Conquest Changes Coming in 5.8

[Quraswren]

Requiring players to fill it up with chairs for the bonus is silly. It basically forces players to choose between decorating as they want, and decorating for the bonus.

 

Incorrect. They are not required to fill it with chairs. They did that because they wanted to. Hell, they could fill it with chairs for the bonus then go back and decorate the way they really want later if all they wanted was the bonus but it was never a requirement. For players that really cared. They went back and leisurely changed to to how they wanted keeping the bonus.

 

Making the requirement unlocking all the rooms for the full bonus is not silly though, and I hope they do that. It's as you mentioned, a pretty good credit sink, and does actually require some time and dedication to get that (chairs doesn't, I filled up Yavin with them, and it took me maybe 20 minutes) (well actually I used the ops trophy wall hangings, but close enough).

 

There is no reason other than bioware just being lazy at this point in the game that would allow someone to purchase DK for 5000 credits and get a 25% bonus and not have to open the whole SH. It's some poor design at this point as they know so many spent 8+ million for the same 25%. It's a dirty kick to a lot of players and for what. So SH are not filled with meat trees or chairs? Like anyone but bioware really cares.

 

Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I actually figure the silence on this (since it's the only complaint folks really have) is because they are discussing that now, and want to have a conversation, and then get back to us on what they decide.

 

When it comes to bioware I no longer have confidence in them.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Quraswren

[SaerethDL]

How about this guys.. what makes you think opening up all your rooms should give those solely the 150% bonus to conquest? Opening up those rooms ARE what you get for paying your credits... gives you more room in your stronghold to decorate, thats that! Stop looking for something to complain about. Also different strongholds have different amount of expansions, so that wouldn't even work you'd just pick the stronghold with the least expansions. Edited March 2, 2018 by SaerethDL

[Darevsool]

Some comments that I'm going to at least attempt to organize and not ramble on about.

 

1. I don't like the RNG factor of which planets are going to come up week by week. That is a completely HORRIBLE idea and all you have to do to see WHY is to look at how long it takes to complete any single specific set of armor from the alliance supply crates you turn in on Odessen. Personally I only need Rishi to get the Galaxy Conquerer title, and right now I know for sure it comes up 1-3 times a year. There's a schedule, and it may be 3 months out once the schedule is released, or data mined, but it's scheduled and it's GOING to happen. With RNG...maybe it comes up 20 times a year now, or maybe not at all. Obviously it's the NOT AT ALL part of the RNG equation I have a problem with.

 

2. Stronghold bonus. Before the recent server merge I had 150% bonus on two different servers, on two different accounts. When the SH bonus was raised from 125% to 150% I unlocked 4 more strongholds, spend the money to unlock ALL the rooms, and placed more cheap chairs and lights down to get that extra 25% for each of the 4 sets that I had going. Now with your proposed changes it isn't clear if someone else can get the full 150% from buying the "base" (no extra rooms purchased) stronghold, or if they at least have to make the effort to unlock all of the rooms to get the full bonus. From a "competitive" point of view, to get the bonus everyone should be required to get to the same place, but you're throwing that out the window. Fine. Just tell everyone whether 1 room of Manaan that you get for the initial purchase equals max bonus, or if you have to unlock the entire place for the max bonus.

 

3. The 3 tier reward/planet system. Honestly, I'm reading this after I woke up and am still fuzzy on what this is going to mean. It looks like, as an example, Yavin could be a high tier planet all the time when it pops up. This means small guilds would never even have a chance at getting that title. I would suggest having each planet rotate between each of the 3 different tiers, requiring different objectives for each tier. That would at least give small guilds a CHANCE at getting the Galaxy Conqueer title. However, to make THAT easier, using a scheduling system would be a better choice than using a RNG system.

[Schoock]

There is no reason other than bioware just being lazy at this point in the game that would allow someone to purchase DK for 5000 credits and get a 25% bonus and not have to open the whole SH. It's some poor design at this point as they know so many spent 8+ million for the same 25%. It's a dirty kick to a lot of players and for what. So SH are not filled with meat trees or chairs? Like anyone but bioware really cares.

 

So much entitlement, yet so wrong.

 

The faction strongholds are available to ANYONE. Yes, even you can get that 50% for just 10k credits. And anyone that cares about the money spent on strongholds because they opened them for conquest got those two, because they have always been the cheapest.

 

Conquest bonus has never been a real mechanic, it was a mediocre one-time credit sink and that's it. Anyone caring even just a little has it maxed out. Already. Stop acting like 8 million credits were some crazy amount of money that you should get some special title for. Barbie shop items are going for hundreds of millions on the GTN, not to mention anyone playing any seriously is sitting on at least hundreds of millions if not billions of credits.

 

TL;DR: Stop acting like having 6 SHs unlocked was some achievement worthy of eternal gratification: it's not.

[Quraswren]

So much entitlement, yet so wrong.

 

It's called earned, not entitled. There is no special treatment I want. I simple want it to stay harder to get. You have to put in some effort if you want the full 25% and in turn the full 150%. which can cost as much 50-70 million credits.

 

Thats no cheap effort to make even if you just put in chairs.

 

Now, bioware wants to make that nothing more than about 8 mill total? Thats terrible design at this point in the game. Though I think lazy is partically to blame too because they don't want to code the keeping it to unlocking at least the whole SH.

 

The faction strongholds are available to ANYONE. Yes, even you can get that 50% for just 10k credits. And anyone that cares about the money spent on strongholds because they opened them for conquest got those two, because they have always been the cheapest.

 

Thats fine the initial cost is cheap. Just make it to where you have to open the entire SH to get the full 25% bonus.

 

Conquest bonus has never been a real mechanic, it was a mediocre one-time credit sink and that's it. Anyone caring even just a little has it maxed out. Already. Stop acting like 8 million credits were some crazy amount of money that you should get some special title for. Barbie shop items are going for hundreds of millions on the GTN, not to mention anyone playing any seriously is sitting on at least hundreds of millions if not billions of credits.

 

And this game needs credit sicks thats for sure with the way inflation has been. Stop acting like 8 million credits isn't much because it is. Same as 50-70 million is a lot as well. I highly doubt gamers are sitting on hundreds of millions much less billions but you can keep dreaming thats true if you want.

 

TL;DR: Stop acting like having 6 SHs unlocked was some achievement worthy of eternal gratification: it's not.

 

It was an achievement. 50-70 million didn't come easy. I know I spent a fair amount of time over a long period of time trying to get that much money. The full bonus shouldn't be so easy to get just because time pasted and bioware has some hang up about meat trees and chairs.

 

Getting all 6 fully opened should be an achievement or at least feel like it.

Same for getting the full 150% bonus. Thats should feel like an achievement and not just pay 5000 for 1/6 and walk away.

 

At a minimum, the stronghold needs to be fully unlocked before you get the full bonus. Take the decorations off it but make it so it has to be fully unlocked.

[Aderes]

OFCOL

 

The faction strongholds are available to ANYONE. Yes, even you can get that 50% for just 10k credits. And anyone that cares about the money spent on strongholds because they opened them for conquest got those two, because they have always been the cheapest.

Uhm... you need to open each stronghold FULLY to get the ability to decorate to 100% in order to gain 25% bonus.

Thats:

• 1.5m Coruscant
  
• 1,5m Dromund Kaas
  
• 10.5m Narshadda
  
• 9.5m Tatt
  
• 13m Yavin IV
  
• 8.4m Mannan
  
• 2.2m Umbara
  

Last time I checked... 46.6 million credits was NOT chump change...

 

Conquest bonus has never been a real mechanic, it was a mediocre one-time credit sink and that's it. Anyone caring even just a little has it maxed out. Already. Stop acting like 8 million credits were some crazy amount of money that you should get some special title for. ...

 

TL;DR: Stop acting like having 6 SHs unlocked was some achievement worthy of eternal gratification: it's not.

Conquest bonus of 150% is the difference between completing personal in a day versus completing it in a week. I have calculators that prove that fact beyond a shadow of a doubt here: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=932675

 

So... while having Six strongholds fully opened and deco'd may sound trivial to someone who didn't... those who had to scrimp and work their butts of in game to open and decorate them just so they could have that edge in conquest do deserve a modicum of respect.

[ivanhedgehog]

No, I'm saying like the CXP bonus per toon, earn it and get the bonus. 5000 credits is a joke compared to the 8 Million or so for something like DK. There is no reason to demean all the players that saved up and collected 50+ million credits to fully unlock all the SH, just so bioware can make the bonus trivial to get for everyone.

 

Hell at that low cost you might as well just do away with the bonus entirely but at least with the regular prices it was a decent money sink that this game sorely needs.

 

But leaving the normal cost isn't even close to pay to win.

 

Sadly, biowares silence pretty much answers our questions on the matter anyway.

 

bringing 4 toons to 300 is actual work. buying your way to a bonus isnt

[Quraswren]

bringing 4 toons to 300 is actual work. buying your way to a bonus isnt

 

When it cost 50-70 million credits I disagree.

 

Hell, its easy to level 4 toons to 300 these days vs making that kind of credits.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Quraswren

[KingGolDragon]

So much white-knighting going on to defend the stronghold decision.. lmao.

 

It was a pointless change , and i assume it was for the people who were too lazy to grind to earn the credits and then decorate to get the stronghold bonus. So now it's pretty much a free-hand out. Unlocking strongholds cost way way more than actually purchasing one.. And for anybody trying to defend this pretty stupid decision without any compensation to the players who got the 150% the original way, feel free to send couple million credits my way since credits aren't a big deal for you .

 

Overall, after reading it the changes seem pretty pointless. Was hoping it'd be something more exciting, but sadly it's pretty much what they've been doing throughout the game.

 

-> introduce a concept

-> Revamp it in a stupid way, rather than building upon what already exists

 

"Competition" for leader-boards was actually pretty intense for those that were participating in conquest. (hence why you see all the small guilds moaning , cause they weren't able to compete with the bigger guilds on the leader-board).. So this really has no effect on the "competition".

 

The whole "lets make sure everybody is on an equal footing" crap is getting annoying now, which is essentially what the "just own a stronghold to get the 150% bonus" is.

[KingGolDragon]

bringing 4 toons to 300 is actual work. buying your way to a bonus isnt

 

That's a pretty stupid way to look at it.

 

To bring characters to 300 -> you're grinding the same **** over and over

 

To max out 150% bonus (most players do it via credits)-> you're grinding things to get the credits, and then spend time to actually fill out the strongholds.

 

So if 1 grinding isn't actual work, then neither is the other grinding. Both concepts are based on grinding.

[casirabit]

That's a pretty stupid way to look at it.

 

To bring characters to 300 -> you're grinding the same **** over and over

 

To max out 150% bonus (most players do it via credits)-> you're grinding things to get the credits, and then spend time to actually fill out the strongholds.

 

So if 1 grinding isn't actual work, then neither is the other grinding. Both concepts are based on grinding.

 

You call placing chairs work? Please. Too many people did that. I went to visit strongholds until I was tired of visiting strongholds with high prestige to find out all they did was throw down chairs or meat trees to get the 100%. To me that is lazy.

 

And just for the record I have all 7 strongholds all completely unlocked but I still have 3 I need to finish because I refused to take the lazy way out and throw down chairs to get the 100%.

Edited March 2, 2018 by casirabit

[KingGolDragon]

You call placing chairs work? Please. Too many people did that. I went to visit strongholds until I was tired of visiting strongholds with high prestige to find out all they did was throw down chairs or meat trees to get the 100%. To me that is lazy.

 

Work: : to perform or carry through a task requiring sustained effort or continuous repeated operations

 

I don't call it.. the definition of 'work' points to the placing down of decorations, which in total takes hours upon hours throughout all strongholds, as actual work.

 

"to me that is lazy", then I assume getting 150% just by purchasing a stronghold would be just 100x more lazy right?? Cause otherwise you'd just be being hypocritical, since the players who got the 150% bonus originally, put in work.. while now not even 25% of that work is required to achieve 150% bonus.

 

But I hope you do realize what "lazy" means.. if somebody wants a stronghold full of chair, why do you have an issue with that? Was it stated in the original rules that all decorations need to be different? Do you not have multiples of 1 decorations in any of your stronghold? if you do by your logic you're lazy..

Edited March 2, 2018 by KingGolDragon

[Khaleg]

It's called earned, not entitled. There is no special treatment I want. I simple want it to stay harder to get. You have to put in some effort if you want the full 25% and in turn the full 150%. which can cost as much 50-70 million credits.

 

Thats no cheap effort to make even if you just put in chairs.

 

Now, bioware wants to make that nothing more than about 8 mill total? Thats terrible design at this point in the game. Though I think lazy is partically to blame too because they don't want to code the keeping it to unlocking at least the whole SH.

 

 

 

Thats fine the initial cost is cheap. Just make it to where you have to open the entire SH to get the full 25% bonus.

 

 

 

And this game needs credit sicks thats for sure with the way inflation has been. Stop acting like 8 million credits isn't much because it is. Same as 50-70 million is a lot as well. I highly doubt gamers are sitting on hundreds of millions much less billions but you can keep dreaming thats true if you want.

 

 

 

It was an achievement. 50-70 million didn't come easy. I know I spent a fair amount of time over a long period of time trying to get that much money. The full bonus shouldn't be so easy to get just because time pasted and bioware has some hang up about meat trees and chairs.

 

Getting all 6 fully opened should be an achievement or at least feel like it.

Same for getting the full 150% bonus. Thats should feel like an achievement and not just pay 5000 for 1/6 and walk away.

 

At a minimum, the stronghold needs to be fully unlocked before you get the full bonus. Take the decorations off it but make it so it has to be fully unlocked.

 

Well, I'm one of those sitting on billions of credits, yet I fully agree with you. The absolute minimum for the 150 % conquest bonus should be to own the full extended strongholds, probably combined with at least some minmum of decoration.

If they now change it so you only need to own the first room...this would be once again a case when Bioware avoids thinking things through at least marginally/having no clue at all about their own game. You can call this a "trademark" of Bioware actually...

Edited March 2, 2018 by Khaleg

[mpddispatch]

Eliminate repeatable crafting and I might consider bringing my guild back to Conquest. Repeatable crafting ruined conquest in my opinion. It's nothing more than a credit and materials battle and not a battle of game play. Otherwise, I'll stay away from conquest, even with the changes.

[mfdencolo]

It isn't an exploit to change guilds. The points you earned for a guild stay with them. If you made personal conquest before leaving to switch guilds you can't earn it again. You can however get points for your new guild.

 

None of that is an exploit. It is NOT a flaw in the game that people can move freely between guilds. The reason that a person changes guilds is their own and has no bearing on whether they should be 'allowed' to change guilds.

 

FYI Exploit does not mean 'action that I do not like in game and should be barred because I say so.'

 

No, it isn't an exploit when an individual player leaves a guild and join another, but when several guilds collude together to pool their resources/members to win a planet, it is an exploit. Scenario: The allied guilds decide that for a given week they will help Guild A win Planet X. Members from the allied guilds take turns joining Guild A, run Conquest events (lockouts, WZs, etc.) and then leave Guild A. Then other players from the allied guilds join Guild A and do the same thing. The next day the same scenario is repeated, and so on for the duration of Conquest week. It is cheating and most certainly is an exploit.

[Khaleg]

This was my biggest concern as well. Running lock outs is the best way to win conquest, but it felt like an exploit to me. Here was my suggestion http:// http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=929445 # 27 to stop that "exploit."

 

TL;DR: Basically you get conquest points for killing a boss. So if Players want to farm the CXP by running lock outs, they miss out on the Conquest points from killing the other bosses in that operation. This would incentivize big guilds to run operations constantly (helping the community) rather than have a dedicated team of lockout runners.

 

Devs, do you like this idea, or do you like the lockout running that is going on?

 

 

 

I would hope that the planet's yield would change, so Rishi is not always a high yield. This would allow small guilds to get the galaxy conqueror title, if they work hard and are patient by only competing in small yield objectives. Some elaboration from Devs would be appreciated.

 

 

 

I would also be in favor of this, as the two strongholds that I decorated "pretty" are both on the last page of my stronghold list.

 

 

 

I wasn't aware of a guild hoping exploit. Shows how much I try to cheat the system. Basically I thought when you leave a guild, you lose all guild conquest points, so you are not eligible to get the guild rewards if the guild you left is a top 10 guild, and you lose the title if the guild you left is the #1 guild. In addition to you losing points, the guild you left loses any points you earned, because you are not longer in it. So joining a new guild hurts you (as you now have to start all over for conquest, and are locked out of the one time conquest objectives you already completed) and your old guild is hurt because it no longer has the points you earned while in that guild.

 

Devs if it doesn't already work that way, would this be a solution to that exploit?

 

It's very simple in my eyes...running last boss kills to get the full points for the conquest objective was always an exploit/cheat, a tolerated one though. But I definately think, saying this as a guild leader of a guild which benefits from that exploit, this ability should be removed entirely. Not even dicussable. It's a cheat/exploit and therefore not fair because only guilds with enough man power can benefit from it. And of course it's unlogic anyway to get full points for a conquest objective when you in fact only did 1/5 from it. Not fair=no go in any game. It's already pathetic and ignorant^10 from Bioware that this is/was even possible to begin with and is around for so long now.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Khaleg

[Kyrra_T]

It's very simple in my eyes...running last boss kills to get the full points for the conquest objective was always an exploit/cheat, a tolerated one though. But I definately think, saying this as a guild leader of a guild which benefits from that exploit, this ability should be removed entirely. Not even dicussable. It's a cheat/exploit and therefore not fair because only guilds with enough man power can benefit from it. And of course it's unlogic anyway to get full points for a conquest objective when you in fact only did 1/5 from it. Not fair=no go in any game. It's already pathetic and ignorant^10 from Bioware that this is/was even possible to begin with and is around for so long now.

 

Do you think perhaps the reason last boss was never removed is that it equalized the objectives? A pvp match at max takes 15 mins, gsf around that. A last boss is roughly equivalent in time. The only way that a full operation would be viable time-wise in conquest is if it gave 5 times the points that the equivalent number of warzones that could be run in an hour gave.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Kyrra_T

[ivanhedgehog]

When it cost 50-70 million credits I disagree.

 

Hell, its easy to level 4 toons to 300 these days vs making that kind of credits.

 

whip out the old plastic card. use cartel coins to unlock...no problem...lots of hard work there

[ivanhedgehog]

That's a pretty stupid way to look at it.

 

To bring characters to 300 -> you're grinding the same **** over and over

 

To max out 150% bonus (most players do it via credits)-> you're grinding things to get the credits, and then spend time to actually fill out the strongholds.

 

So if 1 grinding isn't actual work, then neither is the other grinding. Both concepts are based on grinding.

 

you have to be a subscriber over a long period to grind 4 x 300 cxp levels. 5 min with a credit card for a 1 time purchase isnt exactly grind

[OneHit]

Let me try to let it out with an example and see if I can make more sense of it. Let's say a Conquest has 3 planets that you can invade...

 

Planet 1

Low point requirement to complete

Low reward for completing that conquest

 

Planet 2

Medium point requirement to complete

Medium reward for completing that conquest

 

Planet 3

High point requirement to complete

High reward for completing that conquest

 

If you look at planet 1, since there is a lower point requirement to complete the Conquest, it is loosely targeted at smaller guilds. However, since it is easier to complete, it means less rewards. If a large Guild still wanted to go for it, they still can. It will obviously be easier for them with larger player contribution, but they would be sacrificing conquest rewards to do so (since planet 2 and 3 would reward more).

 

TLDR - Small planets mean small rewards, big planets mean big rewards.

 

 

@Eric,

 

I'm going to speculate that you guys missed the mark. Can you tell us what type of rewards will be offered? You are balancing on the premise that the rewards are going to out weigh the win. But historically your rewards are lackluster at best. This has to be heavily incentivized in order for the larger guilds to go for tier 3 planets. Otherwise they are just going to keep winning what ever planets they choose. If you can put up an internal list of who in guild is scoring. Then why shouldn't the tiers be based on how many different toons are scoring points in a guild?

It's not all bad. Its better than a conquest system designed for 50 servers being carried out on 3 servers. But its not a balance unless tier 2 and 3 are giving out CM items.

Edited March 2, 2018 by OneHit

[Storm-Cutter]

There are not enough hours in the week for small guilds to compete. - regardless of the rewards and planetary weighting.

 

a 20-member guild can't match the work of a 400 person guild. - It's just not possible. There aren't enough hours in the week to do 20x the work.

 

Too little too late, not relevant for small guilds.

 

And don't get me started on the current personal goal rewards. - they truly are miserly.

[Vercundus]

Eric,

 

Can you provide us with the list of objectives, invasions etc, for each of the weeks in advance? With schedule being random it could take a lot of time to properly discover all objectives and it will create a bit of chaotic first few months, specially for smaller guilds.

[ShadowGovernator]

- The Invasion bonus for Conquest objectives has been removed!?!?

Why so?!?!

 

What are we going to use our freaking guild flagship for now?!?!

I run a full guild (1K members) and we have a fully unlocked and decorated flagship.

It took forever to unlock and it costs a ton of credits.

 

We use the flagship by moving it into position above the weekly planet that we plan to invade for conquest.

This gives the guild an invasion bonus for the different conquest tasks that we have to do.

 

It's the only thing justifying having a guild flagship, if you remove that, then you are even more stupid than I thought!

[JediJoy]

- The Invasion bonus for Conquest objectives has been removed!?!?

Why so?!?!

 

What are we going to use our freaking guild flagship for now?!?!

I run a full guild (1K members) and we have a fully unlocked and decorated flagship.

It took forever to unlock and it costs a ton of credits.

 

We use the flagship by moving it into position above the weekly planet that we plan to invade for conquest.

This gives the guild an invasion bonus for the different conquest tasks that we have to do.

 

It's the only thing justifying having a guild flagship, if you remove that, then you are even more stupid than I thought!

 

I believe he meant the bonus on the objective quests you have to do to obtain points. For example: war supplies this week have a x2 for Belsavis, because my guild is invading Belsavis, we get 1000 per general war supply instead of the 500. After 5.8, it will remain 500 no matter which planet you choose.

[UlaVii]

Weekly Conquests are no longer on a set schedule and will be randomly selected each week. The exception to this rule is that Conquests that coincide with recurring events will still be on a set schedule (such as the Gree event)

 

My guild plans all our events out for one month in advance to help our guild members plan things around their real lives. Some events tie in with conquest objectives such as planning our weekly general guild HMx16 raids and our world boss kills. Changing the conquest events to be random makes it much more difficult to plan ahead in a manner that satisfies all aspects of my guild members desires.

 

You have just increased the difficulty for guild administrators who handle event scheduling significantly while already spitting in the face of every guild leader and officer who you have inflicted your broken guild panel on for over a year now. I'm not sure how you reached the logic: "We have these guilds which help our game by organising and helping entertain our subscribers, let's keep doing more things to make that difficult for them".

 

The very least you could do is provide a schedule for the recurring events (such as the Gree event) so we can have sort of framework.