Conquest Feedback and Upcoming Changes

[JediJoy]

It is becoming pretty clear that Bioware is taking a "play the game the way we want you to" stance more strictly than ever before. They have always been a little bit this way, putting rewards in areas of the game they want us to focus on to the benefit of their "metrics" so that they could show their bosses how great the new Flashpoint they developed is because "look at how many people are playing it!" (due to the fact that it's the only way to get schematics for new augments besides paying through the nose on the GTN).

 

They really are just co-opting Conquest to do the same thing now. Conquest was a system added to the game to encourage players to have a reason to repeat old content over and over once they had earned all of the static rewards from that content (you only need so many pieces of story mode gear from operations, how can we get them to keep repeating this activity during content droughts?). Conquest was actually a great way to encourage it, because it added a layer of changing competition to it. It was fairly easy to play certain parts of the game and be rewarded for doing so additionally via Conquest. But it was also worthy of seeking out NEW areas of play because sometimes you found yourself in a heated race for the top 10 leader board and doing those Flashpoints that have been in the game since 1.0 and that you've done to death are worth decent points.

 

Now it seems like the entire reason for Conquest has been changed, after working pretty well (a few problems aside) for four years. Now conquest is about prodding people into the areas where they need metrics. And prodding and punishing - not rewarding, mind you. The old system was way more rewarding. The new system isn't going to encourage anyone to complete that Flashpoint from 1.0 so much as FORCE them to complete it in order to hit goal at all. There's a very drastic difference in the approach there, and I think the original goals of conquest have been utterly lost in favor of "how can we force them to do what we want" vs. "how can we encourage them to replay old content while we develop new content". Maybe that's because they don't really develop much new content anymore. Either way, it's another end to an era of this game's development style that doesn't sit very well with a lot of us. And that's a shame.

 

Those of you who like being forced into specific activities in order to earn the same rewards, congrats! The new system will suit you well. Until Bioware is paying my sub for me though, I'm not really into being told what is rewarding and what is not in my game play. I'd rather decide that for myself. And for four years of the old conquest system, I got some of that. Farewell, old conquest system. You will be missed.

 

And I tell you what - too much more of the "play the parts of the game that we want" pushing and it will be farewell SWTOR, too. Give me MORE reasons to play the game, not less.

 

Disclaimer: This post is strictly opinion. You don't have to tell me that this is "just my opinion"... I'm well aware of the difference. Thanks, though.

 

.

 

A little louder for the people in the back, please. This sums my thoughts up nicely, well done Penny.

[Rheshalea]

we obviously weren't having fun the right way, BW is making us have the right kind of fun.

 

Weeell I was never any good at taking orders, so for me it's Screw Conquest until it gets properly fixed and/or has a bug that gives me lots and lots of Conquest points for killing a random mob.

But it's ok. I have a "little" project now that it seems we're having the rest of our comps returned, finally, two years later (or is it three? I've lost track.)

I'm going to replay all Class stories just for the companion interactions and especially the romances as a reminder of why I like or dislike certain comps.

I'm also going to have to drag at least one lvl 70 of each class through KotET - and event THAT is more fun than Conquest.

 

I'm not playing your game, Biow.... no wait. Dammit. I am. But I'm NOT PLAYING THE WAY YOU WANT ME TO!

[Rheshalea]

As long as they can keep proving to the overlords that they are doing all the "right" things and look at all the players doing this or that (because we're forcing them to!)... and as long as the players keep getting towed along by the nose and paying EA for the privilege, then this is what we get.

 

That's really a guess. But as soon as I started thinking about it in those terms, like you, it all started to make a lot more sense. And I'm not a tin foil hat person AT ALL. I do not think they are trying to shut down this game, but I do think they went from providing lots of different types of content to having an army of discontented players because they can't provide enough of anything to keep any group happy right now.

 

I've been having these same ideas, but it's not necessarily a negative thing.

The Command point "bug" for rep grind areas, for example.

Maybe the Devs needed to show the EvilAverlords at EA that people play a lot of those, or that people don't mind GC after all, so, whoopsie, bugged rewards, but hey, let's not fix it so the players get a lot of time to really dig in and play that content until their fingers bleed...

...but why? So they can tell the EvilAverlords that making new repgrind/daily areas IS a good idea? Or "just" to help players get more alts to GC rank 300 so the Legacy bonuses kick in, which alleviates the grind a little.

 

What about DvL and the former 12x xp for class quests events, and how the "Show Exploration Missions" is OFF by default, so only Class quests show properly? The 12x xp events were super fun, imo, and could well have been used as "proof" that players only care about the main story. But nowadays if I want to play an alt properly, I do all quests anyway, regardless of how much I'll outlevel it, because it gives more flavor to the characters and the settings.

 

And now, with Conquest, trying to make people play all kinds of activities, whether they like it or not... why? To show the EvilAverlords that SWTOR's players play all kinds of content, and need more? Hopefully. To show that people play often and a lot by making it difficult to reach personal goals in one or two sessions? Maybe that was the idea, but it's backfired because of way too harsh point nerfs and the fact that people do not necessarily have time to sit down and play for hours every day.

[AlrikFassbauer]

The only thing I really dislike is the elephant standing in this discussion . Big guilds taking away things from small guilds.

 

Measured against how little talk there is about that uissue, nobody seems to want it to be gone (that big guilds are farming conquest meant for small guilds).

 

So, measured against how little talk there is about that, people either implicitely or explicetely ABSOLUTELY WANT to take everything away from small guilds.

[masterceil]

The only thing I really dislike is the elephant standing in this discussion . Big guilds taking away things from small guilds.

 

Measured against how little talk there is about that uissue, nobody seems to want it to be gone (that big guilds are farming conquest meant for small guilds).

 

So, measured against how little talk there is about that, people either implicitely or explicetely ABSOLUTELY WANT to take everything away from small guilds.

 

Game Update 5.9 will be putting those Augment crafting mats worth over a million credits apiece in the Medium and Large Yield Rewards to try and entice larger guilds to back away from Small Yield Targets. Here's hoping it works : )

[Lhancelot]

I watched the Vulkk interview with Eric and Charles today while the game was down. Eric even admitted (granted half quietly) the feedback wasn't exactly good regarding the new conquest changes.

 

That being said, I really wish he communicated more freely and openly on the forums as he did in that interview. He was very talkative and articulate, even talked with some candor. Why not be that way on the forums?

 

Not addressing the negative feedback doesn't make it go away.

 

When people point out specific, very detailed concerns about the new conquest system such as how people are pigeonholed into playing on a specific toon because they want conquest on that toon which means when the need for another role pops up they are unable to switch to the class needed, why not address this concern and many of the others that people have laid out so well?

 

People have spent hours in the game understanding the new conquest system, and then spent hours on the forums writing very detailed examples of deficiencies and it's very disheartening not to acknowledge what they have found and shared.

 

I just think anytime people are ignored, it builds resentment. This player/game company relationship goes two ways and by not communicating directly to the players it makes them feel unappreciated and insignificant.

 

Showing common decency usually grants common decency back, and this is what's missing here in my opinion.

[DarthSpuds]

Game Update 5.9 will be putting those Augment crafting mats worth over a million credits apiece in the Medium and Large Yield Rewards to try and entice larger guilds to back away from Small Yield Targets. Here's hoping it works : )

 

And what do small guilds get again?

 

Yeah, the same old sh*&^y end of the stick we've been getting since 5.8 dropped.

 

All The Best

[masterceil]

And what do small guilds get again?

 

Yeah, the same old sh*&^y end of the stick we've been getting since 5.8 dropped.

 

All The Best

 

Ideally, for guilds capable of putting up 550k or more points to invade a larger target so the small guilds have a better shot at winning the small one.

[Quraswren]

I watched the Vulkk interview with Eric and Charles today while the game was down. Eric even admitted (granted half quietly) the feedback wasn't exactly good regarding the new conquest changes.

 

That being said, I really wish he communicated more freely and openly on the forums as he did in that interview. He was very talkative and articulate, even talked with some candor. Why not be that way on the forums?

 

Not addressing the negative feedback doesn't make it go away.

 

When people point out specific, very detailed concerns about the new conquest system such as how people are pigeonholed into playing on a specific toon because they want conquest on that toon which means when the need for another role pops up they are unable to switch to the class needed, why not address this concern and many of the others that people have laid out so well?

 

People have spent hours in the game understanding the new conquest system, and then spent hours on the forums writing very detailed examples of deficiencies and it's very disheartening not to acknowledge what they have found and shared.

 

I just think anytime people are ignored, it builds resentment. This player/game company relationship goes two ways and by not communicating directly to the players it makes them feel unappreciated and insignificant.

 

Showing common decency usually grants common decency back, and this is what's missing here in my opinion.

 

Very good post and yes, it's a problem bioware has needed to work on for a long time now when it comes to bioware and their communication to the playing gamers.

 

Game Update 5.9 will be putting those Augment crafting mats worth over a million credits apiece in the Medium and Large Yield Rewards to try and entice larger guilds to back away from Small Yield Targets. Here's hoping it works : )

 

Those mats will still be easier to get in PVP even if you half-arse the matches you are in. The few that will be given out for conquest will be a joke in comparison to PVP.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Quraswren

[Joonbeams]

...

 

Not addressing the negative feedback doesn't make it go away.

 

When people point out specific, very detailed concerns about the new conquest system such as how people are pigeonholed into playing on a specific toon because they want conquest on that toon which means when the need for another role pops up they are unable to switch to the class needed, why not address this concern and many of the others that people have laid out so well?

 

People have spent hours in the game understanding the new conquest system, and then spent hours on the forums writing very detailed examples of deficiencies and it's very disheartening not to acknowledge what they have found and shared.

 

I just think anytime people are ignored, it builds resentment. This player/game company relationship goes two ways and by not communicating directly to the players it makes them feel unappreciated and insignificant.

 

Showing common decency usually grants common decency back, and this is what's missing here in my opinion.

 

This is so very very true. So well put. Frankly, this is the only thing that has ever made me even consider unsubbing: I can deal with bugs, I can deal with experiments gone bad, I can deal with change. But what I cannot deal with is being treated like a know-nothing fiend, who you can do anything you want to with radio silence. It DRIVES ME CRAZY that communication isn't more highly prioritized - it's what I thought would be really refreshing when Keith took over. Heck, even back in the days of Tait, we at least had some regular communication ("lemme look into it"). Acknowledging that we are heard, even without committing to change goes so far toward keeping people happy. If I was running this company, this is the SINGLE thing I would change first - I would put someone in charge of regular forum communication as their sole job. I have ZERO doubt that would more than pay for itself...

[Master_Morak]

Ideally, for guilds capable of putting up 550k or more points to invade a larger target so the small guilds have a better shot at winning the small one.

 

Ah and the member of small guilds didn't Need the materials for the new augments?

 

The next slap in the face of the small guilds.

[masterceil]

Ah and the member of small guilds didn't Need the materials for the new augments?

 

The next slap in the face of the small guilds.

 

Conquest is not the only (or main) way of acquiring these mats. They also come from Ranked Warzones and Operations, as well as all levels of Galactic Command crates.

[Master_Morak]

Conquest is not the only (or main) way of acquiring these mats. They also come from Ranked Warzones and Operations, as well as all levels of Galactic Command crates.

 

And with which probability from Galactic Command Crates? - 1:500, 1: 1000 - Forget it.

[Calar]

The current week of conquest is absolute...... for me.

I don't like Flashpoints. Operations okay. SOMETIMES!

 

Space combat, PVP, quests are fun, but I don't mind that this week. Nothing that would even be worth the effort......

 

I loved the old conquests, but what's here now only frustrates. And I will not be forced to run flashpoints or operations to participate in the conquest.

[ShadowGovernator]

So the new conquest start time is another very bad idea.

They have moved the conquest start time from when the dailies reset in the early afternoon – to 8pm in the evening in Europe.

The reason they did this 6months ago was to prevent certain rewards from not being given on maintenance days.

It did not have any effect and the start time was quickly moved back to the early afternoon, when the dailies reset.

 

Now the conquest start time is back to 8pm in Europe.

This is a bad idea for many reasons;

Players have to wait 6 hours before conquest begins – and in those 6 hours any activity that they do will not count as conquest points. So if you do daily ops or heroics or dailies or events etc. in those 6 hours timeslot you will not get any conquest points.

Furthermore, when conquest is finally active after 8pm – try putting an operation group together to run the daily group-finder operation like Dread Fortress today. If you succeed with the current low group activity in getting a full group together and completing the entire operation – it will be midnight at best on a normal weekday.

And what will the big conquest point payout be, if you succeed: 1718 conquest points for that evening.

 

Not worth it.

[Rheshalea]

I just checked what this week's objectives are.

Not gonna even try. There's no point for those of us who play solo and/or don't have hours every day to play games.

 

Oh, and I agree with the new(-ish) start time. It's evening in Europe, which means a whole bunch of people won't even think about starting any group content for Conquest or otherwise if they can only play for an hour or two on a week day.

You know some of us are GMT +2 or +3, right? For me, that means the Conquest starts at 9pm (or 10, I'm not even sure) and even if I wanted to play group content, I wouldn't start that late.

Consequently, the European players who are in earlier timezones have less people to join their groups, too.

[Lhancelot]

This is so very very true. So well put. Frankly, this is the only thing that has ever made me even consider unsubbing: I can deal with bugs, I can deal with experiments gone bad, I can deal with change. But what I cannot deal with is being treated like a know-nothing fiend, who you can do anything you want to with radio silence. It DRIVES ME CRAZY that communication isn't more highly prioritized - it's what I thought would be really refreshing when Keith took over. Heck, even back in the days of Tait, we at least had some regular communication ("lemme look into it"). Acknowledging that we are heard, even without committing to change goes so far toward keeping people happy. If I was running this company, this is the SINGLE thing I would change first - I would put someone in charge of regular forum communication as their sole job. I have ZERO doubt that would more than pay for itself...

 

Right. It's maddening to not be acknowledged especially when asked for feedback.

 

If anyone wanted to learn about conquest, all they'd have to do is read the pages on top of pages as to how it used to be compared to now in these "feedback" threads, created by Eric.

 

I knew nothing about it, and learned everything from the detailed explanations of the old system compared to the new system!

 

Eric said in that interview his job was communicating to the players via the forums, and back to the developers/Keith.

 

Sadly it seems he must be focusing on only doing half of what he claims because honestly speaking the part to the players is lacking.

 

I realize he probably has a lot of responsibilities, but when his actual title description is community manager and his role is to communicate to the players, well I just think he could do better.

 

EDIT:

 

I forgot to add, you know we the players also should not have to watch an interview to learn that the devs and Eric are keeping the conquest system as is regarding legacy based restrictions. Why? Why was this not explained to us on the forums? This is not communicating to the players properly.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Lhancelot

[Bothan]

I just checked what this week's objectives are.

Not gonna even try. There's no point for those of us who play solo and/or don't have hours every day to play games

 

Same. At most I'll be able to complete one character, largely due to crafting. But all those MM FPs... f it.

[Rheshalea]

Same. At most I'll be able to complete one character, largely due to crafting. But all those MM FPs... f it.

 

I just did quick maths. If I did some crafting for the big points, I'd only have to do 25 Battle of Ilum.

[Master_Morak]

The current week of conquest is absolute...... for me.

I don't like Flashpoints. Operations okay. SOMETIMES!

 

Space combat, PVP, quests are fun, but I don't mind that this week. Nothing that would even be worth the effort......

 

I loved the old conquests, but what's here now only frustrates. And I will not be forced to run flashpoints or operations to participate in the conquest.

 

Agree, what a bu....it conquest.

 

Thank you, Eric I will Play Wow where the devs don't force me to do Things I don't want.

[Vallerie]

So BW doesnt feel like solo players should do conquest this week

[PennyAnn]

@Eric @Keith:

 

If you have read through even half of the two very large feedback threads, you will hear lots of players complaining about the effects on solo players with the new changes to Conquest. Many feel like solo players shouldn't really meaningfully be able to participate in Conquest because it is "supposed to be a group activity mainly targeted at large guilds".

 

Before 5.8, it was obvious why Conquest was in the game. It was there to encourage repetition of old content while new content was being developed. It had issues, yes... but for four years it worked pretty well to provide the entire player base, regardless of their play style or the variety of activities they liked and chose to do in the game an avenue to additional rewards, a framework to their play, and a reason to get involved in group activities they might not otherwise. It was the foundation of many guilds even, and provided them with built-in activities that they didn't have to work so hard to create for their guild members. But now, it is not really any of those things.

 

I think part of the problem is that we feel like we don't really know what you're trying to achieve with conquest. You say you want to give small guilds a better shot, but then every design choice you've made says otherwise. You build your game for two years around solo players (KotFE and KotET could ONLY be done solo, and it was the primary bulk of the content you were providing), and then revert to focusing on "group content" when that didn't work out. What you fail to realize it seems is that in the two years that you were focused on solo-only activities and storyline you built a large contingent of players there. Many who were more group content oriented left for games that focused more on group content. Some of them came back once you reverted your focus to be more broad and include group content, but you still have a pretty large player base that really plays this game alone.

 

They can do that with alts. They can do that because of the strength of companions. They can do that because so many parts of the game easily cater to solo play. Conquest used to be one of those things, too. But not anymore.

 

Your constant reversal of design goals for this game (solo players, group content, story line, uprisings, flashpoints as story vehicles) and the flip flopping that has happened over the last few years makes it nearly impossible to know what you're even aiming for. Especially when you say: These are our goals for Conquest, and then quite obviously design a system that not only doesn't accomplish any of those goals, but actively works against making the system function the way you yourselves described it as ideal.

 

You then ask for feedback, and get tons of it, and yet only respond to the first couple of posts in massive threads full of great feedback (among bickering, yes... but the great feedback is there!).

 

So I guess it all boils down to this: What DO you want the Conquest system to accomplish? Who do you aim for it to include? Who are you targeting with this new system? So far, we've heard goals that make no sense compared to the implementation. Is that because the system is not what you want it to be at all? Why put it in the game until it's at least close to that?

 

So many of these questions shouldn't require us to tune into interviews with influencers to get answers to - you have forums here, you've asked for feedback here, but you are giving us no feedback yourselves.

 

That added to the flip flopping of design goals in the game is causing undue angst that would really be mostly solved if you would just talk to us. Here. And explain the goals more clearly to Eric so that he can explain them to us, because right now 1 (your stated goals) + 1 (your implemented design) does not = 2.

 

.

Edited April 10, 2018 by PennyAnn

[Raytal]

PennyAnn...well said.

 

I don't think they care or are listening. What other reason could there be? I've gone along with the bugs and bad content and took my medicine and (for the most part) kept my mouth shut.

 

Founding Subscriber...here. Which is why I don't get it. I mean this thread is full of great Subscriber feedback. But we are getting nothing...no feedback...no anything.

 

So Team, its...suck it up and play the game the way we (bioware) want you to or LEAVE!

 

Guys & gals....they just don't care.

 

Well, I'm finally paying attention and I hear you bioware.

 

Two minutes ago I gave them additional feedback

 

Your subscription has been cancelled.

 

Good luck and God speed to all of you. Been fun

[Costello]

So BW doesnt feel like solo players should do conquest this week

 

It appears to be this way.

 

Though I think their is method to their madness. Despite it being flashpoint focused, Gods of the Machine is one of the highest rewarding activity, which will help steer the metrics in the direction that this was a smart allocation of resources in the last year.

 

But even if not it will give a bump to the metrics for group content, as you have to group if you want to compete. Which is going to be important for 6.0. Indirectly we have been told not to get our hopes/expectations up and it will be like forged alliance. So we can likely look forward 2 flashpoints, one for each faction and hopefully flipped. Unfortunately this will be the extent of the Republic vs Empire theme, with nothing outside of flashpoint being effect.

 

Now this allows them to do it on the cheap, no worries about companions and their allegiances cause other than the one (Lana) you take with you none will exist in the post Alliance world. While the lack of any open world element or carrying those actions over to the fleet or wider galaxy mean no need to update any other maps. Now people may feel this is a little cheap and the lots of work behind the scenes line seem a little old. So it helps if you can point to metrics and say, well flashpoints in particular master mode flashpoints are very popular so we felt this was the right medium to focus the continuation of the story on.

[matthobbit]

Another conquest week, another series of shoddy objectives, another week I couldn't care less about your conquest changes which address some stupid Utopian ideal of how conquest "should be played as intended".

 

I notice feedback on this thread is dying off... as subscribers leave and no longer can post...