These 4 threads all ask the same questions,can we get answers?

[ScarletBlaze]

I've only done 4x on my trooper, so i got him instantly. Can you reject recruiting him to complete the alert without doing any PvP? If so I have no problem with the requirement.

 

If you have to PvP before you have the option to reject that would be bad design, as there may be a time when literally noone PvPs.

 

No, I tried. I chose every option that wasn't trying to recruit him and still I have to do the pvp. I honestly wanted to reject him as I do not pvp so was hoping for a way to reject him so I didn't have to do the pvp in order not to be locked behind this.

[Jedi_riches]

Thing is, if they continue to gate companions for PvP, we could end up with an entire PvP chain for alliance companions, with, say, 1 from each class. Then, even if you managed to bypass a class requirement on one, the other 7 would require the year of PvP hell.

 

Yeah I don't know why but I get the feeling that Theron's alerts will all be PvP based, but I dread to think what future companions they may hide behind this "chain", I like Forex and Pierce, but I am not sure if I like them enough to PvP for them if bioware change it so that we can reject them from the off, but should others that I like better be PvP only AAHHH!!

[Kianabamin]

No, I tried. I chose every option that wasn't trying to recruit him and still I have to do the pvp. I honestly wanted to reject him as I do not pvp so was hoping for a way to reject him so I didn't have to do the pvp in order not to be locked behind this.

 

Not only that but once I finally manage to trudge my way through the PVP matches, I still didn't see an option to Not recruit him so now I have a companion I didn't want, that I achieved by doing something that I didn't want to do.

[sentientomega]

Yeah I don't know why but I get the feeling that Theron's alerts will all be PvP based, but I dread to think what future companions they may hide behind this "chain", I like Forex and Pierce, but I am not sure if I like them enough to PvP for them if bioware change it so that we can reject them from the off, but should others that I like better be PvP only AAHHH!!

 

It's hellish to do, but I've done it, for myself, I've gotten my new level 1 sniper to Valour 40, but who knows if Valour 40 will be the standard bypass for all Alliance PvP missions?

 

But honestly, mixing Alliance and PvP; bad, BAD move by BW:A.

 

There have to be better ways to encourage people to PvP, putting level 65 PvEers into a Coliseum with ravenous PvP-geared lions, that doesn't make ANY sense to me.

[Anaesha]

Not only that but once I finally manage to trudge my way through the PVP matches, I still didn't see an option to Not recruit him so now I have a companion I didn't want, that I achieved by doing something that I didn't want to do.

 

It wouldn't be so bad if we could use them for crafting. imagine sending all those comps out to craft items or to acquire items through crew skill gathering missions.

Edited November 16, 2015 by Anaesha

[ArielaKnight]

I talked to Matt about Alliance, Companions, and your questions specifically related to accessing future Companions. Between this thread and the ones linked in the OP, I think there are two main questions you are looking to have addressed.

 

Will I need to complete currently available alert Missions to unlock future alert Missions?

As of right now, the answer to this is yes. Inside of each Alliance Companion type (Military, Underworld, etc), the Companion recruitment alerts are very much looked at like a Mission chain. Generally, you must complete one alert Mission before you will receive the next. Note that you only need to complete the Mission itself, not necessarily recruit any Companion associated with it. There may be exceptions to this later on, for story reasons, but this is the general rule right now. It is worth noting that this is something the dev team is talking about, so it could change, but this is how it works right now.

 

Will I need to PvP for future Companions / Will I need to unlock Companions like Pierce to access future Companions?

The answer to your question is maybe. We are open to the possibility of future PvP related Companions/Mission content which could require the completion of M1-4X/Pierce's Missions. That said, we would not likely have PvE related content require it.

 

I think that should answer the primary questions that you have! Let me know if anything requires further clarification. Thanks!

 

-eric

 

Of all the stupid idiot things to do. You put a mission for a companion for pvp and don't give a person a way to reject it. Do you have any brains? Do you dont' realize there are people that hate to pvp? Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

If you going to do something that essentially forces a person that hates to do pvp then this is not about our choices.

 

I know people who essentially will freeze up when they enter a warzone. Did you even consider this? Hell no you don't use the brains you have to consider that. You just hear all the complaints on the pvp side wanting more people so you stupid people think it would be fun to push people into pvp just for a stupid damn companion and then you decide to lock the others behind this so you can't get anymore.

 

Do me a favor and remember not everyone likes to pvp. I can get someone to take me so not a damn problem for me but it is for people I know and for those that freeze up doing pvp it is a major problem.

 

Stupid idea that you can' t reject one!

[robertthebard]

While I think most of the crying is isolated to here, here has been my observation so take it as you will.

 

Zero whining on fleet or any planet.

 

One instance of someone in a pvp match saying they would not try and that BW ruined their life for making them pvp blah blah blah

 

I play on Harbinger and Ebon Hawk.

 

BW PLEASE have some backbone and don't change this. The children on the forums do not represent what the majority feel. Indifference. Just leave it.

 

I likely have children older than you, and based on your posting style, better raised as well. Here's the thing, your anecdotal evidence isn't worth the time it took you type it. You may as well have said "Hi, I logged in for one match, and nobody was crying". Were you in every match that took place on either server, or both, at the same time? Can you 100% verify that none of what these people are talking about is happening? Or, are you simply basing your claim on your very limited experience? The logic required to come to the conclusion that you have reached here is mind boggling in how far off of anything like reality it is.

 

I guess the other side of the question is "Who's tears are you feasting on"? The tears of the PvPers that think is should be griefing, or the PvEers that feel griefed by BW? That's the problem with making totally ridiculous claims, it's hard to tell what part of them to take seriously.

[sentientomega]

If one PvP match, win or lose, was all that was required for a PvP-gated companion, I could handle that on any number of companions that BW:A PvP-gates.

[robertthebard]

Thing is, if they continue to gate companions for PvP, we could end up with an entire PvP chain for alliance companions, with, say, 1 from each class. Then, even if you managed to bypass a class requirement on one, the other 7 would require the year of PvP hell.

 

Actually, it won't be that bad, since you'll only have to do it 4 times per faction. To be clear though, I meant if they allowed you to reject the comp w/out the mission on a class that doesn't get the comp naturally. Otherwise, it is seriously bad quest design, set up to improve metrics on a little used portion of the game.

 

Yes, that's going to hurt the PvPer's feelings, to understand that they are so much the redheaded stepchild that BW has to force people into PvP if they want a comp in order to make the metrics look better. Frankly, however, there's no better explanation for why they thought it was a good idea, because it's really not.

[Jadescythe]

Actually, it won't be that bad, since you'll only have to do it 4 times per faction. To be clear though, I meant if they allowed you to reject the comp w/out the mission on a class that doesn't get the comp naturally. Otherwise, it is seriously bad quest design, set up to improve metrics on a little used portion of the game.

 

Yes, that's going to hurt the PvPer's feelings, to understand that they are so much the redheaded stepchild that BW has to force people into PvP if they want a comp in order to make the metrics look better. Frankly, however, there's no better explanation for why they thought it was a good idea, because it's really not.

 

They already started floating the idea of requiring content for companions with HK. Required flashpoints in order to get a companion that is not intended to be used in flashpoints. I fully expect this requirement to return in the future for a companion. I think GSF is too dead or they would probably make that a requirement as well. Lokin already showed that events can be included, so I expect to have a BH companion locked behind the BH contract week and someone more sciencey locked behind the Gree event.

 

I think Qyzen was also a way to gauge community interaction and see how many players did the WBs and how many did the solo champ mobs. That may give them data on whether they include multiple options in the future. As to whether the options will be PvE/PvP or simply group/solo I don't know.

[sentientomega]

Actually, it won't be that bad, since you'll only have to do it 4 times per faction. To be clear though, I meant if they allowed you to reject the comp w/out the mission on a class that doesn't get the comp naturally. Otherwise, it is seriously bad quest design, set up to improve metrics on a little used portion of the game.

 

Yes, that's going to hurt the PvPer's feelings, to understand that they are so much the redheaded stepchild that BW has to force people into PvP if they want a comp in order to make the metrics look better. Frankly, however, there's no better explanation for why they thought it was a good idea, because it's really not.

 

Exactly, on a fresh 60, having hit the Alliance, done all the PvE stuff, then being totally unprepared for the onslaught that is PvP, at MAX level, no less. There's no way PvEers can compete, especially if they didn't and don't have an FOTM discipline. Since PvP is nothing like PvP spec-wise, and PvP is a lot harder and unpredictable, it feels like they're giving PvEers the finger with that particular companion, as things stand now.

 

If it was just one match, win, lose, or draw, that would be totally fine, and it wouldn't impinge in PvPers at all, that ONE run-through, rather than 20.

 

They already started floating the idea of requiring content for companions with HK. Required flashpoints in order to get a companion that is not intended to be used in flashpoints. I fully expect this requirement to return in the future for a companion. I think GSF is too dead or they would probably make that a requirement as well. Lokin already showed that events can be included, so I expect to have a BH companion locked behind the BH contract week and someone more sciencey locked behind the Gree event.

 

I think Qyzen was also a way to gauge community interaction and see how many players did the WBs and how many did the solo champ mobs. That may give them data on whether they include multiple options in the future. As to whether the options will be PvE/PvP or simply group/solo I don't know.

 

Except that now the solo mode FPs yield both the HK part, even Foundry/Maelstrom Prison.

Edited November 16, 2015 by sentientomega

[Raphael_diSanto]

Actually, it won't be that bad, since you'll only have to do it 4 times per faction. To be clear though, I meant if they allowed you to reject the comp w/out the mission on a class that doesn't get the comp naturally. Otherwise, it is seriously bad quest design, set up to improve metrics on a little used portion of the game.

 

Yes, that's going to hurt the PvPer's feelings, to understand that they are so much the redheaded stepchild that BW has to force people into PvP if they want a comp in order to make the metrics look better. Frankly, however, there's no better explanation for why they thought it was a good idea, because it's really not.

 

Why would you only have to do it 4 times per faction.... Some of us have way more than 8 characters...

[robertthebard]

They already started floating the idea of requiring content for companions with HK. Required flashpoints in order to get a companion that is not intended to be used in flashpoints. I fully expect this requirement to return in the future for a companion. I think GSF is too dead or they would probably make that a requirement as well. Lokin already showed that events can be included, so I expect to have a BH companion locked behind the BH contract week and someone more sciencey locked behind the Gree event.

 

I think Qyzen was also a way to gauge community interaction and see how many players did the WBs and how many did the solo champ mobs. That may give them data on whether they include multiple options in the future. As to whether the options will be PvE/PvP or simply group/solo I don't know.

 

It may well be that they do gate something behind Bounty week, but it's a fairly common event. We're running out of truly sciencey comps though. Talos was simple, Lokin sort of complicated, but really, I can't think of any other "extreme" scientist type comps, well, there's Cedrax, I guess, that could be gated behind Gree. That event, however, is one where I won't mind going, Legacy off hands, for one thing, and "real" PvP, since it's OW, and bound to happen at any time while you're in the flagging area. In fact, all of the WZ comms I had prior to getting 4X and Pierce on their class appropriate toons came from gree...

[Jadescythe]

Except that now the solo mode FPs yield both the HK part, even Foundry/Maelstrom Prison.

 

But for however long HK was available pre-4.0, this was not the case. Which just shows they were fine with requiring group content and potentially content players did not like in order to obtain a companion that was not used in that content.

[robertthebard]

Why would you only have to do it 4 times per faction.... Some of us have way more than 8 characters...

 

I know I do, but I also know I don't need every single comp there is on every single one of them. So I pick one, and go that route. My trooper would be the natural one for Pub side, my SW for Imp, since neither was required to do the WZs to qualify for the comp. If I can reject the comp/mission in the initial dialog, then running on all my toons makes sense, since I won't have to do something that I'm really not interested in doing, WZs, to get the comp. Especially if a comp for a class that I may want, like Kira or Nadia is gated that way. All I need is a method to reject the comp in the initial dialog, I can sort out what to do from there.

[Jadescythe]

It may well be that they do gate something behind Bounty week, but it's a fairly common event. We're running out of truly sciencey comps though. Talos was simple, Lokin sort of complicated, but really, I can't think of any other "extreme" scientist type comps, well, there's Cedrax, I guess, that could be gated behind Gree. That event, however, is one where I won't mind going, Legacy off hands, for one thing, and "real" PvP, since it's OW, and bound to happen at any time while you're in the flagging area. In fact, all of the WZ comms I had prior to getting 4X and Pierce on their class appropriate toons came from gree...

 

Which is where the argument against PvP gating falls apart. People have no issue with gating companions behind content completely unrelated to companions as long as it's something they are willing to do. But if we remove that requirement from any companion, then we would have to do it with all of them as someone, somewhere will not want to do every piece of content.

[Nippon]

Maybe they should make Valor legacy that way you only have to farm the needed valor once.

 

+1 To this, although i think Valor is just completely pointless anyway and way to much of a grind, it should just be removed completely and any titles added to the achievement section of pvp, I have highest level at 82 and that took an absolute age.

 

PVP is by far the worst thing in this game. And personally I don't think anybody should be forced to do it, based on that fact alone, its mind numbing, pointless and has basically zero skill factor or tactical based thought.

 

Seriously I have 2-3 full on PVP toon's, all i do is PVP on them, and that happens when im just kicking around waiting for an OP or FP to form in guild, or trying to get the last bit of XP for a level. I honestly dont think anyone would have an issue doing PVP if it was in any form, wothwhile or decent, actually meant something, had any tactics or War type attributes involved......Which it doesn't.....this coming from someone that has done Voidstar / Hutball / Pylons about 500 times each. Do i play SWTOR for PVP......Hell no.

Edited November 16, 2015 by Nippon

[robertthebard]

Which is where the argument against PvP gating falls apart. People have no issue with gating companions behind content completely unrelated to companions as long as it's something they are willing to do. But if we remove that requirement from any companion, then we would have to do it with all of them as someone, somewhere will not want to do every piece of content.

 

It doesn't fall apart. PvP is really popular, amongst PvPers. Unfortunately, PvPers aren't doing enough to keep their toy relevant to the developers, otherwise, they wouldn't have to gate purely PvE content, companions, behind it, especially given the story line of the expansion. Giving that the idea is to build an Alliance of Republic, Imperial and Neutral factions, such as the Voss, how does "you have to kill the people we're trying to recruit" make sense? Granted, there are times, but, requiring PvP to advance a chain in a scenario where we're trying to get everyone we can only makes sense in a "we have to justify the expenditure" kind of way. It doesn't fit into the story, you'll note we didn't run to Saresh, or her puppet, to gain support.

[Missywink]

Well I completed the 20x PVP matches. The experience was horrible. Am a PVE player, I enjoy the story lines and questing. I do not like PVP as a melee class in full tanking gear (It is not so bad if I play my healer on Imperial side). There is nothing fun about getting into a fight and just been stunned all the time whilst you watch your health go to 0%. I wasn't one of those players that go AFK, I got into the fights. However it is my team I felt sorry for. I really did bring nothing to the match, my damage output in full tanking gear and spec was abysmal. Sure I used taunt all the time and put my shield onto a healer, but lets be honest and say that it isn't fun.

 

Out of the the matches we won twice....... yup, thats 16 losses and 2 wins (2x for a win). Rather demoralising wouldn't you say.

[Jadescythe]

It doesn't fall apart. PvP is really popular, amongst PvPers. Unfortunately, PvPers aren't doing enough to keep their toy relevant to the developers, otherwise, they wouldn't have to gate purely PvE content, companions, behind it, especially given the story line of the expansion. Giving that the idea is to build an Alliance of Republic, Imperial and Neutral factions, such as the Voss, how does "you have to kill the people we're trying to recruit" make sense? Granted, there are times, but, requiring PvP to advance a chain in a scenario where we're trying to get everyone we can only makes sense in a "we have to justify the expenditure" kind of way. It doesn't fit into the story, you'll note we didn't run to Saresh, or her puppet, to gain support.

 

Companions stopped being PvE content with 4.0. Players are still living in this world where you get your 5 companions to do your bidding in your class storyline automatically and interpret that to apply to all companions now. With Alliances, the requirements for obtaining companions are significantly different. As long as BW is continuing to provide 5 companions through the main storyline, everything else is simply to encourage you to play the game.

[ScarletBlaze]

Which is where the argument against PvP gating falls apart. People have no issue with gating companions behind content completely unrelated to companions as long as it's something they are willing to do. But if we remove that requirement from any companion, then we would have to do it with all of them as someone, somewhere will not want to do every piece of content.

 

Actually it doesn't. There should be a way to reject any companion we don't want and therefore not lock them behind the gates if you don't do the mission. There will be some that just don't fit with my shadow but with no rejection I have to do them and take them whether or not I want them. So it should have a way to reject them and therefore not lock the content or take a companion you don't want.

 

I know people who wanted to reject Qyzen as he didn't fit with their character but couldn't. So yes there are people that would like a reject for a companion they don't want but dont' want to be locked from another one.

Edited November 16, 2015 by ScarletBlaze

[robertthebard]

Companions stopped being PvE content with 4.0. Players are still living in this world where you get your 5 companions to do your bidding in your class storyline automatically and interpret that to apply to all companions now. With Alliances, the requirements for obtaining companions are significantly different. As long as BW is continuing to provide 5 companions through the main storyline, everything else is simply to encourage you to play the game.

 

That's a stretch, isn't it? I didn't do any pvp to get Lana, Koth, T7 or Senya. So exactly how is it that they stopped being PvE content? Is it because you prefer to have something gated behind non ranked wzs? With alliances, there are 2 companions, so far, that require wzs. That isn't significant, especially when it boils down to 1 per faction. The significant number of companions are acquired through PvE. Do you have something to share with the rest of us about the first 9 chapters and Alliance building that we haven't encountered yet? Because 1 comp per faction at this point isn't significant when compared to the number of comps you can acquire.

[Jadescythe]

That's a stretch, isn't it? I didn't do any pvp to get Lana, Koth, T7 or Senya. So exactly how is it that they stopped being PvE content? Is it because you prefer to have something gated behind non ranked wzs? With alliances, there are 2 companions, so far, that require wzs. That isn't significant, especially when it boils down to 1 per faction. The significant number of companions are acquired through PvE. Do you have something to share with the rest of us about the first 9 chapters and Alliance building that we haven't encountered yet? Because 1 comp per faction at this point isn't significant when compared to the number of comps you can acquire.

 

I'm not saying companions are PvP content or PvE content. The terms are far too broad anyway. You yourself are an example of this as you enjoy some open world PvP and hate instanced PvP. Alliances are a game mode that encompasses both PvE and PvP gameplay. Some of it may require grouping and some of it might be solo only. I don't know what's coming in the future, but it's clear that Alliances are not a part of the single player story by what has been released already.

[robertthebard]

I'm not saying companions are PvP content or PvE content. The terms are far too broad anyway. You yourself are an example of this as you enjoy some open world PvP and hate instanced PvP. Alliances are a game mode that encompasses both PvE and PvP gameplay. Some of it may require grouping and some of it might be solo only. I don't know what's coming in the future, but it's clear that Alliances are not a part of the single player story by what has been released already.

 

The "that's a stretch" refers to companions not being PvE content. Comps cannot be used in WZs, why then, are they gated behind them? They are PvE-centric content, gated behind WZs. As a case in point, a trooper is not required to do any PvP whatsoever to gain 4X, and SWs can skip it on Pierce. So this argument of "they aren't PvE content" falls way flat, since dialog isn't PvP, and that's all that's required in these 2 examples.

 

None of this has any bearing on my biggest beef, which we've already covered, I'm fairly sure: You can't reject the comp w/out doing the mission first. So even if I don't want the comp, but do want to keep the chain open for future developments, I have to do the mission first, which means I have to do the WZs if I want to get any further alerts from Lana or Theron, depending on faction, that are gated behind these two comps. The logic here states that they are indeed trying to justify expenditures on PvP content, by hard locking people out if they don't do it. We're not just talking these two comps, there are plenty of toons that I have that don't even want them. I don't, however, wish to be locked out of even more content due to their need to justify PvP expenses.

[Jadescythe]

The "that's a stretch" refers to companions not being PvE content. Comps cannot be used in WZs, why then, are they gated behind them? They are PvE-centric content, gated behind WZs. As a case in point, a trooper is not required to do any PvP whatsoever to gain 4X, and SWs can skip it on Pierce. So this argument of "they aren't PvE content" falls way flat, since dialog isn't PvP, and that's all that's required in these 2 examples.

 

None of this has any bearing on my biggest beef, which we've already covered, I'm fairly sure: You can't reject the comp w/out doing the mission first. So even if I don't want the comp, but do want to keep the chain open for future developments, I have to do the mission first, which means I have to do the WZs if I want to get any further alerts from Lana or Theron, depending on faction, that are gated behind these two comps. The logic here states that they are indeed trying to justify expenditures on PvP content, by hard locking people out if they don't do it. We're not just talking these two comps, there are plenty of toons that I have that don't even want them. I don't, however, wish to be locked out of even more content due to their need to justify PvP expenses.

 

This isn't specific to these companions, however. You can't reject ANY of them without completing their mission first and some of them you can't reject at all. If BW chooses to make all companion missions skippable, that's not a problem for me.