New Conquest System: First Impressions

[TrixxieTriss]

Then it is bugged. I have only gotten points on one character and I've healed 7 Ops now trying to help others in my guild get points.

 

Another quality release.

[Euphrosyne]

Considering I had over 1k of invasion forces from all the years of playing and doing conquest. So I clicked on them and turned some of them in to get conquest done on several of my toons. Plus I did my dailies, I did stuff I can do on every toon that didn't take hours. Plus, I did weekly stuff on different toons already to get conquest done on 3 toons. It is easy to do. I play mainly 10-15 toons every week, I don't see much of an effort of getting 5 or more of them to hit conquest every week.

Improbable. Doing all of the once-per-legacy-per-day and once-per-legacy-per-week activities will cap two characters with a bit left over. At that point, you're stuck with setting your invasion forces on fire to get anywhere quickly, and invasion forces are a rapidly wasting asset. Anything else is a very slow grind, unless you get lucky with lockout bugs.

 

Ironically, since the larger guilds with wealthier players are more likely to have disposable invasion forces, all you've shown is that they will still have an advantage once everybody gets their one-times. Poorer guilds, or poorer players, are screwed.

[Nightblazer]

My feedback for the new changes:

 

1. Put back points being earned for winning and losing a PvP / GSF match, not just winning.
   
2. Points earned should be per character for everything not legacy wide.
   
3. Add more daily / repeatable options.
   
4. Adjust the cost amount for crafting / add different types of crafting not just the isotopic mats.
   
5. Adjust some of the fonts for the windows, kinda small / hard to read. Can always make the window itself a bit bigger to compensate for larger text.
   

Edited March 21, 2018 by Nightblazer

[TrixxieTriss]

yeah the community is having an upheaval and they can't be bothered to so much as talk to us

 

Well it’s after 7pm Austin time now. 7:44pm to be precise. They’ve gone home and will look at it in the morning after coffee. Then ask if anyone followed up on Eric’s post. Later they will post some one line joke in the afternoon that isn’t even related to conquest and go home.

On Friday before they go home, they’ll post something else that will make the problems worse and cause us all to rage over the weekend.

Finally next week they will say they are looking to make changes, but it will be after 5.9. They also won’t give any detail on what changes or when exactly to expect them. Then they will go silent till 5.9 and hope we calm down or forget.

Next they’ll have some lame live stream and will ignore all the msgs people send to ask them about conquest. They will seem extremely happy about 5.9 and pretend 5.8 didn’t happen.

After 5.9, they will go silent again.

[CommanderPaco]

Obviously, I haven't spent a ton of time looking at this, but I do have some immediate reactions:

 

Crafting Changes

This feels like it was slipped in under the radar in an attempt to bottleneck the ability of large guilds to manufacture victory easily. The trouble is that it also hamstrings smaller guilds even more. Requiring so much more investment to create the same old stuff should have also been announced so that GTN sellers could have reacted appropriately to the new value of finished goods.

 

Work vs. Reward

The difference in guild rewards between tiers does not seem proportional to the amount of additional grind.

 

Lack of Information

Add some tooltips. Improve some task descriptions. Why are some of the repeatable icons silver / gray and others gold? Where do we donate for Crafting: Aiding the War Effort? (On that note, why does throwing away 10 Invasion Forces, which now cost a lot more to make, only give a few hundred points?)

 

Individual Rewards

Adding credits and CXP to tasks makes working them into limited play time more appealing. Thanks!

 

Accessibility for Smaller Guilds

The concept seems excellent, but if the aforementioned work vs. reward balance isn't addressed, then there's no point to pursuing medium or large yield planets, except to earn titles, so I suspect most guilds will continue piling on the small yield conquests, defeating the purpose.

 

The following addendum includes my subsequent posts on this topic for the purpose of consolidation:

 

Isotope Stabilizers

As an addendum to the crafting changes, I notice that Dark Projects can only be made using Refined Isotope Stabilizers now. Is there still a use for Exotic Isotope Stabilizers?

 

Winning vs. Participating

I'd like to echo the sentiments of others here. In the past, participating in PvP content earned points, even though winning earned more. For those of us who will probably never be great at PvP and frequently join the solo queue, there's no incentive to participate anymore. I can get CXP from PvE content without the frustration of fighting skilled premade PvP groups.

 

One of the areas in which SWTOR is horribly lacking is some kind of training area where friends can actually teach each other to PvP in a controlled environment. It's difficult to learn and improve if one is mercilessly beaten down over and over. Nevertheless, it was worth doing for giggles if a player could help his guild by merely giving his best effort. Now our efforts are meaningless, and there's absolutely no way we're ever going to be able to compete with dedicated PvPers.

 

Multiple Characters

As a smaller guild, we have relied on several dedicated players to meet their goals with multiple characters each week in order to be competitive. I personally do 4 characters per week; I have guildmates who do up to 9. Due to the rewards being so low now and the frequency that they can be claimed reduced significantly, it is impractical to try meeting the personal goals with more than one or two characters, particularly if the people behind them have limited play time.

 

Even if my guild miraculously manages to meet the guild goal, I will personally only earn 1 or 2 encryptions instead of 4, which greatly hinders our ability to expand our flagship. The flagship grind was already extremely slow for small guilds who don't have the cash to simply buy materials outright. Coupled with the increased material costs of dark projects, this is a crippling blow in achieving our community goals as a guild.

 

All of this, 10 times over.

 

While this may help keep some of the "zerg rush guilds" from going nuts, it doesn't affect them much. Smaller guilds get crushed a bit more. Change the whole "once a day, per legacy" bit back to "once a day, per character in legacy," and we're back on track to getting these shenanigans fixed (not to mentioning queues for GSF, PvP, Veteran/Master FPs and OPs were already lacking). Point values need to definitely get tweaked as well...too little reward for so much grinding (that includes crafting...cutting the time out vs. the cost increase is actually a worse trade-off).

 

Otherwise BW, you've really broken Conquest. This coming from a player who was here around launch and left thanks to the launcher client debacle, came back years later, and now is debating taking a break thanks to this junk. I've got good guildmates/friends that keep me coming back now, but this really hurts a game that was already on fragile standing.

 

Cartel Market items are not enough to keep people sticking around...quality game experience should be first and that will facilitate people to pay up in the CM.

Edited March 21, 2018 by CommanderPaco

[ThomasStarWars]

Well it’s after 7pm Austin time now. 7:44pm to be precise. They’ve gone home and will look at it in the morning after coffee. Then ask if anyone followed up on Eric’s post. Later they will post some one line joke in the afternoon that isn’t even related to conquest and go home.

On Friday before they go home, they’ll post something else that will make the problems worse and cause us all to rage over the weekend.

Finally next week they will say they are looking to make changes, but it will be after 5.9. They also won’t give any detail on what changes or when exactly to expect them. Then they will go silent till 5.9 and hope we calm down or forget.

Next they’ll have some lame live stream and will ignore all the msgs people send to ask them about conquest. They will seem extremely happy about 5.9 and pretend 5.8 didn’t happen.

After 5.9, they will go silent again.

 

You spin me right round baby right round, like a record baby.

[GordoKhan]

You think I used all of those Invasion forces. I only used 100 of them...lol.

 

then that is all of 5000 pts. less than 10% of the pts needed to cap three toons

[TrixxieTriss]

You spin me right round baby right round, like a record baby.

 

Yep, they’ll try their sleight of hand tactics they always do when they get negative feed back. It’s the Bioware operando.

“Look at this new shiny thing and forget about that broken thing we will never fix”

[JediBoadicea]

Well, I hope Eric or some of the devs manage to endure their way through the 33 pages of panic already posted in this thread to reach this point, because I'm going to try to be constructive in the hope it reaches someone.

 

She here's the thing. I think I see the intent behind the changes, and I think it's for the most part good. It has sounded promising since the first time you guys talked about it. And I still think it's promising, and I still like the intent. I just think the detail execution needs to be reworked. (And I think you guys seriously need to look at your player data, find your Founders who have been continuously subscribed and active all along, and pull together a focus group to run these changes by prior to deployment. Seriously. Please.) So here goes some thoughts.

 

 

NEED MORE DATA

 

We badly needed some sort of dev post or blog post or something official written somewhere explaining how all of this new stuff works. Live streams are great but they never can go into all the details, and they make bad reference material. The new interface seems nice and all, but it lacks tooltips to explain stuff to us, and even as someone who has been with the game since beta I found myself mystified and having to check multiple forum posts to try to see what the consensus was on what the difference between the silver and gold symbols were, if it's per legacy or per character or per day or... ?, and what does checking the little box do, and so on and so forth. In fact, in a lot of the suggestions I'm going to make to follow, I am forced to do so based on assumptions of what some things mean (like guild invasion target points) because I have no official explanation or key to reference.

 

 

DIFFERENT YIELD PLANETS

 

The good: In principle, I think this is a great idea, for all the reasons the devs already outlined in the streams. Providing different tiered target goals, at different levels of reward, lets guilds make more appropriate choices of where to focus. It also keeps Conquest meaningful to guilds who have been at the grind for a long time already. Not to mention giving hope to smaller guilds! I say keep this, it's a good idea.

 

The Bad: The rewards at Medium and Large yield are completely insufficient to incentivize anyone. There aren't very many people I know of who actually do Conquest for the baseline rewards we already had, so just multiplying those isn't much of an incentive. If you're going for the Small yield it probably means you're a small guild who just wants to keep chipping away excrutiatingly slowly at those encryptions, and it probably means you don't have as big a mats resource pool to draw from as a guild; for those small guilds, the Small yield rewards are fine. But if you're a large enough guild to even reasonably have a shot at making the guild invasion goal on the Medium or Large yield planets, it's almost guaranteed you have little to no need for Superior Resource Matrices, 150k credits can be achieved in 15 minutes running Heroics, and you probably just sell or junk those decos. To actually get the guilds to willingly divide themselves across the yield spectrum in a manner relative to their guild sizes, these rewards must be made more significant, and not just more of the same baseline stuff. Ignore credits if you want. Instead offer Refined Isotope Stabilizers and Void Matter Catalysts for Medium yield, and Encrypted Memory Cores and Charged Matter Transubstantiators for Large yield. The larger the guild, the greater the likelihood that they are deliberately trying to pool those true end-game mats to gear up their prog teams. Maybe add some Unassembled Components in there, or even a Grand Chance Cube.

 

 

DECOUPLING ENCRYPTION REWARDS FROM THE TOP 10

 

The Good: This is a good idea. Presuming, of course, that I am even interpreting this correctly (see my first point about needing a better explanation of how this works). If I am correct in understanding that players should now get an encryption provided their guild meets the guild invasion point target for the invasion they chose (and the player met their personal target obviously), regardless of whether or not they make it into the top 10, then this is a great idea.

 

The Bad: The guild invasion target scores need to be reconsidered, at least on the Small yield planets. If the goal truly is to give smaller guilds a chance to actually get encryptions (and thereby instantly make Conquest meaningful to engage in for small guilds who have long since given up on ever expanding their ships), you seriously need to re-examine the target number of 460,000 points. I feel like these numbers (460,000 / 1,380,000 / 2,530,000 ) were possibly arrived at by someone taking a historical average of what the number 10 spot was on various contested planets in the past (or what they presumed to be the average performance of guilds of certain sizes); if so, this was a bad metric to use, because that average reflects the number all the small guilds previously could already never achieve or they would have been making it onto the board to begin with! Let's consider a small guild of 8 working (and therefore $ spending) adults who play regularly enough to run group content together weekly, and who might all feasibly hope to make conquest by doing so on at least one toon each: that means 8 x 20k = 160k. Every person in that small guild would actually have to make conquest on three toons each week in order to start getting their encryptions even on the Small yield planet. That's just dumb. If the point of this Conquest revamp is to give smaller guilds and players who previously did not have the time or resources to compete a means to engage with Conquest in their own smaller corner, then a target this high defeats the purpose.

 

 

GRANTING CONQUEST POINTS ONLY FOR PVP VICTORIES and/or ONCE A DAY

 

The Good: Honestly... in execution, I don't see a good here. I think I can imagine the good behind the intent, which was probably to try to dissuade conquest farmers from AFKing in PVP or GSF matches. In principle, that's a worthy goal. But in reality, there's almost nothing you can actually do to stop this without hurting your legitimate players. Look, there are always going to be annoying Ugnaught squeaking players out there who try to cut corners, game the system, find the cheapest possible way to get what they want for little to no effort. That's the reality of games, and there is no truly effective way you can police this. Maybe don't grant conquest points to anyone who scores 0 damage on the match leaderboard, or auto-boot someone from a match if they haven't moved in three minutes, or who knows what. Maybe there's no solution. Goal might be laudable, but... moving on to the Bad:

 

The Bad: Artificially throttling people's ability to gain conquest points by doing the activity they most enjoy has terrible ramifications, particularly in terms of your player mood, goodwill, and desire to engage. I have many guildmates who play the game 95% to PVP (and the other 5% to occasionally join us for laughs in our guild Ops). They are loved and valued guildies, and they contribute a hell of a lot of Conquest points. They might still want to keep PVPing after this, or they might not; but whatever they do, under this new model they now contribute almost nothing at all to the guild's Conquest effort. Imagine Joe is able to get on twice a week, for maybe 3-4 hours each of those nights: If he gets in a good 10 PVP matches each night, at an average 50/50 win/loss and under an old baseline model of 250/500 CP per, then for his two nights of PVP fun he is contributing something like 7,500 CP bare-bones baseline. If you factor in stronghold bonus and maybe a CP reward for a weekly, that player has a decent shot of making his personal conquest goal that week, and giving his guild a modest 20k CP. Now throttle that back to 545 CP for a win only and only once a day, and that same player, under the same life/playing circumstances, is now contributing only 2,725 CP baseline for the week and he'll never make that personal goal. That's just... dumb. There's absolutely no reason to make Conquest harder to participate in, if the goal was to make it more inclusive.

 

The badness of this artificial throttling applies to all the other activities that seem to be similarly impacted by this change as well, such as Group Finder FPs. The means of acquiring CP for those repeatable GF activities in the past worked just fine as they were.

 

 

CRAFTING CHANGES

 

The Good: The impression I get is that the intent behind the changes I'm seeing was to slow down the run-away crafting train some guilds used to churn out truly insane points. I do not personally have strong opinions about this, but I can see the reasoning. If that's the goal, then I think some changes are probably good ones, such as making crafting non-repeatable but providing a higher one-time point grant for a X number total of goods. And if that's the goal, in this case throttling a repeatable goal to once a day makes sense. The reasoning is sound enough, and some of the execution seems sound. But...

 

The Bad #1: Slowing the run-away crafting train makes sense as a need to be addressed only if the model was left unchanged. But you completely changed the baseline model here, with the different yield planets and all the reasoning behind that split. Tacking a crafting chokehold on top of it ends up only having the result of taking tools out of the hands of the small guilds the baseline revamp was supposed to help empower. If the Mega Crafting Guilds can reliably put up Mega Numbers via crafting, then they are going to want those high yield planets anyway, so they will end up competing with each other and therefore their crafting advantage is no longer freezing out the smaller guilds under the new model. But by chokeholding crafting on top of all the other changes, now the small guilds who might have been celebrating ("Hey, we can get encryptions now even if we're not in the top 10, awesome, let's do some grinding!") have no chance of tacking on an extra modest 200k points toward their goal with some crafting alts. Basically, you didn't need the two revamps together. One or the other made sense, but the two together benefits no one really.

 

The Bad #2: The "Crafting: Aid The War Effort" objective is way too high at 10 Invasion Forces needing to be donated. I actually like this objective, but the investment cost versus the point reward is abysmal. Someone earlier in the thread did the math on this already, as regards pure credits and resources. But taken from a morale / fun point of view too, why would I sacrifice 10 Invasion Forces (which take quite a lot of mats to create) if I'm a member of a small guild still wanting to work toward encryptions, when instead I could be saving those up to try to work toward Dark Projects? If the idea was that the new Conquest system should make needing to acquire encryptions via DPs no longer that relevant... then I refer to all my above points. Basically: This objective is good, but either buff the CP reward or lower the donation cost to 5 instead of 10. (Or make it that you can donate any of the five War Supplies types instead of the Invasion Forces.)

 

 

DAILY ROTATING OBJECTIVES

 

The Good: I like this idea. Keep it.

 

The Bad: You need to be smart about which objectives get rotated, and right now it doesn't seem smart. Granted, it's the first day, so we have no idea what is going to show up or disappear tomorrow. But based on what we can already see, some conclusions can already be arrived at:

• If anything group content related is being randomly rotated, that's bad. Not everyone can play every day, but when they can play they want to play their favorite thing. Your baseline group activities (PVP, GSF, FP, Uprisings) should always be available for CP gains.
  
• There is absolutely no way right now to tell which objectives are only up for today and might disappear tomorrow. I might choose to peek in every day to see what's up and push myself to do it if I could know which ones they were. We badly need some sort of indicator as to which ones are only temporary objectives.
  
• Rotating/temporary daily objectives should primarily be solo achievable, just IMO.
  
• The "Starfighter: Seize Control" objective up today seems like a great kind of objective to make one of these daily rotating objectives (rather than just some baseline repeatable). Something decoupled from just queueing up for the base activity, something you only get for genuinely participating, and that is purely dependent on your own performance. Bonus! That's the idea, right? Bonus?
  

 

 

So... all in all... I like the skeleton I see here. I like the ideas. But I feel you seriously need to revisit almost all of the detail levels. As someone who, all activities taken together, is a member, Officer, or GM of 10 various guilds, varying between 2 to 30 members (which I think would probably qualify all of them as "small"), I can tell you that everyone I know, be they a member of my Ops team, PVP buddies, GSF lovers, or RPers wanting to decorate their flagship, was excited at the prospect of these changes when we heard about them. But the execution as it stands now fulfills none of our small guild hopes and dreams. Look at rewards, look at invasion target thresholds, look at un-throttling PVP and GF content. (And for the love of all gods that ever were, please do not nuke GSF conquest point or CXP rewards. Why????)

 

I actually really want to see this new system stay - I just want to make sure it works!

Edited March 21, 2018 by JediBoadicea

[LiteSideAvenger]

The conquest revamp was widely accepted and welcomed, until today. Do you know why? Because you didn't tell us you would nerf conquest points into the ground. If you had mentioned that the player base could have stopped you from making a stupid mistake. Nerfing conquest points into oblivion is bad but the worst is the GSF and PVP change to where you only get points for wins. Whoever thought that was a good idea should be fired and Keith should be reprimanded for letting that go live. Please stop making horrible decisions with game design, it makes you look like you don't play the game, don't have a clue or are just plain incompetent. I mean ask any influencer and they would have told you it was a bad change. My advice to fix it is to change the amount of points back to what they were. Reaching your conquest goal on a toon isn't meant to take more than 1-2 days tops. I'm in the top 2 conquest guilds on Star Forge and yes they are earning lots of points but to a player everyone hates the new system.

[Loadsamonie]

Yep, they’ll try their sleight of hand tactics they always do when they get negative feed back. It’s the Bioware operando.

“Look at this new shiny thing and forget about that broken thing we will never fix”

 

Don't forget the thread deletions and shadowbans.

[KendraP]

Well it’s after 7pm Austin time now. 7:44pm to be precise. They’ve gone home and will look at it in the morning after coffee. Then ask if anyone followed up on Eric’s post. Later they will post some one line joke in the afternoon that isn’t even related to conquest and go home.

On Friday before they go home, they’ll post something else that will make the problems worse and cause us all to rage over the weekend.

Finally next week they will say they are looking to make changes, but it will be after 5.9. They also won’t give any detail on what changes or when exactly to expect them. Then they will go silent till 5.9 and hope we calm down or forget.

Next they’ll have some lame live stream and will ignore all the msgs people send to ask them about conquest. They will seem extremely happy about 5.9 and pretend 5.8 didn’t happen.

After 5.9, they will go silent again.

 

If it plays out this way im gone.

The last dev post was from musco at 3 central. I for one was already well into fuming by that time.

[TrixxieTriss]

Don't forget the thread deletions and shadowbans.

 

Oh, I’m expecting those too.

[MuShaBei]

I don't really do conquest, never enjoyed the grind, but the people I most enjoy playing SWTOR with do like conquest. I have joked that all we do anymore is lockouts, but, really they will run other things too, for them, hitting conquest on multiple toons is fun. For them, that is why they come back, and who am I to say they're wrong? The changes to conquest have removed their reason to play. Sure, Unchained Wrath kicks butt at conquest, week in and week out, little guilds probably don't stand a chance, but if you're in a little guild and want the title you can join us for a week and get it. Everyone is welcome, just hit your goal. Maybe being able to kill Bestia 500 (yeah I'm exaggerating) times a day gives us an unfair advantage, so make us do the full op. Make the op kick us out if the holder of the lockout leaves, there will be whining, but we will deal and run a 30 minute op instead of a 15 minute lockout. The changes that were made, however, removed not just lockouts, but conquesting in general. We have tons of toons, you encouraged us to make them, you wanted us to play them, but now we don't have anything to do with them. I understand that changes need to be made sometimes, but they were hidden. As my friend pointed out, when she sings a new song for her choir she asks for feedback, she welcomes the input before performing so when she does perform she brings the best she has, today was a surprise. No pre-performance to get feedback, no finding out why people conquest. If you are trying to push long-time players to quit the game for good, perhaps just deleting conquest entirely would accomplish your goals faster.

[TrixxieTriss]

If it plays out this way im gone.

The last dev post was from musco at 3 central. I for one was already well into fuming by that time.

 

Yeah, you can’t tell me they didn’t bother to read all the other feed back in other threads till that time. Or if they didn’t read it or look at it, what were they doing all day:rolleyes:

[GordoKhan]

Thoughts:

 

You completely screwed pvp and gsf. GSF hasn't had much going for it and now you have run off the folks who come on for conquest pts. Coupled with the total pts for a gsf match at 213 for a win, that works out to having to win 93+ matches to make conquest pts for a toon. You might as well double the number off matches to 186 as it has been about 50% win rate for pubs and imps lately. I doubt gsf pops that in a week. Same goes for pvp, except why even go pub since pops are so low in regs, just pvp imp side only but then wait you only get 825 pts for a win per day. Also, you borked the tokens and loot boxes for solo ranked.

[hankart]

At this point I would imagine it will take mass unsubs for the Devs to reconsider this faux pas!

[Loadsamonie]

If it plays out this way im gone.

The last dev post was from musco at 3 central. I for one was already well into fuming by that time.

 

Well, if Bioware is really willing to let their already hemmoraging playerbase bleed away to nothing because they refuse to address their mistakes, I don't know what that says about this games future.

[TrixxieTriss]

Thoughts:

 

You completely screwed pvp and gsf. GSF hasn't had much going for it and now you have run off the folks who come on for conquest pts. Coupled with the total pts for a gsf match at 213 for a win, that works out to having to win 93+ matches to make conquest pts for a toon. You might as well double the number off matches to 186 as it has been about 50% win rate for pubs and imps lately. I doubt gsf pops that in a week. Same goes for pvp, except why even go pub since pops are so low in regs, just pvp imp side only but then wait you only get 825 pts for a win per day. Also, you borked the tokens and loot boxes for solo ranked.

 

You missed the part where you only get the conquest points for one game on one alt in one legacy. So you would need the conquest week to go for 93 days.

[GordoKhan]

You missed the part where you only get the conquest points for one game on one alt in one legacy. So you would need the conquest week to go for 93 days.

 

intentionally omitted, didn't want to overwhelm them with a long post and too much math.

[TrixxieTriss]

At this point I would imagine it will take mass unsubs for the Devs to reconsider this faux pas!

 

My household of 3 subs has already done this. We reserve the right to resub, but unsubbing pops up on their internal revenue data and can really force them to reevaluate.

That said, my partner says she won’t be back, this was the last straw for her as they’ve broken her faith one too many times now. So they’ve lost atleast one sub permanently in our household.

Only firm actionable (financial) protests seem to work against EA games.

Edited March 21, 2018 by TrixxieTriss

[Akevv]

If you're subbed, cancel. I just did. Its really the only way they're going to take any of this seriously. We deserve a competent dev team, one that plays the game they're making. It is painfully obvious they don't play. How do you push live all of these bugs if you actually play the game. Tired of paying for the C team.

 

From 6 to 15 ingredients to make a single war supply. Why? Wins only count in PvP? They hit two of the items that I actually do in the game. The 1800 point thing on Ilum is kind of a fill in for heroics, but its just a single mission that awards points, and the totally obivous, 10k award just for stepping on the ice. Apparently i caused a Force tremor so large by leaving the base that I killed both of the world bosses immediately. How did this **** go live?

[Loadsamonie]

My household of 3 subs has already done this. We reserve the right to resub, but unsubbing pops up on their internal revenue data and can really force them to reevaluate.

That said, my partner says she won’t be back, this was the last straw for her as they’ve broken her faith one too many times now. So they’ve lost atleast one sub permanently in our household.

Only firm actionable (financial) protests seem to work against EA games.

 

That's what forced them to revamp the Mass Effect 3 ending arc.

[TrixxieTriss]

That's what forced them to revamp the Mass Effect 3 ending arc.

 

And also what made them change loot boxes in SW battlefield 2

[Loadsamonie]

And also what made them change loot boxes in SW battlefield 2

 

Wasn't there a similar reaction to Loot Boxes in LotR Shadow of War?