Bioware, remove the PvP from the quest to get M1-4X.

[azudelphi]

S E M A N T I C S! Symantics isn't a word

All things considered, there are more logical issues with their posts than spelling errors. I think it distracts from the discussion to just call them out on that.

 

Such is my opinion at least.

Edited October 26, 2015 by azudelphi

[Billupsat]

All things considered, there are more logical issues with their posts than spelling errors. I think it distracts for the discussion to just call him out on that.

 

Such is my opinion at least.

 

And I suspect you are right, but I had corrected him several times, it was starting to seriously irritate me. As my posts most likely evidence.

[lanawinst]

I'm finally done with my 20 warzones. Want to know the result? A very annoyed player, me, that dislike PVP now more than ever. In fact, after 20 warzones, dislike is not strong enough of a word to describe how I feel about PVP right now. And a lot of very irritated pvp players who asked us to go back to PVE. I would have loved to be able to go back sooner to PVE. This is just stupid... Edited October 26, 2015 by lanawinst

[Leklor]

Please do not remove PVP from alliance unless your willing to remove PVE from it as well.

 

If they are going to keep PvP into the Alliance, they'd better do it for real. Right now it's so little it's barely justified. Make daily and weekly warzones reward Alliance Ressources.

If that's not done, then PvP has no place in the Alliance system and deserves to be purged from it and kept separate.

And lower the number of Warzones.

[Draqsko]

All things considered, there are more logical issues with their posts than spelling errors. I think it distracts from the discussion to just call them out on that.

 

Such is my opinion at least.

 

Circular reasoning being the biggest logical issues. But hey when I throw that circular reasoning back at them they just can't comprehend it.

[Duedroth]

I'm finally done with my 20 warzones. Want to know the result? A very annoyed player, me, that dislike PVP now more than ever. In fact, after 20 warzones, dislike is not strong enough of a word to describe how I feel about PVP right now. And a lot of very irritated pvp players who asked us to go back to PVE. I would have loved to be able to go back sooner to PVE. This is just stupid...

 

What did you dislike about it?

[hadoken]

I'm finally done with my 20 warzones. Want to know the result? A very annoyed player, me, that dislike PVP now more than ever. In fact, after 20 warzones, dislike is not strong enough of a word to describe how I feel about PVP right now. And a lot of very irritated pvp players who asked us to go back to PVE. I would have loved to be able to go back sooner to PVE. This is just stupid...

 

So you lost all 20? How many commendations did you get out of that? Wonder if you can use that for anything at least...

[Leklor]

So you lost all 20? How many commendations did you get out of that? Wonder if you can use that for anything at least...

 

You can buy Common Data crystals (At a very disavantageous rate) and turn it into Alliance Ressource (Maybe one or two boxes) or a few companions gifts. Yay...

[azudelphi]

You can buy Common Data crystals (At a very disavantageous rate) and turn it into Alliance Ressource (Maybe one or two boxes) or a few companions gifts. Yay...

Can get decorations from the PVP & Starfighter Vendor too, right?

[Jadescythe]

So you lost all 20? How many commendations did you get out of that? Wonder if you can use that for anything at least...

 

Should get at least 75ish for a loss. Probably end up with enough for a mount or something even if you have to combine the comms across a few toons. Or you can get the warzone adrenal schematic and sell the crafted ones on the GTN.

[azudelphi]

Should get at least 75ish for a loss. Probably end up with enough for a mount or something even if you have to combine the comms across a few toons. Or you can get the warzone adrenal schematic and sell the crafted ones on the GTN.

You also get 1000 Warzone Commendations once you get 4X or Pierce.

[obek_kwae]

To those saying it's not forced and completely optional. Not true. I CANNOT get Pierce/Forex without PvP'ing unless i am the class they originated from. Unlike with Qyzen, there is no alternative whatsoever - therefore i am forced to go that route if i want a companion whom fits my charactrsr morals/ethos and whom will strengthen my alliance towards the coming confrontation/war with the Eternal Empire.

 

In a game (and type of game) where min-maxing and making your character and all associated with it stronger by gearing, obtaining companions and so forth is the whole point, why would i NOT want to acquire someone that can do that? Because i have no alternative way of acquiring these companions, i either make myself weaker or get FORCED to patrticipate in a gameplay type that, from experience in this and other PvP games, (WoW, EVE, Warhammer Online, UO etc etc) style i find distasteful, populated by rude, antagonistic bullies. I would be happy to work harder in a pve sense (and i wager i am not the only one in this thread who feels this way) to get either of those companions given the opportunity, but don't tell me i am not forced and that i should be happy to make my alliance weaker because of a poor development decision from BW.

Edited October 26, 2015 by obek_kwae

[azudelphi]

To those saying it's not forced and completely optional. Not true. I CANNOT get Pierce/Forex without PvP'ing unless i am the class they originated from. Unlike with Qyzen, there is no alternative whatsoever - therefore i am forced to go that route if i want a companion whom fits my charactrsr morals/ethos and whom will strengthen my alliance towards the coming confrontation/war with the Eternal Empire.

 

In a game (and type of game) where min-maxing and making your character and all associated with it stronger by gearing, obtaining companions and so forth is the whole point, why would i NOT want to acquire someone that can do that? Because i have no alternative way of acquiring these companions, i either make myself weaker or get FORCED to patrticipate in a gameplay type that, from experience in this and other PvP games, (WoW, EVE, Warhammer Online, UO etc etc) style i find distasteful, populated by rude, antagonistic bullies. I would be happy to work harder in a pve sense (and i wager i am not the only one in this thread who feels this way) to get either of those companions given the opportunity, but don't tell me i am not forced and that i should be happy to make my alliance weaker because of a poor development decision from BW.

We don't know if it makes the alliance weaker from a systemic standpoint. That's speculation.

 

If it comes to be reality, I will reassess my stance. Until then, M1-4X and Pierce are functionally identical to the other companions and are not involved in any other aspects of the game at the moment. (Barring needing to start the conversation for a future companion.)

Edited October 26, 2015 by azudelphi

[hadoken]

To those saying it's not forced and completely optional. Not true. I CANNOT get Pierce/Forex without PvP'ing unless i am the class they originated from. Unlike with Qyzen, there is no alternative whatsoever - therefore i am forced to go that route if i want a companion whom fits my charactrsr morals/ethos and whom will strengthen my alliance towards the coming confrontation/war with the Eternal Empire.

 

In a game (and type of game) where min-maxing and making your character and all associated with it stronger by gearing, obtaining companions and so forth is the whole point, why would i NOT want to acquire someone that can do that? Because i have no alternative way of acquiring these companions, i either make myself weaker or get FORCED to patrticipate in a gameplay type that, from experience in this and other PvP games, (WoW, EVE, Warhammer Online, UO etc etc) style i find distasteful, populated by rude, antagonistic bullies. I would be happy to work harder in a pve sense (and i wager i am not the only one in this thread who feels this way) to get either of those companions given the opportunity, but don't tell me i am not forced and that i should be happy to make my alliance weaker because of a poor development decision from BW.

 

Let me know when you can bring out multiple companions at one time. Until then this entire post is kind of pointless. It's totally optional and has no real impact on gameplay at all. You have a bunch of companions to choose from and they're all equally capable of doing whatever you need them to do. Seriously.

[Jadescythe]

To those saying it's not forced and completely optional. Not true. I CANNOT get Pierce/Forex without PvP'ing unless i am the class they originated from. Unlike with Qyzen, there is no alternative whatsoever - therefore i am forced to go that route if i want a companion whom fits my charactrsr morals/ethos and whom will strengthen my alliance towards the coming confrontation/war with the Eternal Empire.

 

In a game (and type of game) where min-maxing and making your character and all associated with it stronger by gearing, obtaining companions and so forth is the whole point, why would i NOT want to acquire someone that can do that? Because i have no alternative way of acquiring these companions, i either make myself weaker or get FORCED to patrticipate in a gameplay type that, from experience in this and other PvP games, (WoW, EVE, Warhammer Online, UO etc etc) style i find distasteful, populated by rude, antagonistic bullies. I would be happy to work harder in a pve sense (and i wager i am not the only one in this thread who feels this way) to get either of those companions given the opportunity, but don't tell me i am not forced and that i should be happy to make my alliance weaker because of a poor development decision from BW.

 

The idea of the alliance is to obtain the companions you want and skip the ones you don't. There is at least 1 companion you can kill off. So obviously you don't need them all to complete the story. If you want them all, then you can complete all the necessary content like all the other players.

[Bobs_YourUncle]

To those saying it's not forced and completely optional. Not true. I CANNOT get Pierce/Forex without PvP'ing unless i am the class they originated from. Unlike with Qyzen, there is no alternative whatsoever - therefore i am forced to go that route if i want a companion whom fits my charactrsr morals/ethos and whom will strengthen my alliance towards the coming confrontation/war with the Eternal Empire.

 

Well then do what the character requests to get him. If you aren't willing to do that, then you are choosing not to get that companion. No alternatives? Sure, so far, there isn't another lizard companion, or rounded robot with the same exact personalities... but plenty of alternatives. No, they aren't making you do squat, unless you can show me your progress in the game is stopped as a result. There are no required companions locked behind PvP.

[obek_kwae]

We don't know if it makes the alliance weaker from a systemic standpoint. That's speculation.

 

If it comes to be reality, I will reassess my stance. Until then, M1-4X and Pierce are functionally identical to the other companions and are not involved in any other aspects of the game at the moment. (Barring needing to start the conversation for a future companion.)

 

We don't know it doesn't either

 

Fact is, my alliance will be lacking an officer from my faction that has skills and experience that would be an asset to my alliance, therefore it is weaker - in a game (type) where making your character (and powerbase) stronger is the whole means of progression. Gating someone behind a PvP grind in a PvE centric game is bad design and i and others who feel similarly just want an option that doesn't force us into ruining what other people enjoy - PvP or be weaker for refusing to do it.

[azudelphi]

We don't know it doesn't either

Right, but I am not going to request or support a systemic change based on purely speculative worst case changes.

 

If the future indicates that the alliance is functionally weaker without M1-4X or Pierce, I will gladly support an alternative. Until then, I am not going to let the fear that it could be weaker force a change.

Edited October 26, 2015 by azudelphi

[NogueiraA]

People will not understand the real problem until they face the real problem.

I bet most of the people here don't even have early access to see what's really happening at 65 pvp warzones.

[azudelphi]

People will not understand the real problem until they face the real problem.

I bet most of the people here don't even have early access to see what's really happening at 65 pvp warzones.

The same thing that was happening in level 60 Warzones?

[Bobs_YourUncle]

We don't know it doesn't either

 

Fact is, my alliance will be lacking an officer from my faction that has skills and experience that would be an asset to my alliance, therefore it is weaker - in a game (type) where making your character (and powerbase) stronger is the whole means of progression. Gating someone behind a PvP grind in a PvE centric game is bad design and i and others who feel similarly just want an option that doesn't force us into ruining what other people enjoy - PvP or be weaker for refusing to do it.

 

Then go do the required missions, ffs. It obviously matters a lot to you, just not enough to do 20 pvp matches. It's 20 pvp matches.

 

Pro-tip: Turn off game chat and just have fun. They don't even require you win, do they? Pretend the enemy is npcs and its no different than a really hard PvE mission that you don't have to win.

[obek_kwae]

Right, but I am not going to request or support a systemic change based on purely speculative worst case changes.

 

If the future indicates that the alliance is functionally weaker without M1-4X or Pierce, I will gladly support an alternative. Until then, I am not going to let the fear that it could be weaker force a change.

 

That's the kicker though. My alliance is weaker unless i get that companion from a story point of view. Just like my alliance is weaker if as an example

 

 

i kill tanno vik

 

 

At least though by doing the above i had a choice that wasn't forced upon me.

 

And to the person whom mentioned multiple companions out...what? It has nothing to do with that and everything to do with making the alliance i have been working towards and building throughout 9 chapters stronger - strengthening my position in the STORY because KoTFE is a story and my alliance is an important part of that, so why would i want to make an important story element weaker because of a bad design decision when, up until that point i had choices for everything else that were consitent with the rest of the game.

 

Show me any other point in the game where i had to PvP to get a companion after all?

Edited October 26, 2015 by obek_kwae

[Draqsko]

People will not understand the real problem until they face the real problem.

I bet most of the people here don't even have early access to see what's really happening at 65 pvp warzones.

 

It's not because companions that it is happening. It is because of the changes to conquest and crafting. Now the only way for raiders to craft their own raid gear is by doing conquest and finishing their personal goal to get the mat reward. The only viable way to finish the personal conquest goal on multiple alts is with PvP now, not crafting war supplies.

 

So guess where all those PvEers are going to get mats to craft their raid gear? That's right, PvP.

 

Even if they removed all PvP options from obtaining 4X or Pierce, you would still be experiencing what you are experiencing in level 65 warzones. Because of crafting and conquest changes.

[azudelphi]

That's the kicker though. My alliance is weaker unless i get that companion from a story point of view. Just like my alliance is weaker if as an example

 

 

i kill tanno vik

 

 

At least though by doing the above i had a choice that wasn't forced upon me.

The choice itself was forced on you though. You had to make a choice in the moment. Kill <blank> or let him live.

 

Similarly, you have to make a choice here. Recruit <blank> by completing the requirements or don't.

 

You have a choice. You have a conflict of preferences. Fine. But you do have a choice.

[Bobs_YourUncle]

People will not understand the real problem until they face the real problem.

I bet most of the people here don't even have early access to see what's really happening at 65 pvp warzones.

 

You mean endgame PvP is rampant with people who suck? That's been a problem since I been around, if its a problem at all, rather than just a normal feature of solo queue WZ.