Stronghold Cap - Needs to be raised!!!

[JediBoadicea]

Aaaaaaand there it is, exactly what I feared and called out in pretty much every PTS feedback post, not to mention having been calling it out for months before PTS feedback started: the cap on personal strongholds is still set at 10, despite the fact that the server merge meant people may have up to as many as 35. I haven't been able to check yet if the guild stronghold cap is still set at 1, but I'm assuming it is.

 

This is more depressing than I can say. I have more than 10 decorated strongholds after the merge. I have invested a lot of time, love, and money (both virtual and real) into them. It's completely ridiculous that I should have to accept sacrificing time, love, and money just to meet an out-dated and arbitrary cap on something which the merges proved is not a mechanical limitation of the game. I know this may not be a hugely widespread problem, but I know it is a problem for more than just me because I'm still patching and I got the news from other people who are also affected.

 

I repeatedly suggested the option of buying an additional stronghold slot unlock (just like character slot unlocks) through the CM for those of us at cap. I'm not even saying you have to remove the cap (and my suggestion even gets the studio more money). I'm just saying that you should give us the OPTION to have a way to buy more stronghold slots over the cap. Up to the 35 already proven to be supportable at minimum, though setting any minimum lower than what can actually be supported (if it's more than 35) is just pointless.

 

I put so much time into feedback for Rishi, and I was so looking forward to unlocking this stronghold. But I'm not giving up all of that investment when there's no reasonable justification for my having to do so.

[TUXs]

Deactivate some then. Why would you even want multiples?

[Iliac]

Deactivate some then. Why would you even want multiples?

 

For me, why would anyone need more than 1.

[IoNonSoEVero]

ITA. They should either raise the cap or allow players to buy unlocks for more SH slots.

 

If one's put a lot of time and effort into one's strongholds - not to mention paying millions of credits or lots of cartel coins for them - it's probably really hard to have to deactivate them.

[Mubrak]

Signed.

 

I'm at 13 Strongholds. I could delete 2 copies each of Coruscant and Dromund Kaas, as I use them mainly for testing, but why should I? Chances are nil that I can ever get them back, and when BW wants me to buy the Rishi and decorations for it, all they need to do is to add a zero to an arbitrary number.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Mubrak

[TUXs]

Signed.

 

I'm at 13 Strongholds. I could delete 2 copies each of Coruscant and Dromund Kaas, as I use them mainly for testing, but why should I? Chances are nil that I can ever get them back, and when BW wants me to buy the Rishi and decorations for it, all they need to do is to add a zero to an arbitrary number.

I understand this, but it's not like you guys weren't warned - you knew the duplicates were an error and you'd need to deactivate them if another SH was added.

 

I'm not opposed to upping the number - I just think it's slightly unfair.

[IoNonSoEVero]

Even without the duplicates, if you have one copy of every SH, you're up to 8 now. If they continue to add SHs, and that seems to be likely as long as the game continues, they'll probably need to think about upping that cap eventually anyway.

[Andryah]

Even without the duplicates, if you have one copy of every SH, you're up to 8 now. If they continue to add SHs, and that seems to be likely as long as the game continues, they'll probably need to think about upping that cap eventually anyway.

 

So.. if history is precedent.. once they release enough Strongholds such that any given legacy is unable to have them all open and active... they will raise the cap.

 

Currently... the only players suffering here are those that got Strongholds "grandfathered" over the limit as a result of the forced server merges. And I would bet that the studio does not want players having duplicate Strongholds within a legacy, and trusts players to simply deactivate duplicates ... and so it makes sense to not raise the cap until the actual unique instance count of Strongholds actually exceeds the limit.

[Mubrak]

I understand this, but it's not like you guys weren't warned - you knew the duplicates were an error and you'd need to deactivate them if another SH was added.

 

I'm not opposed to upping the number - I just think it's slightly unfair.

 

Well, it wasn't an error, but it was made it clear that we will have to delete SHs to activate new ones.

http://www.swtor.com/info/news/news-article/20171002[/url] "]If the combination of the two Strongholds takes you above the cap of six, they will all be retained. However, you cannot activate new Strongholds until you return to a number below the cap.

And a week after posting that, the cap was increased to 10.

 

 

But yes, it's slightly unfair to the devs working on strongholds and decorations, that the metrics won't show the true reason why the interest in Rishi was lower than anticipated.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Mubrak

[IoNonSoEVero]

So.. if history is precedent.. once they release enough Strongholds such that any given legacy is unable to have them all open and active... they will raise the cap.

 

Currently... the only players suffering here are those that got Strongholds "grandfathered" over the limit as a result of the forced server merges. And I would bet that the studio does not want players having duplicate Strongholds within a legacy, and trusts players to simply deactivate duplicates ... and so it makes sense to not raise the cap until the actual unique instance count of Strongholds actually exceeds the limit.

 

But considering that those SHs each would have cost millions of credits and/or real-world money in unlocks, and the duplicates-on-one-server situation happened via a forced merger, is it really fair to ask players to deactivate them? Especially if it means deactivating 10 strongholds in order to buy just a single new one? In order to get back down to the 10 SH limit, that's what a lot of these players would have to do.

Edited August 7, 2018 by IoNonSoEVero

[Sorrai]

I think some of you aren't paying attention to a key point OP is trying to make:

 

I repeatedly suggested the option of buying an additional stronghold slot unlock (just like character slot unlocks) through the CM for those of us at cap. I'm not even saying you have to remove the cap (and my suggestion even gets the studio more money). I'm just saying that you should give us the OPTION to have a way to buy more stronghold slots over the cap. Up to the 35 already proven to be supportable at minimum, though setting any minimum lower than what can actually be supported (if it's more than 35) is just pointless.

 

The server merge has proven that the game can support a stronghold cap substantially higher than its current limit 10. This has been known to those of us who have been reaping the benefits of having our strongholds grandfathered in from that merge. Asking for additional stronghold slots that allow players to go above the current cap is absolutely reasonable and absolutely doable.

 

Some of you seem to have difficulty understanding why others would want multiple copies of the same stronghold. Personally, what I ultimately want is the ability to create, save and load MULTIPLE design layouts for each stronghold. I wouldn't need to have 4 or 5 copies of Coruscant if I could create a variety of layouts that could be stored and loaded from just one. Since the game does not give us that feature the only other alternative is to have duplicate strongholds, and the only way to get those was to take advantage of the grandfather clause before the servers merged.

 

Strongholds are one of the few creative outlets in the game aside from Outfit Designer. When you think about the hundreds of decos now available is it really that difficult to understand why some of us want to have as many "blank canvases" as possible?! On Satele Shan I have a great Jedi-themed academy that I put a lot of work into but what if I would also like to create a Repulic office, or a stylish apartment, or a hospital, or research facility, or gambling den? Do you get it now?

[Zerileth]

But considering that those SHs each would have cost millions of credits and/or real-world money in unlocks, and the duplicates-on-one-server situation happened via a forced merger, is it really fair to ask players to deactivate them?

 

I'm not in this boat as my duplicate SHs were the result of char transfers so they were free. I just deleted them b4 merge. But this here is why I'd support your cause. I've had BW remove crating things that I used real world funds to get, indirectly, but still. I can understand this.

[cacophonycat]

/Signed

 

- For a Stronghold Slot Unlock. ESPECIALLY FOR GUILDS.

 

If this helps BioWare generate the resources needed to develop more strongholds, & decorations or to improve/fix current issues then I'm all for it.

 

--- Other agreements --

 

I think that the limit increase would be great as well, but it can be said that a stronghold unlock can do the same thing.

 

Saving a design profile would be excellent too, but how complicated that is I'm not sure. I can only imagine that it would somehow work out similar to the UI, where you load, save, and name pre-sets.

[JediBoadicea]

If some people don't have an interest in strongholds such that they haven't imagined a use for more than one SH, that's great for them; play how you want to play. If you don't have a need for more than one stronghold, chances are you're not that interested in strongholds as a mini-game or creative outlet, and therefore this is understandably of no concern to you. Which means you probably weren't the target audience for the new stronghold anyway. Which means the question of a cap is irrelevant to you. That's great. But it's not irrelevant to me, nor to others for whom strongholds are an interest, so for sure we are part of the target audience for the new SH.

 

The duplicate strongholds we got after the merge were not an error. The studio made sure that no one would lose a stronghold when servers merged because they knew people wouldn't want to lose things they had invested time and love and money into, exactly like they made sure no one would lose characters even if they went over the character cap. If they knew we wouldn't want to lose them when the merge happened, then it's logical to assume we don't want to lose them now either. The only thing that has changed about players' circumstances since the merge is that we've now had more than half a year to invest time and love and money into the duplicate strongholds we got to keep. Which makes it even more imperative to address this question.

 

If they want to set the cap on the number of stronghold slots you get for "free" at ten, that's fine, I have no problem with that whatsoever. It's exactly the same as character slots, where there's a cap of slots you get for free as the baseline. But with characters, you can purchase more slot unlocks if you want more than the soft cap. I'm just saying we should have the same option for strongholds. There is absolutely no reason that I should have to accept I can't get an 11th stronghold if the game supports having up to 35, which it does. I am offering to pay for it. How is this an issue?

 

I think it would be an added bonus if people were able to purchase additional/duplicate copies of the same stronghold with their stronghold slot unlocks, because why not? If I want a fifth Coruscant SH, who does it hurt? I want to spend more money on slots and decorations doing a thing I enjoy doing. Let me do it!! As it stands now, as much as I do want to get Rishi, I also don't want to lose the strongholds I've invested so much into crafting. If we were to be told "the game really needs a hard cap of X" then so be it, but if one player has 35 strongholds while the other has 10, then it's been proved that 10 is not the hard cap. There's absolutely no reason to lose out on potential revenue and take a potential hit to interest metrics because of this, especially since it was called out long before the SH released (and it's not like it's a new issue, it's been an issue with every new SH released since Yavin).

 

/Signed

 

- For a Stronghold Slot Unlock. ESPECIALLY FOR GUILDS.

 

If this helps BioWare generate the resources needed to develop more strongholds, & decorations or to improve/fix current issues then I'm all for it.

 

The question of the cap on guilds got called out repeatedly during the PTS feedback as well, so it's disappointing to see it didn't get addressed. Especially pertinent for guilds, since Rishi is such a guild-friendly addition.

 

And I agree, I think it would be great if we could provide direct revenue (via slot unlocks on top of what we spend on decos) as a metric for interest in strongholds. There's no guarantee that would go straight back into development for strongholds but at minimum it would show what the interest is. Given how much of an interest there is in decorations, I have to assume stronghold enthusiasts are at least not an insignificant demographic.

Edited August 7, 2018 by JediBoadicea

[PennyAnn]

The duplicate strongholds we got after the merge were not an error. The studio made sure that no one would lose a stronghold when servers merged because they knew people wouldn't want to lose things they had invested time and love and money into, exactly like they made sure no one would lose characters even if they went over the character cap. If they knew we wouldn't want to lose them when the merge happened, then it's logical to assume we don't want to lose them now either. The only thing that has changed about players' circumstances since the merge is that we've now had more than half a year to invest time and love and money into the duplicate strongholds we got to keep. Which makes it even more imperative to address this question.

 

Let me preface my comments by saying that I do not disagree with you about the desire to keep strongholds that you have put effort into and decorated since the merger.

 

However, there is a character limit (even when you purchase extra character slots) and many went over even that limit with the mergers. You did not lose any of your characters at merger time, but in order to make new ones or transfer from another server, you had to delete down to under the cap. I personally deleted a bunch of characters that I had put time, levels, money for cartel outfits, etc. into in order to server transfer one character that got merged onto a different server than the rest of the ones I primarily played. I could have left that character on the server I moved it from by itself, instead of deleting others to make room for it. But it was a higher level and one that I had put more effort into in terms of storyline progression, etc. and I wanted it with the rest of my legacy. So in order to do that, I had to make room on my "home" server by deleting a whole lot of characters that I had put slightly less time and effort into, but had created and played all the same.

 

They made sure no one lost characters, but did not provide a means to server transfer or create new characters once you were over the cap, and the same situation is happening here.

 

If they want to set the cap on the number of stronghold slots you get for "free" at ten, that's fine, I have no problem with that whatsoever. It's exactly the same as character slots, where there's a cap of slots you get for free as the baseline. But with characters, you can purchase more slot unlocks if you want more than the soft cap. I'm just saying we should have the same option for strongholds. There is absolutely no reason that I should have to accept I can't get an 11th stronghold if the game supports having up to 35, which it does. I am offering to pay for it. How is this an issue?

 

I think it would be an added bonus if people were able to purchase additional/duplicate copies of the same stronghold with their stronghold slot unlocks, because why not? If I want a fifth Coruscant SH, who does it hurt? I want to spend more money on slots and decorations doing a thing I enjoy doing. Let me do it!! As it stands now, as much as I do want to get Rishi, I also don't want to lose the strongholds I've invested so much into crafting. If we were to be told "the game really needs a hard cap of X" then so be it, but if one player has 35 strongholds while the other has 10, then it's been proved that 10 is not the hard cap. There's absolutely no reason to lose out on potential revenue and take a potential hit to interest metrics because of this, especially since it was called out long before the SH released (and it's not like it's a new issue, it's been an issue with every new SH released since Yavin).

 

The question of the cap on guilds got called out repeatedly during the PTS feedback as well, so it's disappointing to see it didn't get addressed. Especially pertinent for guilds, since Rishi is such a guild-friendly addition.

 

And I agree, I think it would be great if we could provide direct revenue (via slot unlocks on top of what we spend on decos) as a metric for interest in strongholds. There's no guarantee that would go straight back into development for strongholds but at minimum it would show what the interest is. Given how much of an interest there is in decorations, I have to assume stronghold enthusiasts are at least not an insignificant demographic.

 

I agree with this, but what about the people that played by the rules as set in place and deleted strongholds today in order to purchase Rishi? There isn't a way to get those strongholds back now, unless they go full bore and add in the additional SH slots to be purchased, and then also allow you to purchase a duplicate of any of the existing strongholds. I'm not against them doing this, but I really do not believe it is going to happen... and if it was it should have happened already in order to not punish those who deleted strongholds to get Rishi today.

 

.

[PennyAnn]

Adding an additional thought to my previous post: In the history of Bioware and SWTOR, in situations like this one, I have found what happens most often is that it is a tricky situation that they can't really "win" with among the player base. If they take your suggestions, then the people who did indeed delete strongholds today in order to purchase Rishi are punished by following the guidelines set out by Bioware currently. We can discuss whether or not we think those guidelines are fair or not all day, but the fact is - I think that if they had a good way to change this before they released the patch today, they would have done it.

 

And now that doing anything after the fact would actually punish players following today's guidelines, I highly doubt it will happen. I could be wrong about this, and sincerely hope that I am because I think it would be a win/win to allow us to purchase extra Stronghold slots, and to make Bioware money in the process. This is especially true for guilds, whose limit of one stronghold is more of a punishment than the limit on individual players... and precisely when the new stronghold functionality fits so well with guild events and community use.

 

I just have a feeling that even though we agree this is a shame, it will go in the "hall of shame" items that Bioware didn't change (or in the case of Conquest, change back) in ways that mostly made sense for the people that still pay for and play their game.

 

Edited to add: I know I come off pretty devil's advocate here, and I don't mean to do that. As I said, you and I agree that this would be a good thing they could do for those who are interested in strongholds and decorating. I merely posted to suggest why it might not be as simple a "win" in their minds and why it might not happen even though it can seem pretty obvious to us that it should.

 

.

Edited August 8, 2018 by PennyAnn

[JediBoadicea]

However, there is a character limit (even when you purchase extra character slots) and many went over even that limit with the mergers. You did not lose any of your characters at merger time, but in order to make new ones or transfer from another server, you had to delete down to under the cap.

 

You're absolutely correct, and I do understand this, both in acknowledging the reality of it and also understanding that there's probably a very good reason for having some sort of cap on things like characters (or strongholds) so that people don't end up with unreasonable/infinity X. At some point we have to bow to realism and accept we can't have 500 characters. At some point I will have to bow to realism and accept I can't have 100 strongholds. I am at peace with this.

 

I am not at peace with accepting I have to have 10, when the game has proved it can support not just more, but a lot more. That's the crux of my frustration. And it seems especially short-sighted if they intend to keep making strongholds. Rather than limp along doing a retroactive patch job on the cap question each time a new stronghold comes out, a genuine productive solution would be better, and the release of an excellent new stronghold is the opportune time to do it.

 

I love strongholds. I am more than happy to keep giving money to the studio to let me play with more strongholds. I can accept that there is, somewhere, at some point, a true hard cap to the number I can have, just like I accept there is a true hard cap to the number of characters I can have. But the cap of 10 is a soft cap, not a hard one; the merger proved that. I am asking that we be given the opportunity to unlock strongholds beyond the soft cap, just like we can with characters.

 

If they take your suggestions, then the people who did indeed delete strongholds today in order to purchase Rishi are punished by following the guidelines set out by Bioware currently.

 

I agree that would be very frustrating to be in that position, and it would be an unfortunate situation created by an unfortunate lack of foresight on the part of the studio (all the more unfortunate because it was called out prior to release). However, without taking away from that or my sympathy for that position, it was still their choice to delete - just like it is my choice not to delete, when faced with the exact same parameters, while I wait to see if this is something that will change later down the line (previous raising of SH caps happened after the initial release, so this is not the first time we've done this dance... unfortunately).

 

And the game is changing all the time. It used to be the character limit was much lower than it is now, and people in the past deleted characters to make new ones... and then the cap was raised, and that was that. Those characters couldn't be un-deleted after things changed, but the change was still a good one. It's a choice each of us makes in its own time, based on our own priorities. This is no different. The game changes, and so long as it is evolving toward more flexibility and options then I think that's a net positive.

 

Ultimately I think a stronghold slot unlock option is just a good idea, long term. It's an opportunity for more revenue while simultaneously letting your passionate decorators have more fun and more reason to keep spending.

 

The frustration comes from it not having been addressed prior to the release of the newest stronghold shiny. One of the things I repeatedly stressed in my PTS feedback, when I mentioned this issue, was that people are most impulsive with their money and most passionate in their interest when something is new. Maybe many of those people who deleted a stronghold today to get Rishi might have instead preferred the option to pay $5/$7/$10 to get an additional unlock... and now all of that opportunity is lost, because they already took the deletion step.

 

This is especially true for guilds, whose limit of one stronghold is more of a punishment than the limit on individual players... and precisely when the new stronghold functionality fits so well with guild events and community use.

 

Absolutely. I said this in my earlier posts here, and many people brought up the cap on guild strongholds in the PTS feedback (far more than were concerned about it for personal strongholds). Guilds who communally invested a lot of time and cost into donating decos to their guild and decorating a shared base of operations probably don't want to lose that. Many will choose to, for the sake of getting Rishi's features. But it's silly to force that choice when instead we could have been given an option to invest more.

 

Edited to add: I know I come off pretty devil's advocate here, and I don't mean to do that. As I said, you and I agree that this would be a good thing they could do for those who are interested in strongholds and decorating. I merely posted to suggest why it might not be as simple a "win" in their minds and why it might not happen even though it can seem pretty obvious to us that it should.

 

Edited to add a response to your edit! I appreciate a good devil's advocate, reasonable discussion is always healthy. I do see the points you were making, and I think you're right about the history of missed opportunities. I just feel that in spite of all of that this is still a step they should take, if at all possible.

 

I may be off in my impression, but it just feels like a painful oversight rather than a thought-out choice to sacrifice potential profit and player happiness for a sound and unshakable reason. Maybe there's a really good reason why they don't want people to have more than 10 strongholds, or they don't want to let people have duplicate copies of a stronghold. But... if there is, I'm not feeling it. (Yes, I know that's totally subjective.) I have 21 strongholds after the merge (for all sorts of reasons, yes I do use them all), and I've noticed no performance issues of any kind. Perhaps there are performance issues that have just been skillfully wallpapered over, I don't know. But every time there's been a cap in the past they raised it... but only after a ruckus was made, and always to some arbitrary number only one or two digits off from the current cap, like there's some fear of wading out into the deep end of the pool. 10, in the face of post-merge 35, seems on the surface very arbitrary, and very short-sighted in the terms of potential profit something as simple as slot unlock could bring.

Edited August 8, 2018 by JediBoadicea

[JediBoadicea]

Adding one more thing to my argument: One of the reasons that I, at 21 post-merge strongholds, do use all 21 and don't want to sacrifice any is because I use them as RP and guild-activity sets in order to create content for other players. In addition to being a "mini-game" past time that keeps me invested, I use strongholds as a tool to keep other people invested too.

 

Outfit Designer slots (of which we could use more too ) and a generous number of character slots incentivize people to spend more money on CM outfits and character designs. Similarly, having more stronghold blank canvases incentivizes people to buy more decos, but with strongholds there's also an additional benefit; I can't let other players use my outfits, but I can let other players use my strongholds in a way that gives everyone more reason to be playing. More stronghold slots means more opportunity to do just that.

 

After all that work on PTS feedback, to now feel like I don't have a reason to log in to the game tonight because it would only mean sacrificing something I care about in order to get something new... it's just disheartening. I'm done patching but haven't hit Play and don't know if I will tonight. (Yes, yes, I realize this is emotional hyperbole to some degree, but I'm a gamer, emotional hyperbole is our mother tongue. It also happens to be very true, in this case. I was hoping to feel incentivized to get in there and play with new things, and instead I'm left with the exact opposite situation.)

Edited August 8, 2018 by JediBoadicea

[Usarean]

Imagine that you were told that you needed to delete all your strongholds before getting a new one. Those caught up in the mergers are being asked to do just that.

[Swtorytime]

Adding an additional thought to my previous post: In the history of Bioware and SWTOR, in situations like this one, I have found what happens most often is that it is a tricky situation that they can't really "win" with among the player base. If they take your suggestions, then the people who did indeed delete strongholds today in order to purchase Rishi are punished by following the guidelines set out by Bioware currently. We can discuss whether or not we think those guidelines are fair or not all day, but the fact is - I think that if they had a good way to change this before they released the patch today, they would have done it.

 

Edited to add: I know I come off pretty devil's advocate here, and I don't mean to do that. As I said, you and I agree that this would be a good thing they could do for those who are interested in strongholds and decorating. I merely posted to suggest why it might not be as simple a "win" in their minds and why it might not happen even though it can seem pretty obvious to us that it should.

 

.

 

 

Guess what? I logged on today and realized I'd lose a bunch of strongholds I slaved over and am proud of. When I realized I couldn't buy Rishi I DIDN'T just go and delete all my goddamned hard work! I simply didn't buy the damn thing and started coming here in search of other people who have the same problem.

 

Listen to the OP! He knows what he is talking about! We're not talking about just one or 2 strongholds at stake here. We're talking about people who have more than double what the current cap limit is! I hesitated buying Rishi for a damn good reason. I put TONS of time and money into this stuff and if I'm not given a way to save it then the devs need to raise the damn cap!

[Tahana]

For me, why would anyone need more than 1.

Because if you run conquest, each one up to 6 adds a multiplier to the points you earn.

[Zorrya]

I'm not at the cap but posting to say I think the idea of a slot unlock is a good one, and also that I would love to be able to buy a second Coruscant SH. I can think of lots of different ideas for the same space so I can understand why people would want that, and for me I like making homes for my characters and I have more than one character who would live on Coruscant so the chance to build more Coruscant apartments tied to specific characters would be great. I'm still trying to build my deco collection and that takes forever since decos are so hard to get and you can't affordably direct purchase them like you can the individual decos from the first bundles, but having more reasons like a second Coruscant home to want to keep at that grind would keep me motivated.

 

End of the day it doesn't seem to make much sense to cap people if they want to buy more. I mean you're not going to stop making strongholds right?

 

Also while I don't lead RP events myself I do attend lots of RP events and I always appreciate seeing the strongholds RP leaders build for events they run. Some of them I know are at the cap so I say give them more freedom to keep making sets for the rest of us.

[JediBoadicea]

I know the dev team is nose to the grindstone right now fixing bugs, and that should rightly be the priority. But I don't want this question of stronghold caps to disappear into the muck and be forgotten. I'm willing to be patient for the hope of a fix on this cap question, but I'd like to know if there's light at the end of the tunnel or not.

 

I could understand that creating the interface and logic for a stronghold slot unlock, or for the option to buy duplicate strongholds, might take some time. I think both of those things are a very good idea for profit possibilities and future state needs, so I do believe they ought to be implemented. But in the meantime... in the meantime, what's the harm of changing two digits in the code that determine what the stronghold cap is?

 

Look, for those people who weren't at cap, Rishi is the 8th stronghold, which is under the cap still. Since they can't currently buy duplicate strongholds, lifting the cap has no effect on them whatsoever (nor on the impact they might have on load or whatever).

 

For those of us exceeding the cap, so long as there's still no option to buy duplicate SHs then for the moment the most we could possibly increase our stronghold count by would be ONE. One copy of Rishi.

 

With those things considered... is it really so hard to go into the code and change the cap number from 10 to 36? Just for now? While a long-term fix is considered over time?

[IoNonSoEVero]

Yeah, they seem to be nose-deep in other issues right now, but when the dust clears, I hope this is something they will consider. An unlock perk on the Cartel Market seems like a reasonable idea to me.

 

if nothing else, if someone is over the stronghold cap due to the merger, maybe they could at least make the deactivation 1:1. Ie, if you want to buy Rishi, you would need to deactivate one stronghold instead of having to deactivate many to get back under the 10 SH limit.

Edited August 10, 2018 by IoNonSoEVero

[Swtorytime]

If nothing else, if someone is over the stronghold cap due to the merger, maybe they could at least make the deactivation 1:1. Ie, if you want to buy Rishi, you would need to deactivate one stronghold instead of having to deactivate many to get back under the 10 SH limit.

 

YES!!! This is a hell of a lot more fair and reasonable than forcing us to delete all of our stronghold copies just to get the new one.

 

Seriously, I am very demoralized about this situation. The biggest fail by the Dev team is that they don't seem to acknowledge or appreciate the amount of time and energy creative people put into making these things look cool. It's an art form to making a well-designed stronghold. I have absolutely NO DESIRE to delete any of my "bonus" strongholds I got from the merge, but I would be more willing to sacrifice one to gain a new one.