Conquest Changes in Game Update 5.9

[DarthSpuds]

Then logged in yesterday afternoon to see that they actually took 5 steps backwards from the previous week, so I cancelled again. I'll be out of here a couple of days after you.

 

Yeah, whoever green-lit H2+ being One Per Day/Per Legacy should be sacked for incompetence, or moved to Anthem - seems to be the same thing at Bioware.

 

 

All The Best

[PorsaLindahl]

Yeah, whoever green-lit H2+ being One Per Day/Per Legacy should be sacked for incompetence, or moved to Anthem - seems to be the same thing at Bioware.

 

 

All The Best

 

I was thinking of a punishment that had some pain involved, but we won't go there.

[masterceil]

This is not what we want. We want to be able to keep doing lockouts with our guilds. These once daily per legacy objectives are not helping anyone out. They aren't leveling the playing field between big and small guilds, they're just making it harder for everyone to earn points.

 

You want to kill Ops bosses with your guild, go for it. But I'm not alone in being pleased at the changes made to stop guilds from straight up farming last boss for 100+k points a day, six days a week.

 

The same 3-4 guilds on the Star Forge Server are still winning EVERY. SINGLE. WEEK.

 

You mean all both weeks the new system's been in place? And even so, the point gap is now a few million instead of 60-100 million. This is a good thing!

 

It would be helpful if you gave us more planets to pick from each week to divide guilds up more and give us more options to win. But if that's not going to change, then please stop taking the fun out of conquest for those of us in small guilds who know they won't ever win a planet again, but still enjoy doing lockouts every night to get as many points as we can (and make our personal goals on as many toons as we can).

 

Agreed that there should definitely be more than three options, at least most weeks. Small and medium-sized guilds, lore-wise, ought to be able to take minor worlds in galactic conflicts while the big guys are slugging it out on their key planets. Here's hoping BioWare does take this issue to heart, and gives us more Invasion Targets in the future. Total Galactic War taking place on three planets was indeed a joke - and a bad one, at that.

 

But again, no Lockouts, no Crafting. Certainly not at the value or spammability they were at before.

 

The way conquest works now..I could right click on my stack of Invasion Forces over and over until my fingers fall off to "donate" them and rack up points infinitely, but I can't play content I actually enjoy doing more than once per day per legacy. What is the point of that? The point is not just to get points, but also to enjoy the time spent doing so, instead of making it a grind.

 

You could always just play the game for the sake of playing the game, and not base your entire experience around Conquest

[SNy-lotrolinux]

Yeah, whoever green-lit H2+ being One Per Day/Per Legacy should be sacked for incompetence, or moved to Anthem - seems to be the same thing at Bioware.

 

"We apologise again for the fault in the subtitles. Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked." -- Monty Python, Holy Grail (1975)

 

SCNR,

SNy

[olagatonjedi]

YES THEY DID. This week's NS heroics being switched to ONE heroic per day per legacy is proof of that which even you can not ignore or dispute.

I dont think you understood what i meant. The activities are there regardless of conquest.

[olagatonjedi]

Are we seriously trying to compare conquest points to crit in pvp? I might be done trying to take this conversation seriously... and if we are conquest as it stands is blatantly more unbalanced than PvP. The large guilds will always win. By playing smarter in a wz my team can win against one stacked with all the op classes; with conquest the large guild will win by sheer numbers. If we insist on this absurd comparison it would be like a 60k crit ability in PvP.

What a tangent! Zwoosh!

[olagatonjedi]

I put my link back in my sig, too. I actually got fooled by last week's conquest and thought they were moving in the right direction, so I went ahead and resubscribed. Then logged in yesterday afternoon to see that they actually took 5 steps backwards from the previous week, so I cancelled again. I'll be out of here a couple of days after you.

And if the vote doesnt go in your favor, what will you do?

[olagatonjedi]

You could always just play the game for the sake of playing the game, and not base your entire experience around Conquest

He didn't just say that did he? Zomgosh

[Darevsool]

I dont think you understood what i meant. The activities are there regardless of conquest.

 

I understood what you wrote.

If you didn't convey what you meant properly, that's on you.

[Equeliber]

I am confused about the "blue" repeatable objectives - the ones that are supposed to be once per day per legacy.

 

I just completed a heroic on Nar Shaddaa, got my points. Switched to a alt, completed it on him, got points (objective said "incomplete" on him). Then I went back to my main, played for like 30 minutes, opened the conquest objective list again - and it's incomplete again! I went ahead and did another NS heroic and got points again...

 

Same happened to Bounty Contract missions, I just cant test the 2nd per character thing as Bounty mission is locked till daily reset.

 

So it seems to be one time per character per day but I can't explain why the objective have been reset on my main again?

[Kurj]

I am confused about the "blue" repeatable objectives - the ones that are supposed to be once per day per legacy.

 

I just completed a heroic on Nar Shaddaa, got my points. Switched to a alt, completed it on him, got points (objective said "incomplete" on him). Then I went back to my main, played for like 30 minutes, opened the conquest objective list again - and it's incomplete again! I went ahead and did another NS heroic and got points again...

 

Same happened to Bounty Contract missions, I just cant test the 2nd per character thing as Bounty mission is locked till daily reset.

 

So it seems to be one time per character per day but I can't explain why the objective have been reset on my main again?

 

That sounds like a bug.

[Darevsool]

I am confused about the "blue" repeatable objectives - the ones that are supposed to be once per day per legacy.

 

I just completed a heroic on Nar Shaddaa, got my points. Switched to a alt, completed it on him, got points (objective said "incomplete" on him). Then I went back to my main, played for like 30 minutes, opened the conquest objective list again - and it's incomplete again! I went ahead and did another NS heroic and got points again...

 

Same happened to Bounty Contract missions, I just cant test the 2nd per character thing as Bounty mission is locked till daily reset.

 

So it seems to be one time per character per day but I can't explain why the objective have been reset on my main again?

 

It's broke.

Same with the rampage / kill count

[PorsaLindahl]

It's broke.

Same with the rampage / kill count

 

Not surprised.

 

Last week it was the daily 10 PvP matches that kept resetting. Think I actually got to 3/10 on one character before it reset.

Edited April 4, 2018 by PorsaLindahl

[KendraP]

What a tangent! Zwoosh!

 

You're the one that brought up that nonsensical comparison...

[KendraP]

You want to kill Ops bosses with your guild, go for it. But I'm not alone in being pleased at the changes made to stop guilds from straight up farming last boss for 100+k points a day, six days a week.

 

 

If someones idea of fun is farming lockouts incessently I reallu dont see how that hurts anyone. My small pvp guild still made the board every week, so its not like it was keeping people from getting rewards

You mean all both weeks the new system's been in place? And even so, the point gap is now a few million instead of 60-100 million. This is a good thing!

The gap being smaller is purely artificial- i believe the point is, if they were trying to make it possible for small guilds to get the titles, they failed rather miserably. As, with the lack of spammability, it is now in fsct favorable to have more independent legacies (ie accounts) than alts. This directly favors guilds with larger membership numbers (again, accounts). Thus, any smaller gap is purely artificial - it made nothing easier for amaller guilds.

 

Again, i couldn't really care less about titles personally, but kust pointing out the logic.

 

Agreed that there should definitely be more than three options, at least most weeks. Small and medium-sized guilds, lore-wise, ought to be able to take minor worlds in galactic conflicts while the big guys are slugging it out on their key planets. Here's hoping BioWare does take this issue to heart, and gives us more Invasion Targets in the future. Total Galactic War taking place on three planets was indeed a joke - and a bad one, at that.

Again, while i personally couldn't care less as long as i get my rewards at a reasonable rate, i agree with this point.

 

But again, no Lockouts, no Crafting. Certainly not at the value or spammability they were at before.

Crafters should be able to get something for their efforts... i hate crafting btw so im hardly biased in favor of crafting. Om lockouts, sure it was profitable, but hows it hurting anyone? The large guilds won by sheer force of member numbers just as they are now.

 

You could always just play the game for the sake of playing the game, and not base your entire experience around Conquest

 

Maybe i enjoy having a goal or objective to work toward? I get bored if I don't. Everyone's playstyle is different. Maybe conquest isnt as big a deal to some people as others. That's fine, too.

[olagatonjedi]

You're the one that brought up that nonsensical comparison...

Yet it still applied perfectly.

[JediJoy]

SNIP

 

But again, no Lockouts, no Crafting. Certainly not at the value or spammability they were at before.

 

SNIP

 

You could always just play the game for the sake of playing the game, and not base your entire experience around Conquest

 

Ah and here I thought we came to a compromise?! (see below) I love STWOR, but there is only so much content you can do over and over and over again with no end goal or enticement to keep you to continue to play the same content over and over and over. Conquest became that passion for so many of us to keep us distracted and busy while we all waited for snippets of new content to come out. Literally the only thing that brings me back to swtor is the story content (chapters 1-3 and revan) and i love all aspects of this game: pvp and pve.

 

Crafting Compromise:

 

1) Instead of the 4 different conquest weeks solely focused on crafting make it just one: Total Galactic War

2) Include ALL planets that are available on the other conquest weeks including yavin/rishi

3) Revert the points, objectives and crafting schematics back to what they were pre 5.8 (without planetary bonuses)

4) Remove all crafting objectives (including donating invasion forces which is beyond idiotic) from all conquest weeks (except the one designated for the crafting week)

5) Set the schedule for every 6 months: this gives crafting focused guilds a reachable goal and keeps them interested. At the same time, everyone else who doesnt like crafting weeks only gets to see it twice a year and can have all the other conquest weeks at their pleasure.

[KendraP]

Yet it still applied perfectly.

 

Its utter nonsense. Pvp is completely different from conquest, which should be entirely accesible to everyone. I don't even slightly see how crit values compare to conquest points.

 

And by the way, the definition of a tangent is the line that touches a curve in exactly one point, its slope being described by the derivative of said function.

 

Ps: that last paragraph was a literary tangent. The point you called a tangent directly addressed conquest and your reply to me

[Kurj]

Its utter nonsense. Pvp is completely different from conquest, which should be entirely accesible to everyone. I don't even slightly see how crit values compare to conquest points.

 

And by the way, the definition of a tangent is the line that touches a curve in exactly one point, its slope being described by the derivative of said function.

 

Ps: that last paragraph was a literary tangent. The point you called a tangent directly addressed conquest and your reply to me

 

Kendra, don't be baited by the argument that encryptions must be limited in order to achieve BW's goals of leveling the playing fields. There is nothing that logically requires this. The rewards can be issued with any appropriate multiplier, in order to diminish the burden on small guilds who will face drastically longer timeframes to equip their guild ships as a result of the changes.

[masterceil]

Ah and here I thought we came to a compromise?!

(see below) I love STWOR, but there is only so much content you can do over and over and over again with no end goal or enticement to keep you to continue to play the same content over and over and over. Conquest became that passion for so many of us to keep us distracted and busy while we all waited for snippets of new content to come out. Literally the only thing that brings me back to swtor is the story content (chapters 1-3 and revan) and i love all aspects of this game: pvp and pve.

 

Crafting Compromise:

 

1) Instead of the 4 different conquest weeks solely focused on crafting make it just one: Total Galactic War

2) Include ALL planets that are available on the other conquest weeks including yavin/rishi

3) Revert the points, objectives and crafting schematics back to what they were pre 5.8 (without planetary bonuses)

4) Remove all crafting objectives (including donating invasion forces which is beyond idiotic) from all conquest weeks (except the one designated for the crafting week)

5) Set the schedule for every 6 months: this gives crafting focused guilds a reachable goal and keeps them interested. At the same time, everyone else who doesnt like crafting weeks only gets to see it twice a year and can have all the other conquest weeks at their pleasure

.

 

I was speaking in very broad strokes. If you could convince BioWare to implement your "Semiannual Week of Crafting" idea, I'd totally be on board! But as a general concept, we all know by now that I'm not a fan of craftquest in general

[olagatonjedi]

Its utter nonsense. Pvp is completely different from conquest, which should be entirely accesible to everyone. I don't even slightly see how crit values compare to conquest points.

 

And by the way, the definition of a tangent is the line that touches a curve in exactly one point, its slope being described by the derivative of said function.

 

Ps: that last paragraph was a literary tangent. The point you called a tangent directly addressed conquest and your reply to me

Conquest is similar to pvp because the system is set up with competition with other players and guilds for dominance.

 

Conquest is similar to crit (or other tertiary stats) because the impact of each lessens as it is accumulated.

 

The soft cap for conquest appears to be 1 toon.

Edited April 4, 2018 by olagatonjedi

[traxxmusic]

I sub every 2 months non-recurring, glad I do. When this sub runs out, I'm going Elder Scrolls. Was fun, but I am going away, ty to all friends. Ya f'd up ops, pvp, now cq (cxp was a blast as well - lmfao). Enough for my money. All the vet players are leaving, or have left. Enjoy the the kiddies and put a G rating on the game (you will need a parents note to go to fleet tho"). Have fun all, was a blast when it worked. Edited April 4, 2018 by traxxmusic

[PorsaLindahl]

I sub every 2 months non-recurring, glad I do. When this sub runs out, I'm going Elder Scrolls. Was fun, but I am going away, ty to all friends. Ya f'd up ops, pvp, now cq (cxp was a blast as well - lmfao). Enough for my money. All the vet players are leaving, or have left. Enjoy the the kiddies and put a G rating on the game (you will need a parents note to go to fleet tho"). Have fun all, was a blast when it worked.

 

And another one down.

 

Before long they'll be forced to put in solo ops and pvp.

[KendraP]

Conquest is similar to pvp because the system is set up with competition with other players and guilds for dominance.

 

Conquest is similar to crit (or other tertiary stats) because the impact of each lessens as it is accumulated.

 

The soft cap for conquest appears to be 1 toon.

 

I could literally give less of a damn about other guilds as long as i get my encryptions, which is what the meet a cap system was supposed to do.

 

And seriously, what? Blatantly setting up small guilds for failure is fair now? Why am i even continuing to argue here?

If all 10 people in my small guild cap 1 toon thats 150000 points.

If all 100 people in a large guild cap 1 toon thats 1500000 points.

In what universe is that more balanced than before? I assume if you pvp you play a merc?

 

I think we need to review a cap. Mathematically speaking, this is an asymptote. Obviously crit has an asymptote somewhere, where if you keep adding it, you no longer get as much damage out.

 

That doesnt exist for conquest points: a point is always one more point, and the large guilds can take advantage of this through greater numbers of accounts, which i could previously emulate with alts. Thus, alts made it more fair to small guilds.

 

This pvp comparison is totally absurd.

Edited April 5, 2018 by KendraP

[krosswong]

Conquest is similar to pvp because the system is set up with competition with other players and guilds for dominance.

 

Conquest is similar to crit (or other tertiary stats) because the impact of each lessens as it is accumulated.

 

The soft cap for conquest appears to be 1 toon.

 

This is literally the most retarded thing i've read on the forums in a long time.... and this is coming from someone who had to make sense of Musco's patch notes... so thanks for that.

 

I'm fairly certain the first conquest point I earn a week is worth exactly the same amount as the 100,000th point I earned that week.

 

#economicsishard

Edited April 5, 2018 by krosswong