PvP Economy and Ranked Rewards Restructure for Game Update 3.3

[Azuyr]

I'm someone...I'm fully in favor of trying this.

 

I think it's ridiculous that right now, one player can spam AOEs and prevent 8 others from capturing an objective.

 

A suggestion that's been made is possibly allowing AOE's with timers to still interrupt...but either way, when it's 8 vs 1, the 1 shouldn't be able to spam cheap *** AOE's and stop them from capping. It's nonsensical right now.

 

That's why 1 will cap and the other 7 will try to prevent the enemies from stopping the capper. DoH!

 

What kind of pvp players would try to cap an objective all at the same time?

[ZentheSecond]

So about the rewards themselves I have a question;

 

Will all of the rewards for ranked that are bought be legacy as an item? I ask because I really only PvP on 1 toon but have many other toons to my legacy that I just simply don't like in PvP. Would I be able to PvP on that 1 toon, and use its rewards to get stuff for my other toons (EI; Mount, weapons, armor, titles, etc)?

[DarthMaulUK]

Whilst the changes to coms are welcome, its all a bit late.

 

The underlying reason why PvP is all but dead is that there's been zero value added to PvP in 12 months. If that's all you do, there's zero value in having a subscription. Bioware said during 1.4 that they would remove the F2P restrictions from Warzones and they haven't.

 

THAT is the soul reason why PvP is in decline. Yes, you could argue class balance sucks but its been bad since day #1 - throw in the endless run of bad design decisions we come to todays stand point.

 

As a subscriber, I would welcome the removal of Warzone restrictions but actually ADD value instead of locking content that is over 3 years old behind a pay wall. You want to add value to subscribers? Give them more credits, a greater yield of warzone coms or a free valour boost.

 

And lets not forget those poor souls stuck on dead PvP servers. Is it any wonder they all left?

 

These changes are just yet another plaster on an open wound.

Edited June 1, 2015 by DarthMaulUK

[AlexModny]

So about the rewards themselves I have a question;

 

Will all of the rewards for ranked that are bought be legacy as an item? I ask because I really only PvP on 1 toon but have many other toons to my legacy that I just simply don't like in PvP. Would I be able to PvP on that 1 toon, and use its rewards to get stuff for my other toons (EI; Mount, weapons, armor, titles, etc)?

 

We are discussing if the titles and mount rewards should be BoL in future seasons. The crystals and weapons are already BoL in previous/current seasons and that will stay the same moving forward. We would like you hear y'alls thoughts on the subject. Does seeing a mount or title on character that (at the extreme) doesn't PvP at all hurt the significance and exclusivity of the reward? Or is it enough to know that someone in the Legacy of that character worked to get the reward?

[idnewton]

I'm someone...I'm fully in favor of trying this.

 

I think it's ridiculous that right now, one player can spam AOEs and prevent 8 others from capturing an objective.

 

A suggestion that's been made is possibly allowing AOE's with timers to still interrupt...but either way, when it's 8 vs 1, the 1 shouldn't be able to spam cheap *** AOE's and stop them from capping. It's nonsensical right now.

If the 8 are even remotely competent, the 1 will be globalled.

 

The 1 will typically only be able to delay a few seconds at most, and that assumes popping every available DCD, assuming reasonable competence on the part of the capping team. The only exceptions would probably be stealth (and they're probably not using that much spammable AOE) or a Force Barrier+grenade on objective combo.

 

If the 1 is skilled enough to survive for longer than a couple seconds against the 8, more power to the 1. Or the 8 are just bads. I think the people complaining about this don't see the second or third sorc LOSing and getting a single tick of FS off to interrupt before LOSing again (but then again I'd be fine with giving FS a short CD).

This.

 

At the end of the day, this is PvP. The goal is to fight, not to spam channels until you get lucky. This proposed change encourages a behavior that will negatively affect Warzones across the board.

[Azuyr]

Whilst the changes to coms are welcome, its all a bit late.

 

THAT is the soul reason why PvP is in decline. Yes, you could argue class balance sucks but its been bad since day #1 - throw in the endless run of bad design decisions we come to todays stand point.

 

And lets not forget those poor souls stuck on dead PvP servers. Is it any wonder they all left?

 

These changes are just yet another plaster on an open wound.

 

Not the sole reason. All competitive and great pvp guilds are dead. This happened after the introduction of arenas. No real point in being a guild if you only need a team of 4 people. And boy, those teams played objectives. Now people barely know what objectives mean. Warzones are a dpsmeter.

 

/Rip

[Vallerine]

How is someone gonna get 60 games per week on a dead server, Bioware?

 

Class balance, Bioware?

 

Why does 7 other people determine my rating? What if I get put with 7 bad people all the time (assume I'm amazing), I'm never going to get bronze tier.

 

There are many amazing players out there who will never get gold rewards because of server and class balance and everything!

[TUXs]

At the end of the day, this is PvP. The goal is to fight, not to spam channels until you get lucky. This proposed change encourages a behavior that will negatively affect Warzones across the board.

That strategy already works (spam capping). This change does nothing but alter how many people will be channeling now. And maybe you'll be right and this will be a terrible change...I admit it might be...but I'm willing (and anxious) to see how it plays. It's the first "tweak" to PvP since they removed the side speeders in CW...I'm ok with them changing it up.

[TUXs]

How is someone gonna get 60 games per week on a dead server, Bioware?

 

Class balance, Bioware?

 

Why does 7 other people determine my rating? What if I get put with 7 bad people all the time (assume I'm amazing), I'm never going to get bronze tier.

 

There are many amazing players out there who will never get gold rewards because of server and class balance and everything!

Transfer, like most of the people on your server already did.

[DarthDymond]

How is someone gonna get 60 games per week on a dead server, Bioware?

The whole point of these changes is to get more people queuing.

 

Why does 7 other people determine my rating? What if I get put with 7 bad people all the time (assume I'm amazing), I'm never going to get bronze tier.

Because Ranked PVP a team game. This is the same as an American football running back complaining "why does my chance of getting a Super Bowl ring depend on the quarterback?"

[Shermainium]

I feel like we are already making too much of this aoe capping change. I'd fully encourage the enemy team to all huddle together for a cap. Sounds like an easy team wipe. Not to mention most of the aoe interrupts people use are overload knockback style powers. Those knock backs should still be able to stop a cap by pushing range I'd imagine. I remain forever optimistic.

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

I feel like we are already making too much of this aoe capping change. I'd fully encourage the enemy team to all huddle together for a cap. Sounds like an easy team wipe. Not to mention most of the aoe interrupts people use are overload knockback style powers. Those knock backs should still be able to stop a cap by pushing range I'd imagine. I remain forever optimistic.

 

The way I understand the change, knockbacks should continue to stop the cap since they'd interrupt the action. It's just that AOE damage alone won't stop a cap now.

[sloasdaylight]

Nice to see some more details on the reward, however:

 

is way too steep of a cost IMO, making the tokens you get from individual matches virtually useless. I really hope that the other rewards like titles will not nearly be that expensive. Because unless suddenly more players start queueing, it's not possible to play this many matches on my server.

PvP is for me just one of many activities in SWTOR and if I can't get a single reward when playing like 5-10 matches per week, there's no point to queue up in the first place. So I really hope that only the mount is this expensive and things like the titles are cheaper.

 

I don't think so. After all, that's for a player who isn't even in the bronze tier, and getting the gold tier mount. That's not supposed to be something that everyone and their mother is running around with on fleet.

[Smuglebunny]

SO thats how long it takes to get BW to do just about everything with PVP that we have been asking for from day one.

 

3 years.

 

glad they finally changed this but kinda makes me feel like i wasted 3 years.

 

oh and pvp in this game already died so...I mean. whats the point.

 

Its like NOW that its too late and no one cares anymore, here is everything you ever wanted and no longer can use. enjoy.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Smuglebunny

[phalczen]

Does seeing a mount or title on character that (at the extreme) doesn't PvP at all hurt the significance and exclusivity of the reward? Or is it enough to know that someone in the Legacy of that character worked to get the reward?

 

I have mixed feelings on this.

For example, the Helix Hyperpod mount from Nightmare Terror from Beyond isn't bind-on-legacy. The only character that can use it is the one that actually participated in the raid.

 

But, the Kell Dragon Offhand token that drops from that same boss can have its mods removed, placed in legacy gear, and transferred to another character without too much effort.

 

Nevertheless, you also recognize the inherent unfairness of a Qyzen Fess customization dropping as loot in an operation when no one could use it, so you made that Bind on Legacy.

 

There could be very specific reasons why a person would want a reward on one character and not on the one that pvp'ed. To use an example from last season, I might want role-play a dark side gunslinger who is very pirate-like, and therefore want to use pistols that looked like the Swashbuckling ones from Season 4, but perhaps I did all my ranked pvp on a Sorc, who is very happy with his current lightsaber and would have no use for a flintlock pistol.

 

I think that freedom is the key here. Players always benefit when they have more choices, and if they want a specific look to their character and are still willing to pvp in order to earn that reward, should anyone really care that they chose to pvp on a different toon? Honestly I don't really pay attention to what other people have. I see Giradda's Rancor and think, wow, that's neat, that person pvp'ed well in season 1 ... and I see Helix Hyperpods and think, wow, that person did a lot of Nightmare TFB. Whether that toon is the one that actually did the pvp'ing or not, is irrelevant, its the same real person putting in the effort for the reward.

 

I will say that if you consider doing it for these rewards, you might want to start to do it on vanity drops from operations as well, for consistency.

[teclado]

Thanks for the info, Alex! At first glance, 60 games a week may seem a bit much. Then again, if you are not going to even hit bronze, you'll have to work for it if you want the TOP rewards. Seems reasonable. I very much do want to see solo ranked in the position where 60 games a week is possible.

 

Will the Tokens be BoL? So, if one is an altoholic and plays 10 different characters in ranked, would they be transferrable via legacy storage in order to create one combined token pool to purchase rewards from? I'm thinking similar to gray helix components for the Gree event.

 

Overall, I applaud the efforts. I'm looking forward to season 6!

Edited June 1, 2015 by teclado

[Karaiblis]

I'm fine with a mount being for any character, someone on a legacy earned it. I don't know about titles, obviously the top 96 titles can't be legacy bound. I would rather not see titles shareable, but that's more because I see a title as a championship trophy-title and a mount/armor/crystal as a the monetary reward pot.

 

I'm very interested in the AoE damage not breaking caps change, I think it needs to be tested on the PTS heavily to try and break it, but I am cautiously in favor, I think it could make games much more dynamic and interesting.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Karaiblis

[DarthDymond]

We are discussing if the titles and mount rewards should be BoL in future seasons. The crystals and weapons are already BoL in previous/current seasons and that will stay the same moving forward. We would like you hear y'alls thoughts on the subject. Does seeing a mount or title on character that (at the extreme) doesn't PvP at all hurt the significance and exclusivity of the reward? Or is it enough to know that someone in the Legacy of that character worked to get the reward?

I think BoL would be fine, even preferable, so long as class balance is in a good place for that season.

 

The only legitimate concern I could see someone having would be if class balance was genuinely out of whack then earning a mount on the 'flavor of the month' class and sending it to an alt of the underpowered class could seem like it's misrepresenting the actual level of achievement.

 

If class balance is good, then the accolades would properly belong to the player, not the character, and it should be up to the player to decide what to do with the reward.

Edited June 1, 2015 by DarthDymond

[Metthew]

No need to complain about capping not being interruptable by AOE.

 

Uncapping would also be non-interruptable. And defusing a bomb takes half the time as a cap.

[JourrnoRush]

We are discussing if the titles and mount rewards should be BoL in future seasons. The crystals and weapons are already BoL in previous/current seasons and that will stay the same moving forward. We would like you hear y'alls thoughts on the subject. Does seeing a mount or title on character that (at the extreme) doesn't PvP at all hurt the significance and exclusivity of the reward? Or is it enough to know that someone in the Legacy of that character worked to get the reward?

 

Alex, every single server has a faction bias. AKA if I don't play my imperial toon I will NEVER get rewards for solo. Team ranked is almost as bad as the best teams are usually on one server.

 

Making ALL rewards (tokens, mount, special tiered rewards, titles are a maybe) legacy bound will make people want to participate in ranked more often. It is impossible to fix faction bias, but if everything is legacy bound people should be more than willing to take advantage of x12 XP to get the characters they need to queue up.

 

This does not reduce the "standing" of the rewards because it would be clear they earned it somewhere on their legacy. Certain classes are more favorable in ranked, but making everything legacy bound will allow people to put items they EARNED on characters they WANT.

 

I fully support legacy bound EVERYTHING for ranked rewards

[Glower]

In Warzones, capturing an objective (on Alderaan or Voidstar, for example) will no longer be interrupted by AoE effects. This change should reduce the stagnation on objectives and allow for more diverse defensive strategies.

 

Love most of the changes except AoE. It will become to spam-fest and more frustrations in pug vs premade on TS situations. Terribad solution in case of "stagnation".

 

pieces will now be purchased with Warzone Comms and the previous tier gear piece.

 

This bs again... Can we save entry level gear without farming it one more time? Can you just check the item in backpack but not remove it? It is easier to farm them again with new prices, but still dumb.

[What_The_Deuce]

some interesting changes and some good changes. the aoe/cap interupts is one I'll wait and see on. it would have been interesting to see if a different system (such as guarded players being the ones immune to aoe interupts) would have rewarded skill or tactics more. i think we will see a lot of 8 people running to the door and taking their chances but it'll be interesting none the less.

it'd also be nice having put a lot of effort into grinding out my 174 set to get some of those comms back in the new system given that the same set is now being given away for a fraction of the effort.

[JourrnoRush]

I think BoL would be fine, even preferable, so long as class balance is in a good place for that season.

 

The only legitimate concern I could see someone having would be if class balance was genuinely out of whack then earning a mount on the 'flavor of the month' class and sending it to an alt of the underpowered class could seem like its misrepresenting the actual level of achievement.

 

If class balance is good, then the accolades would properly belong to the player, not the character, and it should be up to the player to decide what to do with the reward.

 

I agree with this to an extent. Rewards shouldn't be catered around class balance, because there will always be a FOTM in a season. Its just how it happens. If its not one class, its another.

 

As such, it should be up to the player 100% what they do with the rewards they earned and that includes sending a themed reward to a character that makes sense. My Jedi is not a pirate and neither is my Sith, but my BH could be!

[MaximusRex]

I find it disconcerting that there is no sign whatsoever that Bioware is heeding, or intends to heed, the feedback regarding the AOE cap changes.

 

There has been a lot of feedback in support of the change. Why should they heed you instead of those who like it? At the very least it will get played on PTR.

[Vallerine]

The whole point of these changes is to get more people queuing.

 

 

Because Ranked PVP a team game. This is the same as an American football running back complaining "why does my chance of getting a Super Bowl ring depend on the quarterback?"

 

So why is it called a solo rating?