand my guildship by giving griefers more incentive to grief in order to sell frameworks and encriptions.

 

So... balance pve part and make it easier to obtain the purple mats to craft encriptions.... would go a long way towards making the system more fair for small PVE focused guilds that want to expand their ships. This system particularly affects RP/PVE guilds that just want their ship for RP purposes, and they can't expand them because it is too difficult to get encriptions.

 

1 is not a problem. No matter how much time you spend PvPing, someone doing PvE can earn more points. People that are whining about this have absolutely no clue how long PvP takes for the reward given.

 

2 won't be a problem for long since even guilds filled with people who get off on that behavior will move on to the next thing.

 

Making things easier isn't the answer either. It isn't hard to get artifact mats, just time consuming and that is exactly how it should be. Effort = reward and getting something for nothing is a waste of the system.

[ivanhedgehog]

Once the top dawgs fully expand their flagships, you will have an easier time killing commanders. Once they have conquered every planet once, they'll likely not push as hard or care so much.

 

they will continue to get them and sell them for top $$$ in the GTN.......problem NOT solved

[Grayseven]

they will continue to get them and sell them for top $$$ in the GTN.......problem NOT solved

 

Command encryptions are already down to under 300k and will continue to fall as people cease to need them. There are much easier ways to earn 300k.

[Berlain]

It's not just they control the faction bosses at the bases for conquest, we actually had one tagged and had the kill taken away from us by another guild of our own faction. It's intended for the opposite faction try to stop you in their base, but not your own faction. We have reported the guild and the members of said guild that participated in it for harassment and griefing multiple times and still nothing. And this guild has everything unlocked on its ship and has over 90% of the blue incriptions and purple frameworks that are on the gtn for sale. What they are doing is against the games policies and they know it and continue to do it cause they know that bioware isnt going to do anything to them. For once Bioware needs to make a example and enforce the rules on these guilds.

[ZGOZZ]

It's not just they control the faction bosses at the bases for conquest, we actually had one tagged and had the kill taken away from us by another guild of our own faction. It's intended for the opposite faction try to stop you in their base, but not your own faction. We have reported the guild and the members of said guild that participated in it for harassment and griefing multiple times and still nothing. And this guild has everything unlocked on its ship and has over 90% of the blue incriptions and purple frameworks that are on the gtn for sale. What they are doing is against the games policies and they know it and continue to do it cause they know that bioware isnt going to do anything to them. For once Bioware needs to make a example and enforce the rules on these guilds.

 

Yep that is low..

[LordArtemis]

Although I can understand concerns about the fairness of the current conquest system (I have pointed out the folly of the design in the past many times) and would certainly like to see all players get a chance to contribute, I have to question the wisdom of a contention that states that the unfairness of any system like the conquest system would effect subs or total players in any real measurable way.

 

I contend that casual players likely could not care less about the conquest system. Since they likely make up the vast majority of players in this game, it is unlikely, IMO, that any problems the conquest system has would effect player retention in any meaningful way.

 

It just isnt something that I feel the majority of players find important or even worthy of participation IMO.

 

Does that mean it shouldnt be adjusted or altered? Certainly not. But, if I am correct, it does mean that making claims the system will hurt the game in its current state is a silly premise at best.

[Failtima]

So how about this?

 

If the a guild wins, they can not compete the following weeks.

How does that sound?

 

That's like telling a guild that got the top spot on a world one week "And part of your reward for your effort is...you are banned from competing next week! Congratulations!

 

Kinda like winning the World Series or the Super Bowl one year, barred from competing the following year.

Edited September 7, 2014 by Failtima

[branmakmuffin]

they will continue to get them and sell them for top $$$ in the GTN.......problem NOT solved

You're making a fundamentally flawed assumption, namely that there is a problem.

[Pietrastor]

As I mentioned in my previous post, instanced content and group finder has all but destroyed guilds because they eliminated the original reason for guilds, which was to group together to do content. Now, we finally have a little bit of content that requires a group, the larger the better, and some people are objecting.

Then why guilds still existed and most players wanted to be in good guilds? Obviously because instances and group finder won't smile when carrying your 53 alt in Fortress, won't provide you with quality RP players, NiM players, ranked PVP, consistient Starfighter group, nor agree to do Seeker Droid heroic with you even though it's ther 65th time doing it, no 10% bonuses, no borrowing millions for GTN speeders that you can give back for many weeks etc etc

 

The idea of Conquests is great and Bioware has done a lot good stuff to give even further incentive to guilds and their organization, but the system is very flawed as it is right now and need major rethinking.

Edited September 7, 2014 by Pietrastor

[Grayseven]

Although I can understand concerns about the fairness of the current conquest system (I have pointed out the folly of the design in the past many times) and would certainly like to see all players get a chance to contribute, I have to question the wisdom of a contention that states that the unfairness of any system like the conquest system would effect subs or total players in any real measurable way.

 

I contend that casual players likely could not care less about the conquest system. Since they likely make up the vast majority of players in this game, it is unlikely, IMO, that any problems the conquest system has would effect player retention in any meaningful way.

 

It just isnt something that I feel the majority of players find important or even worthy of participation IMO.

 

Does that mean it shouldnt be adjusted or altered? Certainly not. But, if I am correct, it does mean that making claims the system will hurt the game in its current state is a silly premise at best.

 

I don't believe it will cause people to quit, but it will cause people to stop paying attention to a content system that EA/BW spent a considerable amount of time and resources to build.

 

I want to encourage the dev's to do stuff like this, but they also need to use some quality control and actually think about how the players are going to play these systems and what effect that will have on the rest of the player base. Frustration and anger are not desirable outcomes for new content.

[ivanhedgehog]

Although I can understand concerns about the fairness of the current conquest system (I have pointed out the folly of the design in the past many times) and would certainly like to see all players get a chance to contribute, I have to question the wisdom of a contention that states that the unfairness of any system like the conquest system would effect subs or total players in any real measurable way.

 

I contend that casual players likely could not care less about the conquest system. Since they likely make up the vast majority of players in this game, it is unlikely, IMO, that any problems the conquest system has would effect player retention in any meaningful way.

 

It just isnt something that I feel the majority of players find important or even worthy of participation IMO.

 

Does that mean it shouldnt be adjusted or altered? Certainly not. But, if I am correct, it does mean that making claims the system will hurt the game in its current state is a silly premise at best.

 

so you are saying that nothing the devs do will cause players to lose interest in the game and go to more enjoyable endeavors? if this content was not for them, the previous was space pvp, the previous was so far back we start to forget...players will not say"I hate content, I am quitting the game"...but they might notice that they dont log in every night like they used to, they might notice they spent an enjoyable week playing "______" and they might as well cancel their sub. this is how most subs are lost, not like the avalanche of lost subs from sony's NGE. The game will not go away any time soon. The Star Wars IP is too popular for that to happen. that doesnt mean it cant be hurt by bad dev decisions. people can be unhappy without unsubscribing or rage quitting.

[LordArtemis]

I don't believe it will cause people to quit, but it will cause people to stop paying attention to a content system that EA/BW spent a considerable amount of time and resources to build.

 

I want to encourage the dev's to do stuff like this, but they also need to use some quality control and actually think about how the players are going to play these systems and what effect that will have on the rest of the player base. Frustration and anger are not desirable outcomes for new content.

 

I'd say thats fair.

 

so you are saying that nothing the devs do will cause players to lose interest in the game and go to more enjoyable endeavors?

 

That is clearly not what I said.

 

if this content was not for them, the previous was space pvp, the previous was so far back we start to forget...players will not say"I hate content, I am quitting the game"...but they might notice that they dont log in every night like they used to, they might notice they spent an enjoyable week playing "______" and they might as well cancel their sub. this is how most subs are lost, not like the avalanche of lost subs from sony's NGE. The game will not go away any time soon. The Star Wars IP is too popular for that to happen. that doesnt mean it cant be hurt by bad dev decisions. people can be unhappy without unsubscribing or rage quitting.

 

If your saying that a poor design with conquests, combined with a poor design of GSF (something I agree with), poor design of perhaps strongholds (I'm on the fence on that one, fantastic QoL addition IMO, poor decoration mechanic and crafting) and other notable additions to the game recently can have a cumulative effect, causing players to leave if they find the content less than engaging, than I would say I couldn't really argue with that logic.

 

Sure, bad decisions can hurt if they effect a wide playerbase, as they obviously did in the past, early in the game's development and release.

[Hikaru_Kuma]

Do you have evidence this was coordinated, and not just bad timing on your part?

It takes several minutes at best to muster an ops group, even with the handy dandy transport.

Mustering two separate opposing faction guilds to the same outpost at the same time, just to steal one commander from under your nose?

Really?

 

Yup, it has happened 2 times to me. We pulled and were there 1st, the other guild showed up and taunted it away from us but they couldn't make any progress as well so they had imp guild pvp us while the pub guy kept taunting. We killed a bunch of imps but the spawn point was right there, so it was a hopeless fight. We all died and the other guild got the commander, imps stood there and watched they killed it.

 

Also I should mention the healing/ guarding bug. The other faction people did it to their commanders and didn't get flagged. Or that 1 guy who kept taunting to evade it from us. They worked together and wasted 2 hours of people time.

Edited September 7, 2014 by Hikaru_Kuma

[keimox]

As soon as I read about strongholds and conquest I knew this would be a toy for all the top guilds to play with and nobody else.

 

The whole thing is pretty much geared for large, well funded guilds to dominate. There's currently no content for small guilds beyond what BW already have in the game.

 

All MMOs produce targeted content. When I played EQ2 they brought out god avatars to kill which were contested. Small guilds had no chance - it was entirely for the top end raid guilds to play with. It didn't really cause an issue. If you wanted in, you had to do the grind and get a sponsored invite to the guild - after an interview.

 

If you wanted to stay a small guild you had to accept that some content was just not doable.

 

Its the same deal here. If you want to do the content, gear up and qualify to join the guilds that are monopolising the content. If not, just have fun with your mates and let it be.

 

Not really a problem IMO.

 

The thing is that top guilds are not dominating in conquest. On TOFN the one guild that easily dominates top raiding/pvp guilds is the on that has about 250-300 individual accounts, not alts. How a guild that has about 30-50 individual accounts compete against 250-300 individuals? Sure u can grind all day long but still this system favors numbers above anything else.

Anyways BW is going to do something about this and they stated it in last cantina event.

[ZGOZZ]

Although I can understand concerns about the fairness of the current conquest system (I have pointed out the folly of the design in the past many times) and would certainly like to see all players get a chance to contribute, I have to question the wisdom of a contention that states that the unfairness of any system like the conquest system would effect subs or total players in any real measurable way.

 

I contend that casual players likely could not care less about the conquest system. Since they likely make up the vast majority of players in this game, it is unlikely, IMO, that any problems the conquest system has would effect player retention in any meaningful way.

 

It just isnt something that I feel the majority of players find important or even worthy of participation IMO.

 

Does that mean it shouldnt be adjusted or altered? Certainly not. But, if I am correct, it does mean that making claims the system will hurt the game in its current state is a silly premise at best.

 

I will have to disagree with you. Let’s really think about this, shall we?

If you make things beyond 70% of your players who, one do not have the credits others have, and make it next to imposable to join in new content. Plus the old content is boring and respective. Why would you stay? Why would I pay for something, let’s say not fun anymore? I think you’re missing the point.

It is to make it, not easy but balanced for all to be able to have a fair shot. Is this asking too much?

We are beta testing this new product, which we are paying for, which IMO nonsenses too, but hey.

To open Guild Ship and Stronghold, it cost is 2000000, to open one room. What I am saying is to just make it fair. For the guilds that only have 40 players. Or the 20 players. I hope your understanding what I am trying to say.

Edited September 7, 2014 by ZGOZZ

[AlrikFassbauer]

If you don't fix this, it will be 3 guilds running this server, hand in hand, and the rest of us locked out.

 

Why do you worry ? It's just like in Real Life ! Remember Microsoft + Intel ... After Microsoft had successfully pushed out OS/2 and DR-DOS and no Linux was in sight ...

 

Or just look like all of the other international Mega-corporations, like for example Electronic Arts, Activision, Ubisoft ...

 

It's just the way capitalism is meant to me.

 

Those who have will be given more. It's already in the Bible : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_effect

 

And, besides, RL crystal growth works that way, too.

 

So, no worries.

Edited September 7, 2014 by AlrikFassbauer