Conquest Feedback and Upcoming Changes

[Starleash]

Sorry I'm late to the party, last week warzones counted towards personal conquest and this week they won't. Anyone know why?

[Exly]

I'd laugh if this wasn't so damn true lol. Last year to "fix" CXP, this year to "fix" Conquests...hopefully 2019 can bring us back to balance issues that take a year to resolve.

 

In 2019 we will be months into 6.0. We will have had to grind 4 more levels of gear just to get back to where we are today with our gear on a comparable basis, and then they will spend the next 6 months nerfing us because the last tier of gear that we earned made us too powerful for there liking. Then new augments, more nerfs, and as little content as they can get away with bringing us.

 

And by the end of 2019 those that are still playing the game will maybe reminisce about how people used to do conquest before Keith and his dev team got a hold of it.

[DarthSpuds]

Hundreds of pages of feedback. One of the most voiced complaints is the Legacy restrictions.

 

Musco said in the Vulkk interview today that they are NOT going to lift the legacy restrictions.

 

So much for feedback. What a bunch of posers.

 

No lifting of Legacy Conquest Restriction?

 

This mean:

Less over all hours played.

Less Ops queue pops.

Less PvP queue pops.

Less GSF queue pops.

 

May as well unplug the servers now.

 

Guys running the show shouldn't even be allowed to run a bath.

 

All The Best

[PorsaLindahl]

I went back and transcribed the conquest portion of that interview. I don't think I'm convinced that it'll really be any better. We've been lied to before. Anyway, here's the transcript:

 

In regards to Conquest.

Transcribed without the nonsense and carrying on:

 

Vulkk: When is the legacy "restrictment" going away?

 

Musco: It's not going to go away.

 

Charles: We'll adjust and tweak towards making it better.

 

Musco: What's clear from the changes that we made, when we introduced daily objectives, that does implement a more of a legacy restriction on some people. Especially if you play a lot of alts. Because you have to spread out your play over the week or have to make hard choices about who you play, and when. And, so, what that clearly highlights for us is that we did not infinitely repeatable objectives to supplement.. like it is completely by design that there are one time per week objectives and daily objectives, which are meant to be big burst of points, with the idea of if you only play on one character, you can complete them pretty quickly. If you play multiple characters, you can maybe spread that out over a couple of weeks or spread out the activities to really supplement getting a lot of points through objectives.

 

But what we missed the mark on, clearly, was: If I just play warzones, I don't have enough way to just continue getting points. If I play, if I win once a day, once I've won, I kinda don't get enough points to really wanna keep playing that character. So what we wanted to introduce, and we've introduced a lot of, is infinitely repeatable objectives that don't matter what character, how many characters play. It doesn't matter. You can play them and you'll continue to get points. And then, over the week, because again, we really do want to incentivize you to play multiple days a week. We want to incentivize you to play different content that, um, you will be able to get big bursts throughout the week, across all the objectives.

 

And so, we're not going to lift the legacy restrictions. The legacy restrictions existed in the old conquest. That's not a new thing. But what we clearly highlighted is that we didn't have enough non-legacy based objectives for you to continue to earn points beyond the initial burst of points. So that's what we're adding a lot of starting with 5.9.

 

Vulkk: When can we expect the conquest system to be friendly for alts?

 

Musco: Honestly? I think it will be pretty close by the end of 5.9. When 5.9 goes out the door, I think, we'll be pretty close. Because the one thing that, to be perfectly honest, there were some things about the old conquest that were unintended and / or exploitable, that we need to be cautious of, right? So, I know there was a lot of easy ways for people to get points. War supplies and crafting was amazing. We want crafting to be good, but not the sole thing that you do, entirely. And we know people doing lockout trading for quick and easy points for operations. We want you to get points from the operation by playing the operation, not by doing things that are clearly not intended.

 

So we've made some of those changes. Which definitely makes it harder to get points on alts, but that's because we want you to play the game in the intended way, and play different activities and some of those things.

 

We clearly did that in a more punishing way than we should've with 5.8. We won't argue that for a second. And that became very clear, very quickly. And the hope would be, by the time we get to 5.9 you should really just be able to play pretty much any character you want, through any content you want, on any day, on any conquest, and be working towards fulfilling your conquest. That's really the goal.

 

Then it goes on to testing on PTS...

 

Okay. So I'll admit I was hasty in my first reply in here. Apparently I missed quite a bit of that conversation due to other things going on at the same time. But after going back and replaying it, I decided to transcribe it.

 

He pretty much confirmed that using the final boss lockout on ops was an exploit for gaining conquest points. They just never took actions against it.

Edited April 6, 2018 by PorsaLindahl

[Joonbeams]

I went back and transcribed the conquest portion of that interview. I don't think I'm convinced that it'll really be any better. We've been lied to before. Anyway, here's the transcript:

 

 

 

He pretty much confirmed that using the final boss lockout on ops was an exploit for gaining conquest points. They just never took actions against it.

 

Thanks for the transcript - really helpful. Honestly, I'm refreshed by this and it's far less "head-in-the-sand" than I originally thought. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, and maybe I'll regret this, but I'm actually optimistic about the changes coming now. Reading this, I think they do get it. Fingers remain crossed...

[Sunhunter]

I went back and transcribed the conquest portion of that interview. I don't think I'm convinced that it'll really be any better. We've been lied to before. Anyway, here's the transcript:

 

 

 

He pretty much confirmed that using the final boss lockout on ops was an exploit for gaining conquest points. They just never took actions against it.

 

From the transcript: So we've made some of those changes. Which definitely makes it harder to get points on alts, but that's because we want you to play the game in the intended way, and play different activities and some of those things.

 

So we play however they want us to, and what they want us to, or else? (Or else what? We take our money and go elsewhere?)

 

I am not hopeful, but I am not unsubbing, yet.

 

There will eventually be another Star Wars MMO. Disney will get tired of Bioware/EA's undermonitization of the IP and give the rights to another team. For that I am hopeful.

 

Thank you for the transcript, btw.

[Darev]

 

Quote: Originally Posted by PorsaLindahl View Post

In regards to Conquest.

 

Transcribed without the nonsense and carrying on:

 

Vulkk: When is the legacy "restrictment" going away?

 

Musco: It's not going to go away.

 

Charles: We'll adjust and tweak towards making it better.

 

Musco: What's clear from the changes that we made, when we introduced daily objectives, that does implement a more of a legacy restriction on some people. Especially if you play a lot of alts. Because you have to spread out your play over the week or have to make hard choices about who you play, and when. And, so, what that clearly highlights for us is that we did not infinitely repeatable objectives to supplement.. like it is completely by design that there are one time per week objectives and daily objectives, which are meant to be big burst of points, with the idea of if you only play on one character, you can complete them pretty quickly. If you play multiple characters, you can maybe spread that out over a couple of weeks or spread out the activities to really supplement getting a lot of points through objectives.

 

But what we missed the mark on, clearly, was: If I just play warzones, I don't have enough way to just continue getting points. If I play, if I win once a day, once I've won, I kinda don't get enough points to really wanna keep playing that character. So what we wanted to introduce, and we've introduced a lot of, is infinitely repeatable objectives that don't matter what character, how many characters play. It doesn't matter. You can play them and you'll continue to get points. And then, over the week, because again, we really do want to incentivize you to play multiple days a week. We want to incentivize you to play different content that, um, you will be able to get big bursts throughout the week, across all the objectives.

 

And so, we're not going to lift the legacy restrictions. The legacy restrictions existed in the old conquest. That's not a new thing. But what we clearly highlighted is that we didn't have enough non-legacy based objectives for you to continue to earn points beyond the initial burst of points. So that's what we're adding a lot of starting with 5.9.

 

Vulkk: When can we expect the conquest system to be friendly for alts?

 

Musco: Honestly? I think it will be pretty close by the end of 5.9. When 5.9 goes out the door, I think, we'll be pretty close. Because the one thing that, to be perfectly honest, there were some things about the old conquest that were unintended and / or exploitable, that we need to be cautious of, right? So, I know there was a lot of easy ways for people to get points. War supplies and crafting was amazing. We want crafting to be good, but not the sole thing that you do, entirely. And we know people doing lockout trading for quick and easy points for operations. We want you to get points from the operation by playing the operation, not by doing things that are clearly not intended.

 

So we've made some of those changes. Which definitely makes it harder to get points on alts, but that's because we want you to play the game in the intended way, and play different activities and some of those things.

 

We clearly did that in a more punishing way than we should've with 5.8. We won't argue that for a second. And that became very clear, very quickly. And the hope would be, by the time we get to 5.9 you should really just be able to play pretty much any character you want, through any content you want, on any day, on any conquest, and be working towards fulfilling your conquest. That's really the goal.

 

Then it goes on to testing on PTS...

 

 

This does not assuage (m)any of my concerns.

 

1. This allows them to keep the "once per day per legacy" heroic system that we see this week in place. Yes, it's currently actually broken, but it could eventually be fixed and work properly.

2. I interpret the 2nd part of the highlighted text as an introduction of new objectives that could also be once per week per legacy.

3. It seems clear they they want us to meet the conquest goals by doing a variety of content that not all players want to participate in, or are able to (easily) participate in. "Play MY way and not your way" is not a good design choice.

 

These are my concerns. While I canceled my subscription, it doesn't actually run out until after 5.9 hits, so I'll have to wait and see.

[Exly]

@ -eric,

 

Do you play the game the indented way, or do you play the parts of the game that you enjoy (that is if you really play the game at all)?

 

You intentionally made the game less alt friendly because you wanted to, not because it would make the game more enjoyable.

 

What makes you think that people will play the game more if you seek to punish them for playing it the way that they want by changing the rewards to discourage them from focusing on activities that they enjoy?

 

None of what you said makes any sense to me. Your message is inconsistent in so far as one day you say that you made changes to give smaller guilds a chance to receive rewards, while you at the same time are sought to punish those same small guilds by limiting the point values for completing conquest objectives, and force them to make hard choices on which character they play if they even want to meet their personal conquest goal on one character.

 

This new system sucks. I know that based on the smile on your face as you answered Vulk's questions that you are having fun with this, but guess what, we don't pay our sub fees so that you can have fun at our expense, we do it so that we can enjoy the game.

[Joonbeams]

From the transcript: So we've made some of those changes. Which definitely makes it harder to get points on alts, but that's because we want you to play the game in the intended way, and play different activities and some of those things.

 

So we play however they want us to, and what they want us to, or else? (Or else what? We take our money and go elsewhere?)

 

I am not hopeful, but I am not unsubbing, yet.

 

There will eventually be another Star Wars MMO. Disney will get tired of Bioware/EA's undermonitization of the IP and give the rights to another team. For that I am hopeful.

 

Thank you for the transcript, btw.

 

I'm by no means white-knighting here, but I think in context Eric meant "intended" as in not using the lockout "exploit" (technically not an exploit, but digression).

 

I also think that if they can add a bunch of non-legacy-restricted options - if they actually stick to that - then it could mitigate the legacy restrictions to a large degree.

 

And I totally agree that another SW MMO is coming. It makes zero financial sense for that not to happen. What shape/form that MMO takes, I can only speculate. But it's happening. It's shareholder abuse not to try to milk this IP cash cow for all its worth and this IP is fertile ground for an MMO or maybe a multi-player, open world game with oodles of microtransactions and such.

[PorsaLindahl]

One good thing I take away from all of that is the addition of infinite repeatables. The downside to it is that the point values of those infinite repeatables is probably going to be so low that it'll still be a major grind to get personal points through doing them.

 

As far as the one time per legacy always being there, even in the old system? Yeah, that much is true. But it was limited to just a few specific things.

 

• Flashpoints and or Operations that were tied to the active conquest.
  
• Commanders.
  
• Rampages.
  
• Invasion Forces (repeatable for some conquests but still gave a large one-time point burst)
  
• War supplies (repeatable for some conquests)
  
• World Bosses tied to the active conquest.
  

 

We were still able to get points on multiple characters for all planetary heroics/weeklies that were tied to conquest. Not just one single mission per day, per legacy, from the entire list of missions.

 

We were still able to get points on multiple characters for the daily and weekly GF, whether it was FP's, GSF, UR's or PvP.

 

We had choices in how we wanted to participate in conquest. All you've done is drastically narrowed down those choices and think it's a good thing still.

 

As I've said, I'm still skeptical. You haven't won my confidence back. You fooled me once (and lured me into subscribing another month), so shame on me. I won't be fooled again.

[Sunhunter]

I also think that if they can add a bunch of non-legacy-restricted options - if they actually stick to that - then it could mitigate the legacy restrictions to a large degree.

 

If they stick to that AND if they do math to figure an appropriate number of points for a character to use that option to cap. They haven't exactly demonstrated that they are capable of the simple addition and multiplication necessary.

[Darev]

They also didn't say the number of alts the feel is "appropriate" to cap in a given week.

 

They could target 2-3.

 

Many of us are used to 6-10.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Darev

[PorsaLindahl]

If they stick to that AND if they do math to figure an appropriate number of points for a character to use that option to cap. They haven't exactly demonstrated that they are capable of the simple addition and multiplication necessary.

 

Then, of course, they'd have to choose a standard set of points, and take into consideration bonus or no bonus when doing so.

 

The daily repeatables now, even with 150% stronghold bonus, have such low point values that they're not even near feasible enough to make an attempt at grinding them out. Especially for those that don't have 6+ hours per day to play.

[matthobbit]

After Vulkk's stream with the Devs, it is pretty clear that the solution to the most common complaint "remove legacy restriction" from conquest, is to ignore the feedback, NOT remove legacy restrictions, and do "tweaks" to "make conquest better".

 

Clear indication that they don't give a $@ about anything that's said on these largely irrelevant feedback threads.

[Ibokagain]

One good thing I take away from all of that is the addition of infinite repeatables. The downside to it is that the point values of those infinite repeatables is probably going to be so low that it'll still be a major grind to get personal points through doing them.

 

As far as the one time per legacy always being there, even in the old system? Yeah, that much is true. But it was limited to just a few specific things.

 

• Flashpoints and or Operations that were tied to the active conquest.
  
• Commanders.
  
• Rampages.
  
• Invasion Forces (repeatable for some conquests but still gave a large one-time point burst)
  
• War supplies (repeatable for some conquests)
  
• World Bosses tied to the active conquest.
  

 

We were still able to get points on multiple characters for all planetary heroics/weeklies that were tied to conquest. Not just one single mission per day, per legacy, from the entire list of missions.

 

We were still able to get points on multiple characters for the daily and weekly GF, whether it was FP's, GSF, UR's or PvP.

 

We had choices in how we wanted to participate in conquest. All you've done is drastically narrowed down those choices and think it's a good thing still.

 

As I've said, I'm still skeptical. You haven't won my confidence back. You fooled me once (and lured me into subscribing another month), so shame on me. I won't be fooled again.

 

Agree with everyone good post, I for one am not holding my breath that 5.9 will really fix anything.

[Lularapio]

It's good to know that they finally made up their minds on keeping this botched conquest model so I can just drop this game like a bad habit.

 

I don't play in any guilds, I have many alts, I like to play the way I want and be rewarded just like everyone else, even a bit less because I'm not doing group content.

 

If they want me to play the way they want, they got another thing coming.

 

17 days left to my subscription, I suppose this is the last time I've been subbed to this game - and no, I'm not buying any cartel market **** with my money, because you killed my interest in this game.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Lularapio

[PorsaLindahl]

It's good to know that they finally made up their minds on keeping this botched conquest model so I can just drop this game like a bad habit.

 

I don't play in any guilds, I have many alts, I like to play the way I want and be rewarded just like everyone else, even a bit less because I'm not doing group content.

 

If they want me to play the way they want, they got another thing coming.

 

17 days left to my subscription, I suppose this is the last time I've been subbed to this game - and no, I'm not buying any cartel market **** with my money, because you killed my interest in this game.

 

I hear ya.

 

It's like they want us to play Tic-Tac-Toe, but we're only allowed to open with the left column, middle square. Then on our second turn we can only use the right column, top square. Our third move can only be the the middle column, bottom square. All the while they're blocking us from the other available squares.

Edited April 7, 2018 by PorsaLindahl

[Suprderk]

After Vulkk's stream with the Devs, it is pretty clear that the solution to the most common complaint "remove legacy restriction" from conquest, is to ignore the feedback, NOT remove legacy restrictions, and do "tweaks" to "make conquest better".

 

Clear indication that they don't give a $@ about anything that's said on these largely irrelevant feedback threads.

 

Am I the only one that laughed out loud when they were talking about the new augments and making some of the components available through conquest on the medium and large conquest planets to make an incentive for larger guilds to do them? They then said that small guilds could put in a little more effort and move up to a medium yield planet to get them. They obviously do not understand that even a small yield planet is currently unobtainable for most small guilds with all the restrictions. Before we could have a chance with crafting, now if we can only get one or two characters through conquest and there are only 3 or 4 people interested in actively participating, we can never get there much less move up to a medium planet.

[dryving]

That interview today just cost them 4 more members of my guild cancelling their subs.

[PorsaLindahl]

Am I the only one that laughed out loud when they were talking about the new augments and making some of the components available through conquest on the medium and large conquest planets to make an incentive for larger guilds to do them? They then said that small guilds could put in a little more effort and move up to a medium yield planet to get them. They obviously do not understand that even a small yield planet is currently unobtainable for most small guilds with all the restrictions. Before we could have a chance with crafting, now if we can only get one or two characters through conquest and there are only 3 or 4 people interested in actively participating, we can never get there much less move up to a medium planet.

 

I laughed at that, too. That was pretty stupid. A little more effort? If their efforts are blocked because it's not BW's intended way for them to play, how the hell are they supposed to make target?

[VirtualMorrigan]

From the transcript: So we've made some of those changes. Which definitely makes it harder to get points on alts, but that's because we want you to play the game in the intended way, and play different activities and some of those things.

So we play however they want us to, and what they want us to, or else? (Or else what? We take our money and go elsewhere?)

 

Well, having it spelled out this way just ensured that I am done with Conquest. I'm an adult, telling me how to play just "because we say so" doesn't work. I used to do Conquest objectives for fun, with friends, do random FPs. I haven't logged in the last 2 weeks.

 

Not much reason to bother with anything there any more, is there.

[Lhancelot]

Can some of you that are unhappy with the new conquest changes think of ways they can improve it around the legacy restrictions?

 

Perhaps accepting this detail, albeit an unfortunate one might open up a gateway of thought on how to improve upon it with such a seemingly dumb restriction.

 

If you players with tons of conquest experience and knowledge come together and lay out ways that will make conquest not only more viable for smaller guilds to compete as well as FUN that would be good to push at Eric and his band of devs.

 

I just think some of you have the knowledge and understanding it takes to present other ways to improve upon conquest even with this crippling affect the devs and Eric seem bent on leaving in conquest.

[Master_Morak]

If you players with tons of conquest experience and knowledge come together and lay out ways that will make conquest not only more viable for smaller guilds to compete as well as FUN that would be good to push at Eric and his band of devs.

 

Why, they ignore all Feedback given after Patch 5.8. Talking to this ignorant and arrogant gang is like talking against a wall.

 

I don't need any f....g developer oder game designer who told me who to play and what I have experinence as fun. I decide on my own what is fun for me.

[Darev]

Can some of you that are unhappy with the new conquest changes think of ways they can improve it around the legacy restrictions?

 

Perhaps accepting this detail, albeit an unfortunate one might open up a gateway of thought on how to improve upon it with such a seemingly dumb restriction.

 

If you players with tons of conquest experience and knowledge come together and lay out ways that will make conquest not only more viable for smaller guilds to compete as well as FUN that would be good to push at Eric and his band of devs.

 

I just think some of you have the knowledge and understanding it takes to present other ways to improve upon conquest even with this crippling affect the devs and Eric seem bent on leaving in conquest.

 

It's the design change, from being alt friendly (meaning - this week for example - NOT being able to complete NS heroics, daily, on each toon, and getting conquest points like we used to) to what we have now, where it's supposed to be "legacy" friendly.....that's the problem.

The devs did that on purpose, to solve a problem that honestly didn't exist.

 

People didn't like endless lockouts. Ok, I can admit, getting 14k (out of 20k) conquest points for killing the final boss on an operation is a bit over the top. THAT could have been addressed w/o the need to re-write the entire system.

Some people didn't like endless crafting during crafting weeks. I had less of a problem with this, but...whatever. THAT could have been addressed by itslef also, w/o needing to re-write the entire conquest system. They could have made a cap on points from crafting, per toon, per week. It would have been a battle of alts at that point, but that's something each player can CHOOSE to increase. Subscribers get, what, 32 toon slots now or something? Doesn't take much to level up to (the former) conquest crafting mark of crew skill 150 to pump out a few invasion forces to get you to your 20k

 

The Devs CHOSE to hijack the entire system from an alt friendly to a once per day per legacy system that they thought we'd gladly swallow.

 

Now, just like with gearing with 5.0, they're starting to walk it back due to negative feedback, cancellations, and presumably a drop in participation. WHY be satisfied with that? We (well I) waited patiently for the gearing changes to be switched back in the year after 5.0. Now I have to do the same thing again with 5.8?

 

NO I don't.

 

I just won't participate in it anywhere near as much anymore. And when/if Rishi comes around, the one planet I'm missing, if I get it, I'll be done with it completely.

[VirtualMorrigan]

Why, they ignore all Feedback given after Patch 5.8. Talking to this ignorant and arrogant gang is like talking against a wall.

 

I don't need any f....g developer oder game designer who told me who to play and what I have experinence as fun. I decide on my own what is fun for me.

 

That, so many times.

 

We have several threads about conquest. One was closed at ~80 pages, the others are open at 100+ . They are just insulting our intelligende with "we're monitoring, please give feedback." They had their feedback, it sucks. They are not going to change it, I am not goung to participate in it.

We have the same thing going with the next round of nerfs, we are more or less told what class to play. Also not going to do it. Go and do your metrics on that.

 

Only reason I am still here, right now, is one friend I meet ingame, to chat and stab a couple of mobs. I'm not doing group content any more, I'm not buying from the CM, and if queues are slow and money starts to dry out because people are leaving /not motivated to buy CM crap despite the direct sales, well, that's not my problem any more, is it.