Conquest Changes in Game Update 5.9

[Darevsool]

Just saying between the pvp changes and conquest changes there now comes a point where i literally have nothing to do in swtor. There is talk of going game hunting unless something gives.

 

When the forum activity is even slightly more interesting than that actual game itself (at least for me anyway) it's a bad sign.

 

There won't be a new game for me.

Maybe returning to an old one via an emulator.

[Darevsool]

So...Here are some numbers with 20 hours left on this conquest cycle.

 

S. S. server conquest 1st and 10th spots

Invading tatooine: The Steel Court has 6.8 million points 1st place

Weapon X has 1.4 million points 10th place

Invading Nar Shaddaa Crimson Order has 5 million points 1st place

Chaotic Methods = .7 million points 10th place

Invading Quesh Galaxy Knights = 2.6 million points 1st place

Ruinnation@The Harbringer = .4 million points 10th place

 

 

S.F. server

Invading Tatooine: The Sanctuary has 5.5 million points. 1st place

Imperial Reavers = 1.5 million points 10th place

Invading Nar Shaddaa The Courageous = 6 million points 1st place

Second Sith Empire = .9 million points 10th place

Invading Queh: Unchained Wrath = 5 million points 1st place

The Dread Legion = .5 million points 10th place

 

I haven't looked at the conquest websites to compare pre 5.8 numbers like this, but if those sites still hold that data, I wonder how similar the results would be....the percentage of the 10th place guild to the 1st place guild.

 

If the revamps to conquest in 5.8 and 5.9 were intended to "close that gap" the comparison of that percentage difference would be the way to do it.

[olagatonjedi]

So...Here are some numbers with 20 hours left on this conquest cycle.

 

S. S. server conquest 1st and 10th spots

Invading tatooine: The Steel Court has 6.8 million points 1st place

Weapon X has 1.4 million points 10th place

Invading Nar Shaddaa Crimson Order has 5 million points 1st place

Chaotic Methods = .7 million points 10th place

Invading Quesh Galaxy Knights = 2.6 million points 1st place

Ruinnation@The Harbringer = .4 million points 10th place

 

 

S.F. server

Invading Tatooine: The Sanctuary has 5.5 million points. 1st place

Imperial Reavers = 1.5 million points 10th place

Invading Nar Shaddaa The Courageous = 6 million points 1st place

Second Sith Empire = .9 million points 10th place

Invading Queh: Unchained Wrath = 5 million points 1st place

The Dread Legion = .5 million points 10th place

 

I haven't looked at the conquest websites to compare pre 5.8 numbers like this, but if those sites still hold that data, I wonder how similar the results would be....the percentage of the 10th place guild to the 1st place guild.

 

If the revamps to conquest in 5.8 and 5.9 were intended to "close that gap" the comparison of that percentage difference would be the way to do it.

Just a comparing example.

 

Pre-5.8

BBB - 55mil

2nd highest guild - usually 5mil to say 20mil

3rd highest - 5mil to 20 mil

4th guild - 5 mil to 20 mil

 

From your stats

Highest guild 6.8mil

2nd 6.0 mil

3rd 5.5 mil

 

Much much closer, and 3 winners instead of 1.

 

If they a competes against the same target, it would be a much more interesting race than 55mil vs 20mil.

[DWho]

Much much closer, and 3 winners instead of 1

 

I will just point out this is a false statement. In almost every conquest week prior to 5.8 there were three or more planets available for conquest. The only exception I am aware of was Plunder of Iokath. You could win any of the planets and get the title.

 

pre-5.8

 

Relics of the Gree (3 planets)

Trade Emporium (3 planets)

Death Mark (4 planets)

Plunder of Iokath (1 planet obviously)

Rakghoul Resurgence: Corellia (3 planets)

Titans of Industry (3 planets)

Rakghoul Resurgence: Tatooine (3 planets)

Balance of Power (3 planets)

Revenge of the Revanites (4 planets)

Emergency Operations (5 planets)

Total Galactic War (12 Planets)

Flashpoint Havoc (3 planets)

The Dread War (4 planets)

Clash in Hyperspace (4 planets)

[Darevsool]

Just a comparing example.

 

Pre-5.8

BBB - 55mil

2nd highest guild - usually 5mil to say 20mil

3rd highest - 5mil to 20 mil

4th guild - 5 mil to 20 mil

 

From your stats

Highest guild 6.8mil

2nd 6.0 mil

3rd 5.5 mil

 

Much much closer, and 3 winners instead of 1.

 

If they a competes against the same target, it would be a much more interesting race than 55mil vs 20mil.

 

Why not compare apples to apples? Now that I'm home I can look up some historical numbers via this 3rd party site.

http://swtorconquest.com/conquestweeks/314?page=2

 

Death Mark conquest week, Sept 25th 2017

 

Harbringer Server

Invading Nar Shaddaa

Galaxy Knights - 4.7 million conquest points 1st place

Republic Black Ops - 683k conquest points 10th place

 

Invading Quesh

Kai Sithari - 2.83 million conquest points 1st place

lament mass shadow - 678k conquest points 8th place (no real 9th/10th spot)

 

Invading Tatooine

Blood Bath & Beyond - 7.6 million conquest points 1st place

I Is shadow generator - 1 million conquest points 7th place

 

There were 5 total planets to choose from that week, instead of the 3 we have now. The other two scores.

 

Now, Death Mark isn't a crafting week, so there aren't the huge numbers that are usually thrown around (they did happen). If you were to just judge pre and post 5.8 on this data, there isn't much difference at all. If anything, I would say the "distance" between 1st and 10th spots in the new system is worse than before, using this particular old week and this current week as data points.

 

However, I will admit, that can be attributed to having 5 planets to fight for nearly a year ago, and only 3 now. If it were a comparison of a 3 planet week, then and now, the numbers would likely be different.

Edited August 13, 2018 by Darevsool

[olagatonjedi]

I will just point out this is a false statement. In almost every conquest week prior to 5.8 there were three or more planets available for conquest. The only exception I am aware of was Plunder of Iokath. You could win any of the planets and get the title.

 

pre-5.8

 

Relics of the Gree (3 planets)

Trade Emporium (3 planets)

Death Mark (4 planets)

Plunder of Iokath (1 planet obviously)

Rakghoul Resurgence: Corellia (3 planets)

Titans of Industry (3 planets)

Rakghoul Resurgence: Tatooine (3 planets)

Balance of Power (3 planets)

Revenge of the Revanites (4 planets)

Emergency Operations (5 planets)

Total Galactic War (12 Planets)

Flashpoint Havoc (3 planets)

The Dread War (4 planets)

Clash in Hyperspace (4 planets)

Fair enough, i didnt break it down quite like that, but using BBB as the example, they would win each of the planets with scores already mentioned in my previous post. So still, 1 entity winning vs now 3 different entities are winning more frequently

[olagatonjedi]

Why not compare apples to apples? Now that I'm home I can look up some historical numbers via this 3rd party site.

http://swtorconquest.com/conquestweeks/314?page=2

 

Death Mark conquest week, Sept 25th 2017

 

Harbringer Server

Invading Nar Shaddaa

Galaxy Knights - 4.7 million conquest points 1st place

Republic Black Ops - 683k conquest points 10th place

 

Invading Quesh

Kai Sithari - 2.83 million conquest points 1st place

lament mass shadow - 678k conquest points 8th place (no real 9th/10th spot)

 

Invading Tatooine

Blood Bath & Beyond - 7.6 million conquest points 1st place

I Is shadow generator - 1 million conquest points 7th place

 

There were 5 total planets to choose from that week, instead of the 3 we have now. The other two scores.

 

Now, Death Mark isn't a crafting week, so there aren't the huge numbers that are usually thrown around (they did happen). If you were to just judge pre and post 5.8 on this data, there isn't much difference at all. If anything, I would say the "distance" between 1st and 10th spots in the new system is worse than before, using this particular old week and this current week as data points.

 

However, I will admit, that can be attributed to having 5 planets to fight for nearly a year ago, and only 3 now. If it were a comparison of a 3 planet week, then and now, the numbers would likely be different.

I was in the 55 mil guild, and while it wasnt 55 mil every week, probably an average of 15-30mil week ro week PER BBB guild (6 of them), the gap was ridiculously large. I was IN these guilds and felt it needed to be changed, thats how bad it was.

[Darevsool]

I was in the 55 mil guild, and while it wasnt 55 mil every week, probably an average of 15-30mil week ro week PER BBB guild (6 of them), the gap was ridiculously large. I was IN these guilds and felt it needed to be changed, thats how bad it was.

 

a TON of people complained about that guild and their 2nd/3rd/4th guild expansions that had slight variations of the guild name and won virtually every week.

They were the exception, not the rule.

However, and looking in from the outside as I didn't play on that server on a regular basis (still had about 20 lvl 70's there before the merges), they didn't seem to BREAK any rules.

 

They gamed the heck out of the system, but didn't do anything 'bad'

 

And while it wasn't good for morale on that server regarding conquest, it didn't prevent anyone from trying to organize a counter guild, or partnership to make a comparable guild, to do the same thing.

Ultimately that was a player choice that never got made....to my knowledge

Maybe someone did try and failed, I don't know.

 

However, this current system, does absolutely NOTHING to prevent that type of guild activity from happening.

So in that regard, nothing has changed between the two system.

[PennyAnn]

Fair enough, i didnt break it down quite like that, but using BBB as the example, they would win each of the planets with scores already mentioned in my previous post. So still, 1 entity winning vs now 3 different entities are winning more frequently

 

And the 3 guilds winning now are just the remnants of BBB's members that have dispersed to other mega guilds. Nothing at all has changed.

Edited August 14, 2018 by PennyAnn

[PennyAnn]

Also - 3 different entitles are not winning planets on Satele Shan. Steel Court wins one planet and Eternal Order win the other two. The only difference this week is that Eternal Order put both of their guilds on one planet and must be taking it easy, because it has been a month or more since they haven't taken the medium + small yield planets while Steel Court always wins large. I know this because I log in once a week on at least one of my characters to sell off some long-hoarded cartel items here and there. Though last week I didn't even do that.

 

I pretty much ran BBB when we had 6 guilds conquering all available planets every week. It would be quite easy for a guild to do it again now if they recruited. While more difficult due to legacy lockouts, it would be easier due to only having to conquer 3 planets per week instead of 5 or more, as we regularly did.

 

I know that Olag's mind is made up that the new system is better. It is not an opinion that I share. I understand the desire to want to see other guilds be able to compete with large guilds, or more competition in general... but the new system has not changed that. If anything, a small guild has absolutely no chance of upsetting a larger guild by putting forth a ton of effort as a guild. Planning this, pulling together and working hard to make it happen used to be a joy for medium to small guilds. I know this because I got to enjoy the other side of the coin for awhile before 5.8.

 

Now, I've pretty much quit playing SWTOR due to the abysmal changes to conquest and the ever present bugs in the system that keep getting exploited and used to make points in ways I can't believe anyone finds fun or interesting. It used to be the reason I repeated old content. Now I have no reason. Now I play WoW, and am loving their new expansion today. More new content in today's patch than SWTOR has seen in 3 years.

 

Good luck to those who continue to strive to play this game. With all that is going wrong lately, it's gotta feel like a chore.

 

.

Edited August 14, 2018 by PennyAnn

[olagatonjedi]

a TON of people complained about that guild and their 2nd/3rd/4th guild expansions that had slight variations of the guild name and won virtually every week.

They were the exception, not the rule.

They were the potential of how broken and lopsided the old system could get, and was actively getting. I have no doubt the actions of BBB as a whole entity swayed many of the decisions regarding conquest changes.

 

However, and looking in from the outside as I didn't play on that server on a regular basis (still had about 20 lvl 70's there before the merges), they didn't seem to BREAK any rules.

That illustrates just how bad the old system was....BBB didnt even need to chest or hack to obliterate everyone.

 

However, this current system, does absolutely NOTHING to prevent that type of guild activity from happening.

So in that regard, nothing has changed between the two system.

The current system, assuming cheats are fixed, will never allow things to spiral that out of control.

[olagatonjedi]

And the 3 guilds winning now are just the remnants of BBB's members that have dispersed to other mega guilds. Nothing at all has changed.

The players needed to go elsewhere, but they are definitely not operating under the same entity. The 3 top guilds are not always within the same group, like BBB, so there is obviouslt change. Amd again, the gaps arent nearly as wide.

[olagatonjedi]

I pretty much ran BBB when we had 6 guilds conquering all available planets every week. It would be quite easy for a guild to do it again now if they recruited. While more difficult due to legacy lockouts, it would be easier due to only having to conquer 3 planets per week instead of 5 or more, as we regularly did.

I dont think anyone is saying that winning all planets is not possible. I know that Im saying that with legacy restrictions in place, and no cheats, it would be much more difficult if more than 1 guild chose to fight for each of the top spots.

 

I understand the desire to want to see other guilds be able to compete with large guilds, or more competition in general... but the new system has not changed that.

Im not so sure many guilds have even tried to compete, tbh. In the old system, you could see multiple guilds truly trying to overtake BBB, some even getting very close. Now, guilds that have similar numbers to TSC and TEO dont even come close, even though most elements of conquest are relatively equal among guilds except actual guild members.

 

If anything, a small guild has absolutely no chance of upsetting a larger guild by putting forth a ton of effort as a guild. Planning this, pulling together and working hard to make it happen used to be a joy for medium to small guilds. I know this because I got to enjoy the other side of the coin for awhile before 5.8.

To correct you, it used to be a joy for a small number if medium and small guilds, certainly not the majority. That open competition aspect is one of the bright spots of current conquest.

Edited August 14, 2018 by olagatonjedi

[Darevsool]

To correct you, it used to be a joy for a small number if medium and small guilds, certainly not the majority. That open competition aspect is one of the bright spots of current conquest.

 

 

 

 

Which conquest results are you looking at?

 

I see a bunch of guilds going for small / medium invasions because they are pretty sure they can hit the minimum.

I don't see many guilds seriously trying for the #1 spot for the title. They see that the same guilds are getting those spots each week, just like how it used to be.

[Darevsool]

The players needed to go elsewhere, but they are definitely not operating under the same entity. The 3 top guilds are not always within the same group, like BBB, so there is obviouslt change. Amd again, the gaps arent nearly as wide.

 

"The gaps aren't nearly as wide"

 

The point system is different now, it's a completely different measuring system.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again.

 

Where pre 5.8 you had gaps of 10 million, or 50 million (in crafting weeks) now we're seeing gaps of 1 million or 5 million.

If I could earn a million points on one account pre 5.8 in one week, but can now only earn 100k points in one week....the gap didn't change at all.

[AceMasterSoul]

"The gaps aren't nearly as wide"

 

The point system is different now, it's a completely different measuring system.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again.

 

Where pre 5.8 you had gaps of 10 million, or 50 million (in crafting weeks) now we're seeing gaps of 1 million or 5 million.

If I could earn a million points on one account pre 5.8 in one week, but can now only earn 100k points in one week....the gap didn't change at all.

 

Agreed. More hours are required for less points. Small guilds don't stand a chance against guilds that are maxed out. There really isn't away around this. Conguest should literally be survival of the fittest. Majority of the fan base wants per legacy restrictions removed. I am one of them. I recently returned and I'm already pissed off.

[olagatonjedi]

"The gaps aren't nearly as wide"

 

The point system is different now, it's a completely different measuring system.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again.

 

Where pre 5.8 you had gaps of 10 million, or 50 million (in crafting weeks) now we're seeing gaps of 1 million or 5 million.

If I could earn a million points on one account pre 5.8 in one week, but can now only earn 100k points in one week....the gap didn't change at all.

Im sure ive clarified "the gap" at least one of the 4 or 5 times youve already made reference to it.

[olagatonjedi]

Agreed. More hours are required for less points. Small guilds don't stand a chance against guilds that are maxed out. There really isn't away around this. Conguest should literally be survival of the fittest. Majority of the fan base wants per legacy restrictions removed. I am one of them. I recently returned and I'm already pissed off.

Where is your data to suggest most of the fanbase wants it? Where is the data suggesting its a good idea?

[DWho]

Where is your data to suggest most of the fanbase wants it? Where is the data suggesting its a good idea?

 

There isn't any just like there is no data saying "most of the fan base like it the way it is". The issue is that the more you crack down on these repeatables, the more you hurt small guilds. By enforcing strictures on the larger guilds you are creating a situation where the smaller guilds will start to struggle with even getting to the minimal guild goal that gets you 1 encryption per non-alt character (they reduced the total points needed for both guild and personal goals early on because they realized how hard it had become to meet those goals). If you have noticed, the price of encryptions on the GTN has at least doubled since the changes came out. Small guilds now struggle to get to their conquest goals and can't afford the encryptions they need to unlock their guildships. The only ones benefiting are the price gougers.

[AceMasterSoul]

Where is your data to suggest most of the fanbase wants it? Where is the data suggesting its a good idea?

 

Like someone already stated, there really isn't data to support my clam. That being said I've seen more people in the forums opposed to the idea then people trying to defend it. Subs are requesting a change. Which means it's probably a good idea to listen to the paying fanbase.

Edited August 15, 2018 by AceMasterSoul

[AceMasterSoul]

There isn't any just like there is no data saying "most of the fan base like it the way it is". The issue is that the more you crack down on these repeatables, the more you hurt small guilds. By enforcing strictures on the larger guilds you are creating a situation where the smaller guilds will start to struggle with even getting to the minimal guild goal that gets you 1 encryption per non-alt character (they reduced the total points needed for both guild and personal goals early on because they realized how hard it had become to meet those goals). If you have noticed, the price of encryptions on the GTN has at least doubled since the changes came out. Small guilds now struggle to get to their conquest goals and can't afford the encryptions they need to unlock their guildships. The only ones benefiting are the price gougers.

 

Agreed! You can't harm the big guilds without harming the smaller ones.

Edited August 15, 2018 by AceMasterSoul

[olagatonjedi]

There isn't any just like there is no data saying "most of the fan base like it the way it is". The issue is that the more you crack down on these repeatables, the more you hurt small guilds.

Do you realize that the restrictions affect larger guilds more?

 

A guild with 5 members will be affected by restrictions only 5 fold.

A guild with 200 members will be affected 200 fold.

 

Innate number of members will, and should, benefit the guild with more members, to an extent.

[olagatonjedi]

Like someone already stated, there really isn't data to support my clam. That being said I've seen more people in the forums opposed to the idea then people trying to defend it. Subs are requesting a change. Which means it's probably a good idea to listen to the paying fanbase.

Only BW knows how many people are participating in conquest vs those who arent. If active conquesters arent here complaining, then its safe to ssy they are likely ok with the current system, even if there are aspects they may not agree with. If forum population is your data, its a minority.

[Euphrosyne]

Only BW knows how many people are participating in conquest vs those who arent. If active conquesters arent here complaining, then its safe to ssy they are likely ok with the current system, even if there are aspects they may not agree with. If forum population is your data, its a minority.

That's not safe to say at all.

 

• They might have left the game already.
  
• They may feel as though constantly re-airing the same complaint is pointless.
  
• They may simply be tired of dealing with you, specifically, since you're the person who's decided to litigate all of the conquest complaints.
  

[DWho]

Do you realize that the restrictions affect larger guilds more?

 

A guild with 5 members will be affected by restrictions only 5 fold.

A guild with 200 members will be affected 200 fold.

 

Innate number of members will, and should, benefit the guild with more members, to an extent.

 

That argument only holds for one aspect of conquest, that is planetary conqueror titles. The restrictions do not affect larger guilds more for the other aspect of conquest (gaining encryptions). A larger guild has more players than a small guild so they can afford to be limited and still reach their guild points goals.

 

How about this for a suggestion that meets your goal (competition only between the biggest guilds). When you hit your guild goal, all further Conquest points earned are halved, when you hit 2 times you guild goal they are halved again and so on. Add to that you can only win the title on the large planet. That way the small guilds are largely unimpacted (they weren't going to win planets anyway) and your super guilds can fight it out for diminishing returns.