Conquest Feedback and Upcoming Changes

[DarthSpuds]

If we give the team credit and assume they are not ignorant, then perhaps the conclusion is that the direction of the changes in the game really have nothing to do with player satisfaction at all...

 

And that almost entirely explains the need for over 200 servers becoming the need for just 5.

 

Maybe, just maybe, it's time Bioware stopped doing what "they want" and started listening to what we want - that way they may, just may, avoid another server merge.

 

All The Best

Edited March 29, 2018 by DarthSpuds

[HKtheindomitable]

If I'm being purposefully ignorant, someone explain to me. How was my capping 10 toons a week on non-crafting weeks affecting any of you? My 10 person guild was lucky to make the board much less win anything.

 

For clarity: What cap do you specifically refer to?

 

Crafting has always had a one-time mission, and at least one low point reward repeatable. And other missions weren't all infinitely repeatable. Some limitation was needed. I never said what. Those that had 40+ alts putting out 5 mil points were making it difficult for those that didn't have that to compete.

 

Some missions that were one-time before, are daily now. The restriction doesn't need to be one per legacy per day with the lowered point reward. I said it several pages back, that if it were limited to 5 or 10 per legacy per day, then it would be better. And now, as long as the goal is reached (I assume) the reward is given to everyone, not just the individual that made the goal. The board is mostly just for show anymore.

[HKtheindomitable]

Clearly, you understood incorrectly.

 

Has hitting the Top Ten been easy with small guilds under the old system? No, but it was possible, nonetheless.

It was possible by running the multitude of alts through their individual goals, each getting their points into the sum, each qualifiying for the guild reward should the Top Ten be reached.

We did this for the last 6 or 7 consequitive conquests before the change, with basically 6 (7) toons from only TWO PEOPLE (with some minor support from the others that came on for a few hours throughout the week) (see the post I made in the other thread).

 

EVERY char that made their goal got flagship expansion items. That was 13+ for us over the last weeks.

 

Now? With the idiotic change to daily per legacy, no more alts. We can TRY to reach the cap on 3, maybe 4 chars, but with the lack of repeatable objectives, and the legacy dailies for just about everything, it will be a massive grind.

None of our other members are near the 150% bonus, so they will simply be UNABLE TO QUALIFY for their personal goal.

Given that, it will remain to be seen if we can even make the 200k we need (we are at <80k ATM). Just run the math (it has been posted above), it will be a frigging GRIND whereas it was just running the content we were running, anyway.

 

Speaking of which, the queues for FPs etc. empty. I have been waiting in queue with a healer (!) until I got auto-logged out while I was writing that other post, and that was with Double XP on and school holidays, to boot! Unthinkable the weeks before!

 

So, get your facts straight, and stop spouting the nonsensical notion that any of this has been asked for or is even backed by data.

Also, the math has obviously not been done, or they would not have reduced guild threshold by ~60% and personal by 25% within the first week of this "improved" system. It appears also heavily "optimized" for a +150% bonus and the apparent belief that everybody had racked up thousands of Invasion Forces. Hint for the devs: those small guilds, that you wanted to "help out" with this? Those that presumably had trouble to hit Top Ten before? That will be the same guilds that do not have +150% bonus and have not accumulated those huge amounts of Invasion Forces to burn. Neither will they be able to craft them now, what with the uncalled-for changes to the recipes.

 

So, all in all, just when we got the hang of it, you drop this hot mess on us. I will also cancel my subscription, because this is LotRO all over again, and the sheer amount of dev communication (read: lack thereof) is the very same. Tanks, but no thanks.

 

SNy

 

I direct you to my other posts. I see your "get your facts straight" and raise you a "read the rest before replying".

[Ibokagain]

If I'm being purposefully ignorant, someone explain to me. How was my capping 10 toons a week on non-crafting weeks affecting any of you? My 10 person guild was lucky to make the board much less win anything.

 

I'm pretty much in the same boat as you. The person you are responding to doesn't actively participate in conquest, pvp, or much pve other to enjoy RP. Which is fine however not sure how or why they are posting on something that doesn't really affect their game play.

 

I along with the other two to four players in my guild that actively hit conquest on multiple toons prior to 5.8 are no longer and will no longer participate in conquest. We are doing the activities and playing the game the way we like. However by doing so that means we play much less and are playing and paying more money to other companies.

 

If that was the overall goal of this change than congrats.

[HKtheindomitable]

I'm pretty much in the same boat as you. The person you are responding to doesn't actively participate in conquest, pvp, or much pve other to enjoy RP. Which is fine however not sure how or why they are posting on something that doesn't really affect their game play.

 

I along with the other two to four players in my guild that actively hit conquest on multiple toons prior to 5.8 are no longer and will no longer participate in conquest. We are doing the activities and playing the game the way we like. However by doing so that means we play much less and are playing and paying more money to other companies.

 

If that was the overall goal of this change than congrats.

 

BWA HA HA HA! You're funny! You don't even know who I am, nor do I know who you are.

[PennyAnn]

For clarity: What cap do you specifically refer to?

 

Crafting has always had a one-time mission, and at least one low point reward repeatable. And other missions weren't all infinitely repeatable. Some limitation was needed. I never said what. Those that had 40+ alts putting out 5 mil points were making it difficult for those that didn't have that to compete.

 

Some missions that were one-time before, are daily now. The restriction doesn't need to be one per legacy per day with the lowered point reward. I said it several pages back, that if it were limited to 5 or 10 per legacy per day, then it would be better. And now, as long as the goal is reached (I assume) the reward is given to everyone, not just the individual that made the goal. The board is mostly just for show anymore.

 

Let me try to help you out here, as you obviously haven't done much Conquesting (based on assumptions that you've made in your posts):

 

The "cap" is the personal rewards quota per week. "Capping a character" means reaching your personal goal with that character. Many were able to "cap" or reach their personal goal with as many alts as they wanted to work for, and now you are lucky to reach "cap" with one main and possibly one or two alts, and that's if you're playing the game 80 hours a week (exaggeration, but not by much).

 

In the former system, there were always one-time crafting objectives, but then there were weeks that were focused heavily on crafting and saw most of those objectives become repeatable. Just as there were weeks when PvP was the focus, and many added objectives gave people who focused on that type of play a better shot at hitting their conquest goals. In all conquest weeks, the ability to hit personal goal was infinitely easier on alt characters than it is now, no matter what the objective "theme" or focus was.

 

The ability of a small guild to get alts through the system and complete their goals is imperative to competing with large guilds who rely on a larger number of individual legacies putting up points. Without being able to mimic the "large guild" effect of having so many individual legacies by using alts, smaller guilds are out of the loop and always will be. It took something that allowed them to compete for planet conquers and titles sometimes, and turned it into never.

 

Yes, those that meet the personal goal and also have their guild meet the guild goal have access to rewards without having to be in the top 10. However, fewer guilds are hitting the guild goal and fewer members of the guilds are hitting their personal goals due to current restrictions and low point yields such that fewer people are earning rewards now than ever in the conquest system.

 

The current design sees fewer people earning rewards, small guilds unable to compete for planet titles at all, and players being encouraged to play the game less than they were before due to the fact that it is statistically impossible to make any headway on more than a couple of characters in conquest. None of this is good for the game in general, even if you don't participate in conquest or care about it.

 

.

Edited March 29, 2018 by PennyAnn

[chaharbagh]

Did the devs forget to get rid of the old schematics for [War Supplies: Infantry Supply Kits]?

[PennyAnn]

Did the devs forget to get rid of the old schematics for [War Supplies: Infantry Supply Kits]?

 

Yes. Biochem is currently the only crafting specialty that has access to the old schematics for these.

[SNy-lotrolinux]

Yes, those that meet the personal goal and also have their guild meet the guild goal have access to rewards without having to be in the top 10. However, fewer guilds are hitting the guild goal and fewer members of the guilds are hitting their personal goals due to current restrictions and low point yields such that fewer people are earning rewards now than ever in the conquest system.

 

The current design sees fewer people earning rewards, small guilds unable to compete for planet titles at all, and players being encouraged to play the game less than they were before due to the fact that it is statistically impossible to make any headway on more than a couple of characters in conquest. None of this is good for the game in general, even if you don't participate in conquest or care about it.

 

^This.

You have put it much more eloquently than I could have, thank you.

 

SNy

[Ibokagain]

 

Let me try to help you out here, as you obviously haven't done much Conquesting (based on assumptions that you've made in your posts):

 

The "cap" is the personal rewards quota per week. "Capping a character" means reaching your personal goal with that character. Many were able to "cap" or reach their personal goal with as many alts as they wanted to work for, and now you are lucky to reach "cap" with one main and possibly one or two alts, and that's if you're playing the game 80 hours a week (exaggeration, but not by much).

 

In the former system, there were always one-time crafting objectives, but then there were weeks that were focused heavily on crafting and saw most of those objectives become repeatable. Just as there were weeks when PvP was the focus, and many added objectives gave people who focused on that type of play a better shot at hitting their conquest goals. In all conquest weeks, the ability to hit personal goal was infinitely easier on alt characters than it is now, no matter what the objective "theme" or focus was.

 

The ability of a small guild to get alts through the system and complete their goals is imperative to competing with large guilds who rely on a larger number of individual legacies putting up points. Without being able to mimic the "large guild" effect of having so many individual legacies by using alts, smaller guilds are out of the loop and always will be. It took something that allowed them to compete for planet conquers and titles sometimes, and turned it into never.

 

Yes, those that meet the personal goal and also have their guild meet the guild goal have access to rewards without having to be in the top 10. However, fewer guilds are hitting the guild goal and fewer members of the guilds are hitting their personal goals due to current restrictions and low point yields such that fewer people are earning rewards now than ever in the conquest system.

 

The current design sees fewer people earning rewards, small guilds unable to compete for planet titles at all, and players being encouraged to play the game less than they were before due to the fact that it is statistically impossible to make any headway on more than a couple of characters in conquest. None of this is good for the game in general, even if you don't participate in conquest or care about it.

 

.

 

 

 

Well said, this I completely agree with.

[olagatonjedi]

How exactly? Maybe I'm being purposefully dense, but as guildmaster of a small guild who made the board primarily through PvP and usage of alts, this point doesn'tseem valid.

 

Limiting the number of toons capped objectively benfits larger guilds as they have more member accounts - i.e. more legacies.

 

I have maybe 10 people that play regularly. Basic arithmetic says thats 10*15000=150000 points if everyone caps their main. In other words, I am strictly dependent on alts or people going beyond the objective to reach the planet cap. A 100 person guild has 100*15000=1500000 points. That's cap multiple times over, particularly since the rewards are so underwhelming that most guilds are probably not bothering with the larger planet. Why risk getting nothing, when yiu can easily get the most useful part of the reward?

 

 

 

Nowhere did i say it made alts unplayable. I myself have played 3 charscters this week (1 at cap, 2 more probably will reach it). That said, I have a guild to run and a ship to expand. This process is now unnecessarily convoluted since I can only feasibly cap 3 toons.

Whatever benefit a small guild had in the old system, the large guild had as well, but even more so because of the true member number difference.

 

Please explain, in detail, something that only a small guild can do that a large guild cant? I havent seen anyone to date bring something to the table to truly identify an unobtainable benefit exclusive to small guilds to allow conquest success. So I challenge anyone making the alt claim to produce adequate reason to believe alt exclusion hurts small guilds in conquest success vs the previous system.

[PennyAnn]

Whatever benefit a small guild had in the old system, the large guild had as well, but even more so because of the true member number difference.

 

Please explain, in detail, something that only a small guild can do that a large guild cant? I havent seen anyone to date bring something to the table to truly identify an unobtainable benefit exclusive to small guilds to allow conquest success. So I challenge anyone making the alt claim to produce adequate reason to believe alt exclusion hurts small guilds in conquest success vs the previous system.

 

I took you off ignore and will try to explain this to you. Hopefully I won't regret it, but if you fail to take what I tell you and reasonably consider it, I won't make this mistake again.

 

It is not about giving a small guild the ability to do something a large guild cannot also do. It is about making it even possible for a small guild to compete. Without alts, that is impossible.

 

In the previous system, if it was a crafting week and I had 30 alts with 8x level 50 companions (which I do, and spent an enormous amount of credits to accomplish btw) - I could compete with a large guild that had 30 individual crafters who may or may not have as many alts with leveled companions as I do. Now, that is completely off the table. Now, no matter how many crafting alts I have spent credits and resources and time to prepare for crafting weeks, I will always be beat by a large guild's unique legacies who can repeat those points, where I cannot. Now they only need 2 players to beat the points that I can put up in a day.

 

In the previous system, if I had 20 alts with decent enough gear, skill, and ability to make it through a SM raid, I could repeat that raid as many times as I had play hours to do so with, and compete with a large guild who might or might not have raid capable players able to do the same. Now, that option is completely off the table. Now, no matter how many raid-capable characters I have that can repeat an operation, I will always be beat by a large guild's unique legacies who can repeat those points, where I cannot. Now they only need 1 more team of 8 people to double the amount of points that my guild put up for that objective.

 

Take those two examples and apply them to EVERY objective that is limited to once per legacy per day, or worse... per week... and it is obvious why the exclusion of alts hurts small guilds.

 

Can large guilds do the same thing with alts? Sure, but many of them didn't, and because of that a window was sometimes open to smaller guilds that is now permanently closed.

 

.

Edited March 29, 2018 by PennyAnn

[olagatonjedi]

The term you are looking for is “Alt unfriendly”. Basically meaning there is little incentive or it will be detrimental to play your Alts because you will not be able to achieve enough conquest points on them or they will mess up points on other Alts.

So while you can still play them by running around doing quests or pvp if you don’t or care about conquest, you can’t use them like you used to because it will be detrimental to your goal.

Yes you can login on them and do stuff. You just can’t use them to do anything significant for conquest like you used to be able to do.

When you consider that many people get a lot of enjoyment from playing their Alts and them having a purpose, by removing or degrading the ability to use them like that makes them seem worthless. People are rightly annoyed because Alts are also an massive part of the game for people. Bioware seem to continually forget that and people are angry.

Considering that many of the issues related to "using up points are due to bugs, once resolved, it won't be as much of an issue.

 

That said, everyone who has ever played swtor has had to prioritize their time, playstyle, and involvement in some form or fashion. Do you join the rare izax run people are asking aboit, or do you pvp because queue is popping? Conquest now operates under similar restrictions. Do you focus on guild and/or personal conquest on your primary toon, or do you play alts and run the risk of missing out? It's a tradeoff. It's always been a tradeoff. You are criticising a system that was changed because you were allowed to roam free within, rather than incurring the restrictions every other part of the game had - or in other words, cheating the system. The fix for it is called balance.

[KendraP]

Whatever benefit a small guild had in the old system, the large guild had as well, but even more so because of the true member number difference.

 

Please explain, in detail, something that only a small guild can do that a large guild cant? I havent seen anyone to date bring something to the table to truly identify an unobtainable benefit exclusive to small guilds to allow conquest success. So I challenge anyone making the alt claim to produce adequate reason to believe alt exclusion hurts small guilds in conquest success vs the previous system.

 

For the very reason i mathematically laid out in my post. As i small guild pf 10 people i HAVE to cap alts (or go over the personal cap substantially), or we get nothing.

 

The large guilds that have 100 people make cap on their main (a condition of being a member of some guilds. I think), defscto gets the rewards.

 

If, for whatever reason the nath didn't make sense before, again:

10 people * 15,000 points =150,000 points of a cap of 200,000. I need another 50,000 or 4 more people to cap another toon or go double the amount of points on their main.

 

100 people * 15,000 points = 1,500,000 points, they get the rewards if fewwer than half their people cap even one toon.

 

I dont mind working harder than the big guilds when i could easily cap 10 toons doing whstever i wanted anyway. And asssuming we picked the right planet, get guild rewards too. Now its unnnecessarily difficult.

 

Naturally the larger guilds xan use this as well, to make the gap bwtween us qnd them lsrger, but as long as i was getting 5-15 encryptions a week just myself i wqs satisfied. Now, yiu have the dame problem, but with lower numbers.

[olagatonjedi]

Clearly, you understood incorrectly.

 

Has hitting the Top Ten been easy with small guilds under the old system? No, but it was possible, nonetheless.

It was possible by running the multitude of alts through their individual goals, each getting their points into the sum, each qualifiying for the guild reward should the Top Ten be reached.

We did this for the last 6 or 7 consequitive conquests before the change, with basically 6 (7) toons from only TWO PEOPLE (with some minor support from the others that came on for a few hours throughout the week) (see the post I made in the other thread).

 

EVERY char that made their goal got flagship expansion items. That was 13+ for us over the last weeks.

 

Now? With the idiotic change to daily per legacy, no more alts. We can TRY to reach the cap on 3, maybe 4 chars, but with the lack of repeatable objectives, and the legacy dailies for just about everything, it will be a massive grind.

None of our other members are near the 150% bonus, so they will simply be UNABLE TO QUALIFY for their personal goal.

Given that, it will remain to be seen if we can even make the 200k we need (we are at <80k ATM). Just run the math (it has been posted above), it will be a frigging GRIND whereas it was just running the content we were running, anyway.

 

Speaking of which, the queues for FPs etc. empty. I have been waiting in queue with a healer (!) until I got auto-logged out while I was writing that other post, and that was with Double XP on and school holidays, to boot! Unthinkable the weeks before!

 

So, get your facts straight, and stop spouting the nonsensical notion that any of this has been asked for or is even backed by data.

Also, the math has obviously not been done, or they would not have reduced guild threshold by ~60% and personal by 25% within the first week of this "improved" system. It appears also heavily "optimized" for a +150% bonus and the apparent belief that everybody had racked up thousands of Invasion Forces. Hint for the devs: those small guilds, that you wanted to "help out" with this? Those that presumably had trouble to hit Top Ten before? That will be the same guilds that do not have +150% bonus and have not accumulated those huge amounts of Invasion Forces to burn. Neither will they be able to craft them now, what with the uncalled-for changes to the recipes.

 

So, all in all, just when we got the hang of it, you drop this hot mess on us. I will also cancel my subscription, because this is LotRO all over again, and the sheer amount of dev communication (read: lack thereof) is the very same. Tanks, but no thanks.

 

SNy

So your guild was able to acquire goals set up for the best of the best without having adequate numbers and without even having the right bonuses in place (strongholds).

 

Based on that way of thinking, people with green gear should be doing NIM content without buffs.

 

A change was merited just from your guild being an example of what was wrong with the system. Conquest is an endgame activity and a competition of sorts. Why shouldnt it be designed and implemented as one?

[AlrikFassbauer]

What disturbs me far more is that big guilds arre now happily invading small planets, leaving the big planets to either the MEGA-guilds AND the SMALL guilds.

[olagatonjedi]

The frustration around here is so palpable... and unfortunate.

 

We're going after each other because we're so frustrated with changes that make no sense to us, aren't being explained by developers in sufficient detail (not the white knight mind readers telling us what the devs intended like they attend development meetings themselves). Then there are the ever helpful people who "don't care" about this kind of content or that kind of content and want to lambaste everyone who does, for caring about the state of the game. What good does that do?

You forgot the population of players who find a problem with everything they can and post irrationally about changes that personally affect them more than the average player.

[Lhancelot]

You are criticising a system that was changed because you were allowed to roam free within, rather than incurring the restrictions every other part of the game had - or in other words, cheating the system. The fix for it is called balance.

 

People like flexibility, options, and choices in games. This is called fun. Adding restrictions in a game to the point it deters people from playing it is called a failure. Games are supposed to be fun.

 

Hope that helps.

[Mithran]

After the initial Conquest revamp, I came onto Forums (posting for probably the third time since before this game was launched) to register my displeasure over the changes to a system that had been working well. I indicated there that while I hadn't committed to cancelling my account, I was considering it. I gave SWTOR a chance to respond to the "feedback," since you were quick to express your desire to address the "feedback." The response to the widespread criticism of the revamp was a symbolic gesture, not a real response.

 

Was the goal of the changes to make small guilds more competitive?

If that was the goal, the makeover was a dismal failure. Small guilds are LESS competitive.

 

Was the goal of the changes to make Conquest more time/effort/labor intensive?

If this was the goal, I think you've overachieved and the message boards have been filled with customers railing against the amount of time/labor they're required to perform.

 

I've worked on my characters here long and hard, but they're just not viable, anymore. After the initial revamp, I ventured onto Forums (where I don't want to be spending my time) to express my complaints. Since there were a lot of other people voicing the same complaint, SWTOR was obliged to scale back its system, but instead of addressing the concerns, you've chosen to see how little you can get away with.

 

The complaints are still being voiced, but I've seen no indication that they're being heard.

 

In view of my expressed complaints not being either heard or addressed, I have cancelled my subscription. My sincere hope is that SWTOR will make SIGNIFICANT changes to the current system, and not just the token gestures we've seen, so far. In the absence of SIGNIFICANT changes to the system, I will leave the game and the results of many, many hours and dollars that I have invested into building my account, here.

 

The default now has moved from one of my staying in the game to a default of my leaving the game.

 

I cancelled my subscription very reluctantly. I've enjoyed playing the game and I like many of the people I've met, here. I like the graphics, the content, the setting, and my characters very much. The few interactions I've had with Customer Service were largely pleasant interactions where my concerns were adequately addressed. I've been extremely frustrated by all the bugs that you won't fix (Eternity Vault, anyone?), but I'd been willing to overlook the downsides of this game because I regarded it as worthwhile in other respects.

 

I sincerely hope that you will heed your customers' concerns, but I'm betting now that you won't.

[olagatonjedi]

It is not about giving a small guild the ability to do something a large guild cannot also do. It is about making it even possible for a small guild to compete. Without alts, that is impossible.

 

In the previous system, if it was a crafting week and I had 30 alts with 8x level 50 companions (which I do, and spent an enormous amount of credits to accomplish btw) - I could compete with a large guild that had 30 individual crafters who may or may not have as many alts with leveled companions as I do. Now, that is completely off the table. Now, no matter how many crafting alts I have spent credits and resources and time to prepare for crafting weeks, I will always be beat by a large guild's unique legacies who can repeat those points, where I cannot. Now they only need 2 players to beat the points that I can put up in a day.

Ok, so stop right there. If those 30 individual crafters had 8x level 50 companions, they would still have an advantage, and an even more significant one than you and/or your guild.

 

Please correct me if Im wrong, but with your example, you want BW to balance conquest so 1 person to have the ability to produce the equivalent of 30 people?

Edited March 29, 2018 by olagatonjedi

[PennyAnn]

So your guild was able to acquire goals set up for the best of the best without having adequate numbers and without even having the right bonuses in place (strongholds).

 

Based on that way of thinking, people with green gear should be doing NIM content without buffs.

 

A change was merited just from your guild being an example of what was wrong with the system. Conquest is an endgame activity and a competition of sorts. Why shouldnt it be designed and implemented as one?

 

You tend to like to speak as if you are a developer yourself and know their intentions/desires. They never once said anything about smaller guilds achieving goals in conquest being a problem. In fact, much of the reworked system was to encourage more competition among smaller guilds, and give them more opportunity to do so.

 

Evidence of their intention to do this is given here (you don't have to take my word for it):

On the Guild Conquest front, we have gone even further on changes. We have untied the Guild rewards from the Conquest leaderboards, with the exception of the Guild in first place as they will still receive the Conqueror title and planetary bonuses. A big change is that now every planet falls into one of three designated Invasion Targets. These targets differ by the minimum Conquest Points thresholds that we call “Planetary Yields.” These thresholds determine the minimum points a Guild has to earn to receive those Conquests rewards. The higher the yield the harder it is for the Guild to receive the reward, but also means a better reward.

 

We made this change to encourage more leaderboard competition among similarly sized Guilds, smaller Guilds going after smaller Yields, etc. Note that this is not a restriction, just a recommendation. If a larger Guild wants to go for lesser rewards in a smaller yield, they can, and the same is true of a smaller Guild trying to go for the highest yield.

 

 

Further, when it became an overwhelming part of the feedback and their goal (as stated above) was in fact not being met, they discussed changes to make it more in line with their intention:

 

[*]Yield Targets – Competition among different sized Guilds has always been a problem in Conquests. We introduced yield targets to assist in separating out Guilds by various sizes, as they have differing targets and rewards.

 

Large Yield Target Rewards Aren’t Good Enough

We are seeing concerns that the Large (and possibly Medium) Yield rewards simply aren’t good enough to warrant the extra points required. That this may cause most Guilds to simply filter down into Small Yields, which is counter-productive to the goal of getting Guilds to split a bit by Guild size.

Plan: This is something we are sensitive to but without seeing actual participation data around Conquests, we are hesitant to make changes just yet. We will monitor in the coming weeks and make any needed changes in 5.9 and beyond.

 

 

Punishing to Alts // Legacy

With the rebalance of Objective points and the reclassification of some Objective types, there is some concern over the ability for a player with multiple characters in a Legacy to be competitive in Conquests. Additionally, there are similar concerns for folks with characters within a Legacy in more than one Guild.

Plan: One initial step to resolve this is the lowering of the Conquest targets as highlighted above. Also, by adding more repeatable Objectives (like PvP participation) as noted, this should give players more ways to gain points and make it easier to achieve targets. Beyond that we will continue to monitor data and your feedback to seek other possible changes in 5.9 and beyond.

 

 

So as much as you seem to want to claim that you know exactly why they did what they did to the conquest system, the developers own words about their intent behind some of the changes speak the opposite of your points.

 

I know you feel like everyone here is critical of the game and the developers and you are happy with everything they've ever done and feel the need to defend them. Firstly, I'm glad for you that your satisfaction with the game remains undiminished no matter what changes the developers make for good or for bad... but secondly, your constant rebuttals that stretch the truth of the matter (in this case, developer intent) just work to make most here consider you combative, and for no good reason.

 

This is why I posted earlier encouraging people who are happy with the system to play the game and continue being happy with it. Posting just to counter other posters (and sometimes stretching your facts to do so) doesn't really help the situation or the frustration that your fellow players are feeling. Let us give reasoned feedback to the developers without speaking for them as if you are one of them, please. They can speak for themselves perfectly well.

 

.

Edited March 29, 2018 by PennyAnn

[ivanhedgehog]

Even if your statement is sarcastic you may be right. However, why would they bother to try to make the remaining 3 subscribers happy if the motivation isn't to keep players happy now?

 

If we give the team credit and assume they are not ignorant, then perhaps the conclusion is that the direction of the changes in the game really has nothing to do with player satisfaction at all, but rather what the development team wants the game to be. If something bothers the development team (like how much impact crafting had on old conquest), then they nerf that, who cares what the players think.

 

Development seems to be simply eliminating pet-peeves of the dev team. If a huge majority of players react negatively about the changes, the response is never to reverse course and make the players happy again, its to make a slight change back into the direction it was before to be seen as a minor consesion or compromise. I think the dev needs to be more focused on customer service. But thats just what it seems like to me based on what we have seen since 5.x started.

 

This whole game is just about the dev teams desires. They dont give a crap what their subscriber base thinks, or any of their players. They seem to think that money magically appears in their accounts from the CM. They dont give a crap what we think, they are designing the game they want to design, not the game we want to play.

[PennyAnn]

Ok, so stop right there. If those 30 individual crafters had 8x level 50 companions, they would still have an advantage, and an even more significant one than you and/or your guild.

 

Please correct me if Im wrong, but with your example, you want BW to balance conquest so 1 person to have the ability to produce the equivalent of 30 people?

 

Unbelievable. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

 

You said:

So I challenge anyone making the alt claim to produce adequate reason to believe alt exclusion hurts small guilds in conquest success vs the previous system.

 

So I responded and tried to produce adequate reason. And now because I've successfully done that, you are going to twist it around to make it about me wanting Bioware to cater to me personally. Nope, that's not what I said at all. I met your challenge.

 

You asked for examples of making alt exclusion hurt small guilds. I gave them to you. You ignored that reasoned response and instead are going for the throat grab because I responded to your request directly and met your challenge.

 

Well let me stop you right there. Back on /ignore you go.

 

.

Edited March 29, 2018 by PennyAnn

[KendraP]

Ok, so stop right there. If those 30 individual crafters had 8x level 50 companions, they would still have an advantage, and an even more significant one than you and/or your guild.

 

Please correct me if Im wrong, but with your example, you want BW to balance conquest so 1 person to have the ability to produce the equivalent of 30 people?

 

This was only possible on crafting weeks anyway and if thats how she wants to cap her toons and has fun doing it, why not? She took the time to level and equip those toons for the purpose and its her resources being dumped into it. Again, how does that hurt your ability to have fun in any way?

[KendraP]

So I responded and tried to produce adequate reason. And now because I've successfully done that, you are going to twist it around to make it about me wanting Bioware to cater to me personally. Nope, that's not what I said at all. I met your challenge.

 

You asked for examples of making alt exclusion hurt small guilds. I gave them to you. You ignored that reasoned response and instead are going for the throat grab because I responded to your request directly and met your challenge.

 

Well let me stop you right there. Back on /ignore you go.

 

For whatever reason, us capping multiple toons bothered him. I used to cap 10 toons doing PVP. To get all those crafters you had to level them and their crafting skill, then grind companion gifts and mats. I see no reason why you shouldnt be able to cap toons in this method

 

I took the time to level and gear said toons for pvp, and similarly should be able to cap them in the way i enjoy.

 

I dont see how the alt thing is so complicated.

Edited March 29, 2018 by KendraP