Conquest Feedback and Upcoming Changes

[olagatonjedi]

Actually I’m not sure and nobody else can be either because everything being thrown around is speculation. All the armchair maths being done (for pvp, GSF and FP’s) is based on the currently released system and it is based on one win only, There are also no flashpoints setup in this system, so numbers aren’t even possible to armchair calculate.

 

What I am asking is reasonable because they never envisioned having more than one win to get points. Which means anything they add in the patch will likely be totally different to what we are seeing or not seeing.

 

What my household (3 players) would like to know is how many matches or flashpoints will be needed to achieve the personal conquest total if doing only one activity. That is not complaining, that is asking a question of the developers to provide the information they have readily available to them so we don’t have to debate it on the forums and have some community mathematicians work it out for us after it is released.

 

Some transparency from them would go a long way to restoring some faith. It’s not like we won’t find out within the first 24 hours of it being released. So if they openly offer the information upfront, it looks better for them.

Under the old system, I knew I needed to do 40 WZs to complete my personal conquest target. I just want to know if it will be the same or similar.

Whether it's a good number or bad number, what benefit does it provide to release that info early? It's no currently active, so even if they answer you, it's still subject to change last minute and cause more PR issues than need to be. It's like telling you the end of the movie without actually having you go see the movie for yourself. They teased, now everyone can wait. Some people will "get" the changes and feel a sense of balance, others with "not get it" and feel slighted and betrayed by BW (yet again, zomg).

[olagatonjedi]

They took away all incentive to play, and you can only really complete 1 conquest a week. do they not realize the only reason people play many things is to complete conquest? when you remove that you are killing group finder and motivation for anything when there are no good objectives anymore. also you raised the prices of mod removal and repairs, and lowered credit drop rate. gross. how does this attract subs.

You can still play for conquest, and once you are done with one toon, you can actually enjoy doing just the stuff you truly enjoy, rather than the very specific conquest tasks. It's a good change for the game, just maybe not for your personal experience.

[DWho]

How many 5 player guilds are actually participating in Conquest ?

 

It depends on what you were participating for. Can they win, not really likely but they could finish in the top 10 (or with the new guild goals meet their guild goal) before the server mergers. In reality they didn't need to do anything more than add a guild goal to gain the encryptions (rather than having to finish in the top 10). Then the big guilds could have their precious titles and the small guilds could expand their flagships without having to grind for the hundreds of millions of credits needed to unlock sections.

[olagatonjedi]

If you only PvP in this game (unless you only play ranked) I wager you will see an affect to your game play due to the changes to conquest in the form of much slower queue times and fewer people playing PvP.

 

Conquest isn't about the rewards really, except for the encryptions - but even that is not why most people do it. Honestly, an unlocked flagship adds nothing of any significance to a guild apart from a sign that they've had some money to throw around unlocking it, decorating it, etc. Still, it's something that most guilds aim to complete so that portion of the rewards is still meaningful.

 

The encryptions are also still meaningful to the NiM community, particularly those who do sales runs. They are used to craft nightmare crystals.

 

But I would argue that the majority don't participate for the rewards (or at least the bulk of the rewards).

 

For most people, I think Conquest is about having a thread to follow that gives you a reason to play the parts of the game that are old, tired, and boring. It doesn't make them more exciting in and of themselves, but there is a competition tied to them that can be exciting if you are a competitive type and it gives guilds a framework of group activities to plan and execute. It's structure.

 

Many guilds would not run Group Finder operations if not for Conquest. There are still plenty that will, as the CXP and Command Crate rewards for last boss lockouts is still one of the fastest/best/easiest ways to farm it. Many players would not play PvP, GSF, or run Flashpoints and Heroics that we've been repeating over and over thousands of times without Conquest. Some may still enjoy those modes of play, but the number of people who participate in them is definitely boosted by Conquest.

 

It's a reason to replay old parts of the game and continue to play a game whose development rate is molasses. The competition between guilds, and even inside guilds to see who can score the highest is reason enough for many people. Not everyone certainly, and obviously not you. But for many, it's the framework that keeps us going when we don't have new operations, new storylines, new planets to explore, or anything else in the way of new content to play.

 

It has almost never been about the rewards, by and large. Materials Decos that are of such limited use, a pittance of credits via a token that you immediately vendor, and a crafting material that largely goes unused since more than a year ago (and wasn't all that high in demand then) are not the real motivators. Jawa scrap is nice, and the encryptions are helpful to growing guilds or as a commodity to sell - but the main draw for many (not all, but many) is just the competition. Winning a planet. Getting in the top 10 and competing to work your way up the board.

 

Much of the tired, old, outdated content will sit under utilized without it (or be untouched entirely by all but a handful of people who are dedicated die-hards of that form of play). More so than most realize, including Bioware.

 

It's a reason to keep coming back for many, and a reason to keep playing the game despite the slow cadence of new content release. Without it, it's one less reason to log in. It may not matter to you, but 80+ pages in one thread and 40+ pages in another in a matter of 3 to 4 days should indicate that plenty of people care about it, even if you don't.

 

.

Your post explains exactly why it was a good idea to making completion of personal and guild conquests more difficult for people who only dwell in one area of the conquest tasks. If everyone (Or the majority) segregated themselves to only aspects of the game they personally enjoy, it would leave many areas high and dry. 5.8 changes were a step in the right direction.

[olagatonjedi]

How many 5 player guilds are actually participating in Conquest ?

From some of the posts, I'd reckon quite a few that believe they should be able to compete with 1000 member guilds.

[TrixxieTriss]

Your post explains exactly why it was a good idea to making completion of personal and guild conquests more difficult for people who only dwell in one area of the conquest tasks. If everyone (Or the majority) segregated themselves to only aspects of the game they personally enjoy, it would leave many areas high and dry. 5.8 changes were a step in the right direction.

 

So what you’re saying is people should be forced to play other parts of the game they don’t enjoy?

I only play parts of the game I personally enjoy and not other parts.

Am I bad person or selfish for only wanting to play for enjoyment and not work?

Now I feel like I’ve let everyone down because I don’t put more effort into playing parts of the game I don’t enjoy.

I hope you can all forgive me, I promise in the future to spend 70% of my time to support those parts of the game I dislike so they aren’t left high and dry

[TrixxieTriss]

Whether it's a good number or bad number, what benefit does it provide to release that info early? It's no currently active, so even if they answer you, it's still subject to change last minute and cause more PR issues than need to be. It's like telling you the end of the movie without actually having you go see the movie for yourself. They teased, now everyone can wait. Some people will "get" the changes and feel a sense of balance, others with "not get it" and feel slighted and betrayed by BW (yet again, zomg).

 

Probably none except calming people down a little. So what is the harm in asking?

Ask yourself, what is the benefit of questioning other posters intentions who aren’t even talking to you or about you or things that affect you?

IRL, people call it being a busy body. On the internet we call it bridge dwelling

[MacCleoud]

Whether it's a good number or bad number, what benefit does it provide to release that info early? It's no currently active, so even if they answer you, it's still subject to change last minute and cause more PR issues than need to be. It's like telling you the end of the movie without actually having you go see the movie for yourself. They teased, now everyone can wait. Some people will "get" the changes and feel a sense of balance, others with "not get it" and feel slighted and betrayed by BW (yet again, zomg).

 

Here is the deal with wanting to know the numbers early, it is to determine if I can still play the game the way I WANT TO PLAY not be forced into playing all aspects of the game. If all I want to do is run FP's, I should be able to achieve my goal. It Trixie wants to run just PVP, she should be able to complete her goals. If Billy Joe Jim Bob wants to run just LO's with his guild, more power to him.

 

Balancing the numbers is what it is about, not limiting my play. The reason OP's are so low in numbers now is because of LO's. You want to fixe that, make each boss worth Conquest Points, not just killing the last one. That way those that run the full raid will get more, but those that just want to spam LO's can still do that as well.

 

But, no matter what is done, don't try to force me to play a different way because you, as you say, "don't get it"

[PorsaLindahl]

I can't believe you guys are falling into that "Point/Counterpoint" debate with him. He's baiting you guys. That's all there is to it.

 

Anyone that's been around for a while knows that the way BW "balances" things is akin to using a hammer on a window because it has a spot on it, then they turn around and try to glue it back together to fix the shattered mess they created. They break things so badly, then when they do manage to bring them back to an acceptable level, they think they'll look like knights in shining armor. Maybe that's their intent. In my book that's a poor practice.

[Lyshar]

...

Balancing the numbers is what it is about, not limiting my play. The reason OP's are so low in numbers now is because of LO's. You want to fixe that, make each boss worth Conquest Points, not just killing the last one. That way those that run the full raid will get more, but those that just want to spam LO's can still do that as well.

 

But, no matter what is done, don't try to force me to play a different way because you, as you say, "don't get it"

 

That's why I suggested making every ops boss give 250 point (example value), completing the ops through GF 500 points (another example value), if they then assume an average of 6 bosses (I don't care what the exact average is for this example), then that would total for an average of 2000 points (or however much they want to give) for running the entire ops, or 750 for just the last boss.

 

Not only does that balance operation points, it also gives ops guilds a way to get points for running progression on harder difficulties.

[Damask_Rose]

So what you’re saying is people should be forced to play other parts of the game they don’t enjoy?

I only play parts of the game I personally enjoy and not other parts.

Am I bad person or selfish for only wanting to play for enjoyment and not work?

Now I feel like I’ve let everyone down because I don’t put more effort into playing parts of the game I don’t enjoy.

I hope you can all forgive me, I promise in the future to spend 70% of my time to support those parts of the game I dislike so they aren’t left high and dry

 

What! You think you should have fun playing a game?!? Don't be ridiculous! You are supposed to work all day so you can afford to come home and work at the game. Are you going to suggest that you should be able to relax on vacations next? Or have lunch on your lunch break? Kids these days...

[TrixxieTriss]

What! You think you should have fun playing a game?!? Don't be ridiculous! You are supposed to work all day so you can afford to come home and work at the game. Are you going to suggest that you should be able to relax on vacations next? Or have lunch on your lunch break? Kids these days...

 

I knew I was doing it wrong, but I just couldn’t help myself. I’m addicted to fun and it lures me away from what I should be doing at the coal face of the game, grinding away to support those down trodden parts I don’t like to play.

 

I really need to get back to rehab and get this fun addiction under control. It’s ruining people’s lives around me. I never thought I had a fun problem until my wife found me happy. That was the last straw for her, she organised an intervention and everyone agreed my addiction to fun had gone too far.

Edited March 24, 2018 by TrixxieTriss

[TrixxieTriss]

They break things so badly, then when they do manage to bring them back to an acceptable level, they think they'll look like knights in shining armor. Maybe that's their intent. In my book that's a poor practice.

 

I can never tell because there’s so much tape holding the pieces together. They look more like knights that have been toilet papered, than knights in shining armor,

Edited March 24, 2018 by TrixxieTriss

[PennyAnn]

I can't believe you guys are falling into that "Point/Counterpoint" debate with him. He's baiting you guys. That's all there is to it.

 

He is one of the only people I have on ignore in this forum because he only says ridiculous things. I'm sure he's doing his best to convince everyone that the conquest changes are the best thing that ever happened to SWTOR. I still want some of what he's smoking, but I won't listen to the resulting tripe that he posts after smoking it.

 

I don't /ignore him because I disagree with him (even though I vehemently do on just about everything)... it's more because even facts don't make him reflect at all on the conversation we're trying to engage in here. I don't want to hear from someone that closed minded, and I certainly am not going to waste my breath on someone so determined that their view is the only and correct one that can possibly exist. I've just seen too many people try to reason with him and him entrench even harder into his delusions for that.

 

Honestly though, I do think some people go to far with their criticism of the developers and the game - but as I said in another thread: too much rational and reasoned discussion gets ignored here, even when they ask directly for feedback. When you ask for feedback but ignore it, that will naturally cause some people to respond louder and louder because they do not feel heard. We keep hoping that the louder responses will make them take out their ear plugs, but so far it hasn't been all that effective.

[NovelaCreed]

[*]Crafting - Crafting is a key part of Conquests, and we certainly did not want to remove that. However, we know the use of War Supplies and crafting was contributing too much to the overall competition of Conquests. For that reason, we reduced the overall effectiveness of Crafting, but added new functionality to War Supplies that they can be consumed to add Conquest points. Allowing you to get points out of them twice if you want, or you could craft them on one character and then move them to other characters to gain conquest points.

 

Crafting in Conquests was just too good prior to 5.8. There is a feeling though that we cut a bit too deep on its overall impact to Conquests. The War Supply schematics were combined which made them harder to craft, and their point contribution went down, even with the added functionality of being able to consume them.

Plan: We are going to give it some time and monitor the impact of these changes, and then we will make any needed adjustments in 5.9 or beyond.

 

On the subject of DISLIKES -- I definitely DISLIKE how the devs have "streamlined" crafting War Supplies so that low level crafters CAN'T do it anymore.

 

You used to be able to craft your first tier of them at crafting level 150 , your second tier at crafting level 300 and your third at crafting 400.... when you were able to craft the appropriate level of assembly components.... NOW you have to have ALL tiers of components up to crafting level 400. This pushes lower level crafters completely out of being able to contribute War supplies to their guild efforts. I'm certain that is not what was intended, but that IS what is happening. What I would recommend is having the old tiers of craftablity being restored while keeping the same lower level of points. This way lower-level players are not being forced out of being able to participate.

[Helgram]

 

Here are some of the other areas we were aiming to address:

• Objectives and their points – Conquests are meant to be an activity that someone can work on throughout the week as they play the game. Previously, Conquests were very homogenized in that there was very little diversity among each week. We used this opportunity to spread out what objectives were available in each Conquest.
  

 

 

This is the core blunder of the 5.8 changes. That 5.8 debuted with Gree week was actually a good thing, since Gree week, with its limited palette of bonus activities, highlights the flaw of the philosophy demonstrated with the above goal.

 

Diversity in the abstract is fine. But if you make it impossible for a player to cap all the toons they want to cap via the activity in which they enjoy participating, they're going to go find some other game to play. They're not going to investigate other activities within this game. An ops guy isn't going to suddenly start pvp'ing. A crafter isn't going to jump into pvp. Die-hard PvP'ers who never do ops aren't going to aug their gear with accuracy to cap a toon. They'll just go find another game.

 

The entire purpose of Conquest is to motivate players to retread old content. For most there's one style of old content they're willing to tolerate for the nominal gains and associated camaraderie of Conquest. If you force diversity, if you force folks to do things in the game they have no intention of doing, they won't do them to cap Conquest. They'll just leave the game.

 

My guild is the largest, most successful Conquest guild in the game. One of our most avid PvP'ers took one look at the conquest payouts and said, "forget it, I'm out." The big crafting guilds are losing players. My own guild (not really a crafting guild) didn't run more than a handful of KP lockouts yesterday - just no reason to.

 

If this mishandling of activity-related rewards continues, every day will be like a Monday in the old system. Much reduced concurrency, much reduced participation, much reduced everything.

 

My advice is this:

• Take every conquest activity in the game and figure out how many iterations of that activity you want to require to hit the weekly personal goal, divide the goal by that number, and award that number of points, per toon, per iteration.
  
• Get rid of per legacy rewards. If there's a particular activity you want to nerf into the ground (crafting, apparently) then limit the payout to daily, again, per toon. But then I should still be able to cap each toon just with crafting if that's my thing.
  
• Put the schematics for war supplies back to the way they were so that crafting is affordable and lacks the ginormous barrier to entry you've erected.
  

 

If you want to foster diversity among conquest events, then create something extra for each conqeust event that rewards additional points, while ensuring that folks can still cap their toons (all their chosen toons, within reason) doing only their chosen activity. For example, Gree operation and Gree dailies for Gree week; Bounty contracts for Death Mark; Bonuses to GSF (above and beyond what's required to cap normally) for Clash in Hyperspace.

 

Regarding opportunities for small guilds, the stratification of rewards is well meant, but originates in a misunderstanding of how the larger Conquest guilds operate. If my guildies need Iokath or CZ-198 to complete their Galaxy Conqueror titles, my guild will invade and win Iokath or CZ-198. It doesn't matter what scale of reward is offered for the different grades of planet. The title is our only motivator in planet choice in that instance. In the previous Conquest regime, we had a schedule worked out with default planet choices so my officers would know where to send the guild in each circumstance. Invasion targets were decided well in advance and were planned to ensure we'd hit every planet at least once a year while giving our guildies the greatest opportunity to cap as many toons as they could during each event.

 

The point is, a smaller guild is never going to win a planet invasion except via crafting (assuming you restore crafting).

 

It would be a better idea to create some parallel conquest-like or conquest-related activity for smaller guilds to participate and compete in that larger guilds wouldn't bother with (because they're going after planets). Or create a competitive "allied forces" roster and let smaller guilds compete to contribute points to a specific larger guild and share in the title if they're the winning contributor. There are lots of ideas along these lines that work better than what you've come up with.

 

So, in summary, don't attempt to force diversity, let people cap toons doing just want they want and not something else, and rethink your strategy for inclusion of smaller guilds.

[Euphrosyne]

Nice post, boss.

Regarding opportunities for small guilds, the stratification of rewards is well meant, but originates in a misunderstanding of how the larger Conquest guilds operate. If my guildies need Iokath or CZ-198 to complete their Galaxy Conqueror titles, my guild will invade and win Iokath or CZ-198. It doesn't matter what scale of reward is offered for the different grades of planet. The title is our only motivator in planet choice in that instance. In the previous Conquest regime, we had a schedule worked out with default planet choices so my officers would know where to send the guild in each circumstance. Invasion targets were decided well in advance and were planned to ensure we'd hit every planet at least once a year while giving our guildies the greatest opportunity to cap as many toons as they could during each event.

 

The point is, a smaller guild is never going to win a planet invasion except via crafting (assuming you restore crafting).

To add onto this last sentence: pretty much any way to nerf things that large guilds do to gain Conquest points quickly will also hit smaller guilds.

 

For example, the proliferation of once-per-legacy-per-day objectives actually make it harder for smaller guilds to keep up, because most such guilds have small numbers of different legacies, not just a small number of characters overall. A few players who play a lot of alts in a given small guild might be able to cap one or two characters just as easily as they would in a larger guild, but since the larger guild has a vastly larger number of separate legacies, all of which will cap one or two characters, the smaller guild, of course, comes out worse.

[olagatonjedi]

So what you’re saying is people should be forced to play other parts of the game they don’t enjoy?

I only play parts of the game I personally enjoy and not other parts.

Am I bad person or selfish for only wanting to play for enjoyment and not work?

Now I feel like I’ve let everyone down because I don’t put more effort into playing parts of the game I don’t enjoy.

I hope you can all forgive me, I promise in the future to spend 70% of my time to support those parts of the game I dislike so they aren’t left high and dry

Actually, what PennyAnn said is that the conquest isnt a system necessarily put into place for rewards, but a part of the game that encourages people to get involved with stuff they otherwise wouldn't. GC is built in the same fashion. Do people have to play stuff they dont wish to? Absolutely not. Would it make it easier for them to accomplish their personal or guild goals? Absolutely. MMOs, in general, have always had a primary focus on getting the majority of the population to take part in all aspects, so that there is plenty of people willing to participate. What players actually do with their time is completely up to the player, but the encouragement is still there. They are not forcing anyone to do anything they dont want to. In fact, they arent even forcing you to pay, or to play, in the first place.

[olagatonjedi]

Probably none except calming people down a little. So what is the harm in asking?

Ask yourself, what is the benefit of questioning other posters intentions who aren’t even talking to you or about you or things that affect you?

IRL, people call it being a busy body. On the internet we call it bridge dwelling

No harm in asking them. No harm in asking you. Im inquisitive.

[Bothan]

Your Feedback

We never saw this revamp as being a perfect change out of the gates, but it is a first step for us in crafting an improved Conquest system. Your feedback is incredibly valuable as we can immediately start making changes to get things to a great place. Now that you understand what our goals were, let’s talk about the things we are hearing from you.

 

Let's talk about an annoying f'ing bug. I just finished my Hoth dailies, and racked up over 150 kills. Only 100 or so remaining, for Hoth Rampage.

 

I relogged into an alt to check on something, and when I came back, my kills had been reset to zero.

 

I'm f'ing PISSED right now.

[olagatonjedi]

Here is the deal with wanting to know the numbers early, it is to determine if I can still play the game the way I WANT TO PLAY not be forced into playing all aspects of the game. If all I want to do is run FP's, I should be able to achieve my goal. It Trixie wants to run just PVP, she should be able to complete her goals. If Billy Joe Jim Bob wants to run just LO's with his guild, more power to him.

 

Balancing the numbers is what it is about, not limiting my play. The reason OP's are so low in numbers now is because of LO's. You want to fixe that, make each boss worth Conquest Points, not just killing the last one. That way those that run the full raid will get more, but those that just want to spam LO's can still do that as well.

 

But, no matter what is done, don't try to force me to play a different way because you, as you say, "don't get it"

Im not sure you even know what you're wanting. Technically, if mathematically the goal can be accomplished doing only one type of task, it meets the criteria you are asking for, even if ur time commitment doesnt allow it to be possible. If that's your concern, that is the same concern many people have before buying a game, seeing content in an update, or when real life changes. And they generally dont lead on or reveal those details in advance anyways.

[olagatonjedi]

That's why I suggested making every ops boss give 250 point (example value), completing the ops through GF 500 points (another example value), if they then assume an average of 6 bosses (I don't care what the exact average is for this example), then that would total for an average of 2000 points (or however much they want to give) for running the entire ops, or 750 for just the last boss.

 

Not only does that balance operation points, it also gives ops guilds a way to get points for running progression on harder difficulties.

Any change made to boss values will lead to different misuse of the system. If boss 1 gives the same or "enough points to make it worth killing and leaving to reform, people will do it. I can already see people farming DF or EV bosses over and over without having to clear more than 5 npcs.

[JaenelleAngeline]

While this link is much of the same issues, and I’ve previously stated my peace. I want to add my two cents and advocate for my guilds’ I have characters in 3 guilds- all with a different focus:

 

First off- my large conquest oriented guild- has worked very hard for the status we have. What I want to address for guild is - alt play. We have upwards or near 500 accounts at any given time. However, it is sometimes carried by our top conquestors , playing beloved alts. Additionally, our guild definately does listen to members and desired planets. Therefore, it may be we want a smaller planet given the member needs.

 

Solution- you need to make more planets available as soon as possible ( the reason I say this is for benefit of smaller guilds) .

 

Next guild- Medium sized, crafting oriented- these crafters spend upwards of 3 hours per day gathering- 3 hours! Based on that was crafting broken? No it wasn’t. You probably doubled gathering times, and additionally, increased cost to crafter, which may be difficult to re-gain after those hours of crafting/gathering. These are adult, working people!

 

Solution: scale back costs and increase yields!!!!

 

Final guild: small 6-15 people- love wz, gsf, crafting, and heroics. Relies on alts to make our mark.

 

Solution: See above alt statements, crafting statements, and give us a fighting chance by adding more planets! Additionally, make sure we have plenty of Repeatables

 

Sincerely

Kormara Recruitment General - Unchained Wrath

Kadrie- Battle Master - Exsanguinate

Omerta- Just A Girl for guild - You Ain’t Sith

Edited March 24, 2018 by JaenelleAngeline

[Lyriel]

From some of the posts, I'd reckon quite a few that believe they should be able to compete with 1000 member guilds.

 

Leader of a ~5 member guild here.

 

No. We do not think we can (or should) compete with a 1000 member guild. That's not realistic. What we do think we should be able to do is make our personal goals and, occasionally, get on the board to get the guild rewards. This was possible under the old system. Rare, took planning and work, but possible. It was one of the ways we planned activities though, even on weeks we knew we wouldn't make the top 10.

 

We had hope for the new system because rewards were decoupled from that competition. When they first talked about it, it sounded exactly like the kind of thing that would revitalize us. Some old members even talked about coming back. We'd be able to shoot for a numerical goal, rather than compete directly against the larger guilds. In theory, it should have made it easier for us to get encryptions. Not easy, mind you, but easier. We were cautiously optimistic.

 

In practice, with the gutted reward numbers, legacy-based restrictions, and the crafting changes, we have no chance at all. I'm the only one who will make my personal goal this week, and that's on a single toon thanks to the boss bug. No one else even wanted to bother, and none of the people who were thinking about coming back are still considering it after finding out how it was implemented.

[olagatonjedi]

Blame should be focused at our colleagues, not the devs. These changes were brought on by player complaints and actions that lead to specific metrics.