Conquest Changes in Game Update 5.9

[TUXs]

A guild of 10-12 people shouldn't be able to go toe to toe,

or even challenge, one of the larger guilds on a server.

Then why have any challenge at all? Why not just reward the largest guilds without the pretend scoreboard? Why would you even allow some peasants in a small guild to "compete" if they should never win?

 

See, under the old system, a guild of 10-12 could actually beat a guild of 999 players by actually ATTEMPTING to win a planet. Size matters if all parties are going for the win, but if that large 999 player guild doesn't give a flip, why shouldn't a guild with only 10-12 players have a chance if they put in the effort and planning to win?

[Toraak]

Then why have any challenge at all? Why not just reward the largest guilds without the pretend scoreboard? Why would you even allow some peasants in a small guild to "compete" if they should never win?

 

See, under the old system, a guild of 10-12 could actually beat a guild of 999 players by actually ATTEMPTING to win a planet. Size matters if all parties are going for the win, but if that large 999 player guild doesn't give a flip, why shouldn't a guild with only 10-12 players have a chance if they put in the effort and planning to win?

 

I agree 100% with this. any guild should have a chance if they want to really work for it. Lets all be honest here, the times the small guilds had a chance to really get a planet was either TGW in which the larger guilds were spread out, giving smaller guilds a chance or Crafting weeks. Crafting weeks took smaller guilds Months if not a year to FARM MATS, and prepare to go toe to toe with a large guild. That was a massive amount of work just for 1 week of putting up a fight against a large guild.

 

Truth be told those smaller guilds that put up a fight (and sometimes won) Just wanted it more. Those are the people that should win.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Toraak

[MacCleoud]

Then why have any challenge at all? Why not just reward the largest guilds without the pretend scoreboard? Why would you even allow some peasants in a small guild to "compete" if they should never win?

 

See, under the old system, a guild of 10-12 could actually beat a guild of 999 players by actually ATTEMPTING to win a planet. Size matters if all parties are going for the win, but if that large 999 player guild doesn't give a flip, why shouldn't a guild with only 10-12 players have a chance if they put in the effort and planning to win?

 

Because TUX.... they just shouldn't. The numbers don't add up. A guild of 10-12 busting their humps to try to beat 999 people sitting on their duffs just shouldn't happen. No way, no how. I mean.... really.... /sarcasm off now

 

 

The old system was great for the underdog, heck... i won a crafting week on my own back in May of last year. Won Ilum with just me and my 6 crafters because I saw where the big dogs were going (this was pre-merger obviously). I hope it gets back to a point where those that put in the hard work are able to give those bigger guilds a run for their money. The current state is that it will not happen. Now, there is no way a 10-12 person guild can out work a 25-30 person guild much less give the big fish a run.

 

Under the new system, i may not be able to get 9 toons to personal ever again, but now my guild only has to hit 200k We were often close to the top ten, but rarely got in. Now while I may still carry a heavy burden of the 200k, if we can keep the 10-12 hitting their goal on a couple toons, we will be able to get the encryptions we need for our flagship, so it does have that merit for us, but it was really nice when we made a surprise run at the leaderboard and the two times we actually won planets.

[Stellarcrusade]

A guild of 10-12 people shouldn't be able to go toe to toe,

or even challenge, one of the larger guilds on a server. I have no doubts it was fun for you, but perhaps it wasn't fun for them to know that for all the work they put in to have a large guild (yes, there are a lot of other responsibilities beyond conquest), it doesn't give them a reasonable advantage. Allowing a 10 person guild to beat a 500 person guild, while potentially fun, is broken. I already know you won't understand or believe it, but that's practical application for balance. Until you come to terms with that being a failed level of balance, you of course will have an issue with the new system. The responsibility to accept certain rules is in your hands, not the devs teams.

 

You miss the real issue. I'm sure it is easy if you are part of a big guild to deliberately miss the point on these types of things. The breakdown to 3 planet sizes at its face implied that small/medium guilds would have a chance to compete with each other instead of against the big guilds. So your point is meaningless. Unfortunately it is impossible to prevent large guilds from going for small planets. At its heart it is a completely flawed design, at least when it comes to "taking a planet".

 

But the good item in the new system is to have planet minimums for top10, which essentially removes competition for the #10 spot. And the system should be extended along those same lines to eliminate the competition for the #1 slot, only then will it be as fair as it can be. If we put a planet-takeover threshold amount, and let guilds work towards that number instead of competing, just like they do now with the top10, then for the first time all guilds will have a chance to get any planet by planning to gain the pre-specified number for each planet size. The issue currently is if you get 5 million, the big guilds will simply effortlessly move the bar to 7 mil, so then you get to 7 mil, and the big guilds effortlessly move it to 9 mil, then you stop, and so do they. It's an idiotic system. There is no reason it has to be a competition, and before you argue against that point, see what they did for top10, same reasoning applies.

[Darevsool]

The most fun I've ever had in conquest was back on POT5 during a "Revenge of the Revanites" week.

I chose Rishi for my private guild <Dead Wookiee Storage>

One of the "larger" (for that server anyway) also chose that, and I had a toon in that guild as well.

I decided to try and go for it with my own guild, instead of piggy backing from the other.

 

I had two friends who very rarely log in, log in specifically to craft the single invasion force they could.

I had a couple F2P accounts that I crafted invasion forces in. I did the yavin weekly on well over 20 toons that week.

 

It was neck and neck all week. I kept looking at the other guild's discord and saw a couple of the bigger conquest players getting frustrated that the larger guild wasn't demolishing those "dead wookiees."

 

The final Sunday night they coordinated with another large guild to PVP non stop during the last 6 hours of conquest, while I was sleeping (had to work Monday morning). They wound up beating me by about 50k points.

 

Had I done the entire week differently, I might have won. At the end of the week I figured out something I could have done differently that would have helped.

 

But, even though I lost, I had a TON of fun!

Since they wound up winning, I think they came out of it feeling good about themselves, I certainly didn't make the win easy for them.

 

THAT feeling, I wouldn't be able to do that level of work in this new system because it's so alt unfriendly...it just isn't there right now.

[JediJoy]

The most fun I've ever had in conquest was back on POT5 during a "Revenge of the Revanites" week.

I chose Rishi for my private guild <Dead Wookiee Storage>

One of the "larger" (for that server anyway) also chose that, and I had a toon in that guild as well.

I decided to try and go for it with my own guild, instead of piggy backing from the other.

 

I had two friends who very rarely log in, log in specifically to craft the single invasion force they could.

I had a couple F2P accounts that I crafted invasion forces in. I did the yavin weekly on well over 20 toons that week.

 

It was neck and neck all week. I kept looking at the other guild's discord and saw a couple of the bigger conquest players getting frustrated that the larger guild wasn't demolishing those "dead wookiees."

 

The final Sunday night they coordinated with another large guild to PVP non stop during the last 6 hours of conquest, while I was sleeping (had to work Monday morning). They wound up beating me by about 50k points.

 

Had I done the entire week differently, I might have won. At the end of the week I figured out something I could have done differently that would have helped.

 

But, even though I lost, I had a TON of fun!

Since they wound up winning, I think they came out of it feeling good about themselves, I certainly didn't make the win easy for them.

 

THAT feeling, I wouldn't be able to do that level of work in this new system because it's so alt unfriendly...it just isn't there right now.

 

^^ This is the essence of conquest for small guilds. And when you do win, youre on this "high" for weeks afterwards knowing you went up against Goliath and WON! The small guilds put up greater effort and should be rewarded for that effort. It shouldnt be a punishment to choose quality over quantity.

 

After the server merge and before 5.8, crafting conquest weeks were the only chance small guilds had an opportunity to go against large guilds neck and neck. Crafting week's points are focused on crafting repeatables but small guilds do ALL group content on top of crafting to get those points. Crafting week was typically when our guild was the most active and more 'solo' focused members helped with group content as well as crafting.

[olagatonjedi]

Then why have any challenge at all? Why not just reward the largest guilds without the pretend scoreboard? Why would you even allow some peasants in a small guild to "compete" if they should never win?

 

See, under the old system, a guild of 10-12 could actually beat a guild of 999 players by actually ATTEMPTING to win a planet. Size matters if all parties are going for the win, but if that large 999 player guild doesn't give a flip, why shouldn't a guild with only 10-12 players have a chance if they put in the effort and planning to win?

In the current system, your guild has every opportunity to beat them if they dont put in the effort. If only 9 of their members put in effort, and all 10 of yours do, you can win! It's your choice to have a guild with 12 members, just like its their choice to not have only 12 members. Successes and failures are guided by decisions and actions players make, not simply by an overabundance of playtime.

[Darevsool]

In the current system, your guild has every opportunity to beat them if they dont put in the effort. If only 9 of their members put in effort, and all 10 of yours do, you can win! It's your choice to have a guild with 12 members, just like its their choice to not have only 12 members. Successes and failures are guided by decisions and actions players make, not simply by an overabundance of playtime.

 

We're talking about being able to take, for example, 3 accounts with 20 alts (60 toons to max out) and be able to compete against a guild with 20-30 accounts where not everyone participates, and be able to win because the objectives are per toon and not per legacy.

 

Yes, there have always been 'per legacy' objectives in conquest, but there were enough high point 'per toon' objectives where you could cap 20 or 30 alts some weeks if you put in enough time.

[olagatonjedi]

Because TUX.... they just shouldn't. The numbers don't add up. A guild of 10-12 busting their humps to try to beat 999 people sitting on their duffs just shouldn't happen. No way, no how. I mean.... really.... /sarcasm off now

One could argue the old system rewarded people that were able to have more playtime, not necessarily effort. I urge you to show me how you can measure 2 peoples effort in the game. Unless you can show effort in a tangible, calculable manner you're just assigning effort randomly based on your skewed experiences.

[TUXs]

In the current system, your guild has every opportunity to beat them if they dont put in the effort. If only 9 of their members put in effort, and all 10 of yours do, you can win! It's your choice to have a guild with 12 members, just like its their choice to not have only 12 members. Successes and failures are guided by decisions and actions players make, not simply by an overabundance of playtime.

You are incorrect my friend. I don't think you understand how the old system worked vs. how the current system does.

[Stellarcrusade]

I understand why big guilds want an unfair advantage in conquest. But the old system gave small/mediums a tiny chance on crafting weeks, the current system no matter what week gives no guild a chance except the top 2 guilds in the server. So really, conquest at this point is pointless and big guild members should realize that and be against the current state.

 

I mean seriously, there is no point to conquest anymore for guilds big or small, they should just get rid of the #1 prizes and permanently write the top 2 guilds names on all the planets. You can go through the motions doing mundane pointless things, but realize you are not really beating anyone, its a forgone conclusion who will win so others are not trying. Sure maybe #3 guild will take one planet every once in awhile - pointless. Three planets each week, big will take 1, big's alt will take 1, and either 2nd big will take the 3rd. In the mean time, the current system killed all the queues because there is no point gains nor any reason to try.

 

Do you really want no queues anymore, do you really want to be the only 2 guilds while all the others dissolve and move on to other games. You are voting for boredom and the end of the game.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Stellarcrusade

[Darevsool]

I understand why big guilds want an unfair advantage in conquest. But the old system gave small/mediums a tiny chance on crafting weeks, the current system no matter what week gives no guild a chance except the top 2 guilds in the server. So really, conquest at this point is pointless and big guild members should realize that and be against the current state.

 

I mean seriously, there is no point to conquest anymore for guilds big or small, they should just get rid of the #1 prizes and permanently write the top 2 guilds names on all the planets. You can go through the motions doing mundane pointless things, but realize you are not really beating anyone, its a forgone conclusion who will win so others are not trying. Sure maybe #3 guild will take one planet every once in awhile - pointless. Three planets each week, big will take 1, big's alt will take 1, and either 2nd big will take the 3rd. In the mean time, the current system killed all the queues because there is no point gains nor any reason to try.

 

Do you really want no queues anymore, do you really want to be the only 2 guilds while all the others dissolve and move on to other games. You are voting for boredom and the end of the game.

 

This is what seems to be happening with the first two weeks of the new conquest system wrapped up.

[olagatonjedi]

We're talking about being able to take, for example, 3 accounts with 20 alts (60 toons to max out) and be able to compete against a guild with 20-30 accounts where not everyone participates, and be able to win because the objectives are per toon and not per legacy.

 

Yes, there have always been 'per legacy' objectives in conquest, but there were enough high point 'per toon' objectives where you could cap 20 or 30 alts some weeks if you put in enough time.

I understand the point, but that is a single, isolated scenario that does nothing for balance.

 

The guild with 20-30 accounts could just as easily have 20-30 alts each (and many do), just as all the other 3 person guilds may not have 2p-30 alts.

 

Your example, and these complaints, and the solutions people keep making via their hot-takes dont balance for all of those varying scenarios.

 

I am in a small guild. I'm also in a large guild. I have gone up against my own guild and won before. I get it. I understand the "high of these feats, but it was fun.

 

However, afterwards, I looked at my friend in a small guild with no alts, and they had absolutely no chance to compete with my small guild.

 

I also saw a normally competitive large guild with very few alts (though smaller than the my large guild) who saw our battle, and ended up losing the rest of the conquests for months because my large guild started massively utilizing alts like my small guild, so the points of everyone were so outrageous that nobody had a chance except large guilds with massive alt use.

 

The exponential point growth of alts makes everything disproportional, and creates a nightmare for even attempting to balance anything.

 

It would be like giving everyone in the game a random stat-pool, and random skills, and trying to balance it all so the actual game is fair for everyone.

[olagatonjedi]

You are incorrect my friend. I don't think you understand how the old system worked vs. how the current system does.

I could say the exact same thing.

[TUXs]

I could say the exact same thing.

You sure can...in fact, you can claim anything on the interweb...that doesn't make it true.

[olagatonjedi]

You sure can...in fact, you can claim anything on the interweb...that doesn't make it true.

Very true. It sure helps, though, when the devs do something that I said they would.

[TUXs]

Very true. It sure helps, though, when the devs do something that I said they would.

Which was?

[megafirstone]

I could say the exact same thing.

 

The only thing that you do Olaganjedi is commenting post from other people. I think even you might be a employer from bioware itself. This is a thread that people post there comments about the conquest. Nobody's need youre comments on all those posts. The devs will decide what is usefull or not.

Maybe bring out youre own post how it should be done , then commenting other people posts

[DuchessKristania]

My stance is that there should be enough objectives repeatable per toon that hitting 200,000 points for a small guild is easily achieved every week without people giving up every free second to grind through stuff, or being forced to engage in elements of the game that they do not enjoy. We have three-four members who contribute to conquest, but we're adults with jobs and families, and we aren't really into PvP or randomly grouping for fps. With those limitations on our time and gaming preference we won't ever conquer a planet, and that's fine, but three to four people should be able to earn enough points to hit the small planet goal, regardless of the activities they enjoy playing.

 

Before the change we hit at least 200,000 almost every week, but rarely made it on the leaderboard so we usually only got our personal rewards. We were all excited to hear that the guild rewards were no longer going to be restricted to being on the leaderboard and we would have more ways to get the encryptions we need to open up our ship. However, sooooo much is once per legacy per day, that we haven't even been able to hit 100,000 since the change. What's the point in having different sized goals if most of the objectives are gated behind legacy? The guild goals and actually conquering a planet are two wholly different things with different purposes. The guild goal should be easy for even a small guild with 2 or 3 players running alts to hit.

Edited April 2, 2018 by DuchessKristania

[Darevsool]

I understand the point, but that is a single, isolated scenario that does nothing for balance.

 

The guild with 20-30 accounts could just as easily have 20-30 alts each (and many do), just as all the other 3 person guilds may not have 2p-30 alts.

 

Your example, and these complaints, and the solutions people keep making via their hot-takes dont balance for all of those varying scenarios.

 

I am in a small guild. I'm also in a large guild. I have gone up against my own guild and won before. I get it. I understand the "high of these feats, but it was fun.

 

However, afterwards, I looked at my friend in a small guild with no alts, and they had absolutely no chance to compete with my small guild.

 

I also saw a normally competitive large guild with very few alts (though smaller than the my large guild) who saw our battle, and ended up losing the rest of the conquests for months because my large guild started massively utilizing alts like my small guild, so the points of everyone were so outrageous that nobody had a chance except large guilds with massive alt use.

 

The exponential point growth of alts makes everything disproportional, and creates a nightmare for even attempting to balance anything.

 

It would be like giving everyone in the game a random stat-pool, and random skills, and trying to balance it all so the actual game is fair for everyone.

 

It may be an isolated example, but it's the very heart of what conquest was supposed to be, a competition that rewarded a variety of effort.

 

Effort in recruiting. Effort in making alts. Effort in crafting/pvp'ing/GSF/flashpoints and all of the other ways you could earn objectives.

If you had 10 players with 10 alts you COULD complete against a guild of 100 players with no alts.

 

Now, based on these first two weeks, the only way anyone is going to get the titles (for me, the entire reason I participate in conquest) is to figure out which is going to be the large guild to win on a consistent basis.

How does that match up with your balance, where the only way to "win" is to join the other guys instead of trying to compete against them?

[Joonbeams]

Which was?

 

TUXs (and others), it's looking for food. Don't feed it. Only serves to derail the valid points on the thread even further...

[MacCleoud]

One could argue the old system rewarded people that were able to have more playtime, not necessarily effort. I urge you to show me how you can measure 2 peoples effort in the game. Unless you can show effort in a tangible, calculable manner you're just assigning effort randomly based on your skewed experiences.

 

Effort is actually fairly easily calculated in conquest. Total conquest points acquired = effort put in.

 

In the case of a small guild vs a large guild, you can have 4 players who play a total of 20 hours each for the week, maybe across 10 toons each, up against a guild of 20 players that play 8 hours each per week. The guys that play 20 hours each have more playtime, and individually, will be rewarded more due to playtime. The 20 guys however, actually have more playtime than the 4 when all are combined together. So, if the 4 guys can gain more points in their 80 hours than the 20 people people can in the 160, who put in more effort?

 

Edit: for spelling mistake

Edited April 2, 2018 by MacCleoud

[olagatonjedi]

The only thing that you do Olaganjedi is commenting post from other people. I think even you might be a employer from bioware itself. This is a thread that people post there comments about the conquest. Nobody's need youre comments on all those posts. The devs will decide what is usefull or not.

Maybe bring out youre own post how it should be done , then commenting other people posts

Almost all of my posts are related to the subject content. Commenting or countering someone else's post is one of many ways to illustrate my feelings (either for or against) about the subject content. You don't have to agree with it, but its well within the rukes of conversation. I notice people dont like being called out on stuff they cant prove or validate, so it's a way to filter out issues that really arent issues.

[Kurj]

My stance is that there should be enough objectives repeatable per toon that hitting 200,000 points for a small guild is easily achieved every week without people giving up every free second to grind through stuff, or being forced to engage in elements of the game that they do not enjoy.

 

snip

 

 

For me, that is the chief complaint. I (think) I understand what BWs goal was with this redesign, and I can accept their goals as being legitimate. But I got a lot less enjoyment capping 2 toons last week than I did capping 10 the week before, because I don't like many of the activities I had to do to accomplish my goal. I don't like running GSI missions - they feel like chasing your tail over really, really long distances. Iokath isn't an enjoyable dailies zone for me, largely because the maps and map cues are poorly implemented.

 

If I were allowed to modify the system, I would simply assign a maximum number of CQ points you can earn from the "daily repeatable" missions, calculated as the total number of CQ points you can earn from all daily repeatable objectives for that particular CQ. That way folks could play what they like, while still being limited as to the total number of CQ points anyone can grind in a single day for those (relatively) larger rewards.

[olagatonjedi]

My stance is that there should be enough objectives repeatable per toon that hitting 200,000 points for a small guild is easily achieved every week without people giving up every free second to grind through stuff

I partially agree with this. I don't believe it should be enough for all toons, but certainly enough for each legacy to achieve their personal goal without it eating up the majority of the average players time. That said, i would imagine BW is keeping statistics on numbers that will support future adjustments to the point and point availability system, even if it is solely for legacy use.

 

The ability to cap multiple toons perlegacy is there, but its not the cakewalk people are used to from the old system. It's called being spoiled. Old habits die hard, but I have faith that every one is relisient enough to overcome it. And those that arent will show their true colors by leaving.