6.1.4 Conquest Feedback

[JediJoy]

Hi all!

 

I wanted to take a moment and give another update regarding 6.1.4 and Conquest.

 

As Chris mentioned yesterday during our Live Stream, live-service game systems changes are based on data we see regarding how everyone is interacting with the system, our own hypothesis, and a dialogue with all of you! We believe the dialogue portion is a critical part of this process, and is one of the driving reasons we took our 6.1.4 Conquest updates to PTS. We want to thank you for all of your input, and encourage you to continue having a conversation with us!

 

We have continued to iterate on what the 6.1.4 Conquest system looks like based on the above process, and I would like to share with you some updates we are making which you can expect to see coming in an upcoming PTS patch:

• The planetary restrictions for <Planet> Defeat Enemy Objectives and <Planet> Heroic Missions Objectives have been removed.
  
  • This should once again function how it does on our live server, restricted only by Level Brackets (so for example, a Level 25 character will not have Defeat Enemies for Mek-Sha)

  [*]The restriction on Defeat Enemies 2 has been removed from the 50-70 and 71+ Level Brackets, and will continue to function as it does on our live server for characters of all levels restricted only by Level Brackets.

  [*]Defeat Enemies, Defeat Enemies 2, and Heroic Missions have had their points increased.

  • Defeat Enemies is now worth 1200 Points (up from 750)
    
  • Defeat Enemies 2 is now worth 2400 Points (up from 1650)
    
  • Missions: Heroic is now worth 1550 Points (up from 850)

 

This was just the first step in a larger and more robust PTS update we are currently working on which wasn’t quite ready for this PTS patch. We will provide further information once it’s ready to go!

 

We encourage you all to continue this conversation with us by heading to PTS and providing feedback! We are still interested in the following points:

• How do the new values feel? Do you feel that larger and more complex objectives have a more accurate point representation of their time and effort, and do those new values make those objectives more appealing to attempt?
  
• Are there Objectives you feel are too rewarding? Not rewarding enough?
  
• As a player who wants to partake in the story, do you feel like you are able to more actively participate in Conquest?
  
• As a player who enjoys Operation/Warzone/Uprisings or other group play, do you feel like you are able to more actively participate in Conquest and that your time investment is more accurately reflected?
  
• How do you feel about the Objectives for Feast of Prosperity? Did they encourage you to partake in the event? Did you enjoy earning Conquest through Event participation?
  
• Any other thoughts or feedback you may have!

 

This is a step in the right direction but still far from where it could be.

 

A few suggestions:

 

1) Add more objectives for GSF, Ranked and Unranked PvP

2) Add objectives on top of the weekly for uprisings and flashpoints that may specify so many conquest points for killing the bonus boss or the last boss in both.

3) Do not nerf the space mission. The time and effort involved in completing some of them isnt worth the "nerfed" points youre offering.

4) Expand the planets available for invasion; just 3 each week isnt enough. Meta guilds are mutating and dominating all planets to the point where smaller guilds arent even on the board anymore. I know that it doesnt matter as long as they reach the min cap of points. But just think for a moment how amazing it felt to see your guilds name on the board when that was never a possibility in the past. If you expand the available planets, then more small guilds will finally be able to see their name on the board and show off their hard work. This will also give more guilds an opportunity to possibly conquer the planet.

5) This idea is from a guildie: Make it to where only small guilds can invade small yield, medium invade medium yield and large invade large yield planets. Go off of player count (not member count) for each.

6) Leave the planetary kills and heroics alone. keep them at live server point level. This isnt hurting anyone. Let people choose how they want to cap toons how they want and give them options to cap more toons.

7) Bring back commanders and republic/imperial troop kills conquest objectives. That was hella fun to get the guild together to take down a base. (someone else in this thread mentioned this also)

8) Stop nerfing points. Increase till your hearts content but stop nerfing and stop restricting conquest. (oh come on, i couldnt end it on 7 points because thats just eww).

 

[Master_Morak]

Hi all!

 

I wanted to take a moment and give another update regarding 6.1.4 and Conquest.

 

As Chris mentioned yesterday during our Live Stream, live-service game systems changes are based on data we see regarding how everyone is interacting with the system, our own hypothesis, and a dialogue with all of you! We believe the dialogue portion is a critical part of this process, and is one of the driving reasons we took our 6.1.4 Conquest updates to PTS. We want to thank you for all of your input, and encourage you to continue having a conversation with us!

 

We have continued to iterate on what the 6.1.4 Conquest system looks like based on the above process, and I would like to share with you some updates we are making which you can expect to see coming in an upcoming PTS patch:

• The planetary restrictions for <Planet> Defeat Enemy Objectives and <Planet> Heroic Missions Objectives have been removed.
  
  • This should once again function how it does on our live server, restricted only by Level Brackets (so for example, a Level 25 character will not have Defeat Enemies for Mek-Sha)

  [*]The restriction on Defeat Enemies 2 has been removed from the 50-70 and 71+ Level Brackets, and will continue to function as it does on our live server for characters of all levels restricted only by Level Brackets.

  [*]Defeat Enemies, Defeat Enemies 2, and Heroic Missions have had their points increased.

  • Defeat Enemies is now worth 1200 Points (up from 750)
    
  • Defeat Enemies 2 is now worth 2400 Points (up from 1650)
    
  • Missions: Heroic is now worth 1550 Points (up from 850)

 

This was just the first step in a larger and more robust PTS update we are currently working on which wasn’t quite ready for this PTS patch. We will provide further information once it’s ready to go!

 

We encourage you all to continue this conversation with us by heading to PTS and providing feedback! We are still interested in the following points:

• How do the new values feel? Do you feel that larger and more complex objectives have a more accurate point representation of their time and effort, and do those new values make those objectives more appealing to attempt?
  
• Are there Objectives you feel are too rewarding? Not rewarding enough?
  
• As a player who wants to partake in the story, do you feel like you are able to more actively participate in Conquest?
  
• As a player who enjoys Operation/Warzone/Uprisings or other group play, do you feel like you are able to more actively participate in Conquest and that your time investment is more accurately reflected?
  
• How do you feel about the Objectives for Feast of Prosperity? Did they encourage you to partake in the event? Did you enjoy earning Conquest through Event participation?
  
• Any other thoughts or feedback you may have!

 

A step in the right direction, but not enough. Lower the points for PvP or give all PvP goal a daily cap for instance 5 or 10 times repeatable . Why could someone do endless the same PvP or GSF missions but PVE is restricted to once a day?

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

Thank you for listening to the feedback and making changes for heroic missions. From what I was able to experience last night and just from the numbers alone, this is still a nerf obviously but it's much more reasonable and leaves heroics in a place where they're not completely unviable. I'm happy with where they're at currently.

 

My only real concern now with these changes to planetary stuff is something I brought up previously, and something BW has asked about in each of these balance posts so I'm going to reiterate now: [Planet Name]: Heroic Missions does not count story missions. That's obvious, but what that means is that players that get to level 71+ before finishing their class story, such as via the Master's Datacron or double XP, lose out on Conquest points that they would have gotten previously because, as I've also noted, Missions: Story Time is not available for the 71+ bracket.

 

There are two obvious ways I can think of to address that issue:

 

1. Remove the [Planet Name]: Heroic Missions objective and add [Planet Name]: Mission Completed back to the 71+ bracket for all planets.

This option doesn't have a huge effect on balance and brings this aspect back to how it is on the live servers. These two objectives are worth the same amount of points, but Mission Completed still requires 2 missions to be completed in order to actually trigger. This would be a minor nerf to heroics because of that, but it would open things back up for Story missions. I think that's a reasonable compromise.

 

2. Add Missions: Story Time to the 71+ bracket

This option is more intuitive to me, but has a larger balance impact. Level 71+ characters still have story content, and story missions aren't inherently shorter between level 70 and level 71, nor are they farmable in such a way that this could be abused. So this would bring that back in line and keep everybody on the same playing field for story missions in terms of Conquest. Again, the prevalence of level 71+ characters that still have class story missions left to complete is a lot higher now than I imagine it used to be given the Master's Datacron and double XP, so this would help keep that part of Conquest consistent for those players. As intuitive as that is, though, that's a 5.5k infinitely repeatable objective, so that'll affect balance.

 

I think either of these changes would work for Story missions, so it's a matter of if the consistency of having Missions: Story Time available for all is worth the balance effect it would have on the 71+ bracket or not. That's something only the devs could really determine based on their targets/data, but the first option works just as well.

[Decalin]

[color=#f9d648

This was just the first step in a larger and more robust PTS update we are currently working on which wasn’t quite ready for this PTS patch. We will provide further information once it’s ready to go!

 

Those numbers look much more realistic for the solo stuff. I ended up not being around much this week so may just hold off until the next patch until jumping onto test at this point. Hopefully we will have some love for GSF and Unranked to test then, since the feedback for the solo stuff was taken on board! ;D

 

EDIT: One I did notice had changed was the node harvesting up from 10 to 25 nodes required, I cant imagine its a deal breaker for anyone but it seemed a bit unnecessary, I don't believe anyone was running about farming conquest points by gathering nodes?

Edited September 25, 2020 by Decalin

[Jdast]

Why could someone do endless the same PvP or GSF missions but PVE is restricted to once a day?

 

I'm going to side with the PvP and GSF folks on this one. Why?

 

For all intents and purposes, PvE is not restricted b/c there are so many missions. BW wisely did a course correction and removed planetary restrictions.

 

The GSF and PvP advocates, unfortunately, seem incessantly focused on once a day activities like Companion Influencer, Amplifer Change, Give Treek a Treat, etc. In other words, activities anyone, including PvP-ers / GSF-ers, can easily complete in between matches.

 

Dasty

Edited September 25, 2020 by Jdast

[Decalin]

A step in the right direction, but not enough. Lower the points for PvP or give all PvP goal a daily cap for instance 5 or 10 times repeatable . Why could someone do endless the same PvP or GSF missions but PVE is restricted to once a day?

 

PvE has literally hundreds of objectives where GSF has, what, 2 or 3? Only 1 of those being repeatable...

 

If you are not happy with something please make suggestions to improve that area rather than asking for nerfs to areas which are already suffering greatly as far as conquest points are concerned.

[DawnAskham]

IMO there are two primary reasons players engage with conquest (with overlap between the two), one for the rewards (the majority I'm going to assume), the other is for titles and achievements (mostly those in very large guilds).

 

The personal rewards are structured in a way that encourages capping as many alts as possible (because rewards trigger once at 50K, additional points are wasted from a reward perspective) - getting 1 million points in a week across 20 characters is worth 20X the rewards over getting 1 millions points in a week on one character.

 

On the other side, to compete for large planets, guilds need players that gain as many points as possible on as few characters as possible due to the 1000 character limit (e.g. a guild getting an average of 250K a player at 1000 characters will win over a guild getting an average of 50K also at 1000 characters).

 

Most of the guilds that compete for wins are stingy with allowing alts into their guilds, and highly encourage if not outright require every character to earn more than the minimal amount (50K) required for rewards to trigger.

 

Players are forced to choose between getting conquest wins (and the titles / achievements) by amassing lots of points on a few characters in a very large guild at cap, or just giving up on the titles and achievements and focus on maximizing their rewards in other guilds.

 

Guilds are forced to decide if its worth it to even bother attempting to get wins (generally requires heavy recruiting to build a full or next to full roster with very active players), as well as if they choose to go for wins, they are forced to restrict alts and require players to earn lots of points on as few characters as possible.

 

NOTHING in the changes addresses these fundamental challenges.

 

Due to the reward structure, players are still going to want to cap as many characters as possible each week.

 

Getting 100K, 200K, 250K or whatever points for whatever new objective is utterly useless to most players who are just trying to cap a character for the rewards as no additional rewards are provided for gaining more than 50K in a week.

 

Due to guild limits and the current small number of targets available each week, guilds will either have to go all out and recruit to full while restricting alts while requiring players to hit ever increasing point totals on every character or just give up on getting wins and be content with maximizing personal rewards.

 

If you all are going to make changes - look at why players participate and what players want, figure out how to best align that with your own studio goals, and then make changes to support.

 

Most who have provided feedback have simply asked for more repeatable objectives with reasonable points so that they can play their characters in whatever content they enjoy and cap conquest to earn their weekly rewards.

 

Why is this so difficult to understand?

 

Tying a weekly (once and done) to a bunch of points that is 2, 3, 4 times the weekly goal isn't how most approach the game. Most just want to spend an hour playing a character and gain a similar number of points regardless of whether they spend that hour running rampages and planet missions or GSF or flashpoints or clearing a HM operation.

 

Leave current points as they are and add repeatable objectives for things like flashpoints and GSF and anything else that is missing a repeatable, put reasonable points on the objective, and see how that plays out.

 

Alternatively, make changes that allow players to gain another reward payout every so many points, and maybe more would be willing to chase some of the 100K+ objectives (though don't remove / nerf the existing objectives to do so - just add some sort of 'every 50K, get another box' to conquest).

 

There are also others wishing for changes to give more guilds a chance to gain wins for the titles and achievements, and there have been some suggestions made by players as well as ideas pitched around by the developers on ways to increase the number of guilds able to participate in gaining titles and achievements.

 

While this is probably a much larger change than just modifying the list of objectives and point values, it is something a lot of players are interested in seeing - so I would suggest putting your ideas out there and getting feedback from the players before spending a bunch of resource time developing something that goes over like a brick when it hits the PTS.

Edited September 25, 2020 by DawnAskham

[Darev]

Personally I wish you would just negate all previous changes to the Heroics and leave them as they are on live today.

Even though you've added some points back from what you've taken away, there's still a net effect of fewer points on PTS, from Heroic missions, than what is on live today.

 

Maybe the boost to renown makes up for that. We'll have to test and compare to live. Won't know until then.

 

Again, your primary focus should be making multiplayer content more attractive to the conquest crowd.

 

Reverse the previous changes to trash mobs

More points for ALL the bosses

I think the 100k for completion of an operation was overkill, but I don't know if anyone's been able to get through a raid on PTS since this patch due to lack of players / coordination.

 

 

The best way forward is to add to conquest.

Not to subtract from it.

Please don't try to dictate, or funnel, players into the type of content you want to see us doing.

Let us choose for ourselves.

[casirabit]

A step in the right direction, but not enough. Lower the points for PvP or give all PvP goal a daily cap for instance 5 or 10 times repeatable . Why could someone do endless the same PvP or GSF missions but PVE is restricted to once a day?

 

While not a pvp/GSF player why not allow them to have more missions or repeated missions they can do. PVE has a lot of missions (provided they don't lock the heroics/etc behind the planets involved in the conquest) so why shouldn't the others have the same. Fair is fair. I hate pvp/GSF and will never do those but there are those that hate pve as well so why not give them enough missions for the day that they can pvp/gsf to their heart's content.

[Decalin]

Getting 100K, 200K, 250K or whatever points for whatever new objective is utterly useless to most players who are just trying to cap a character for the rewards as no additional rewards are provided for gaining more than 50K in a week.

 

Some really good points in here, made me think... How would people feel if the personal conquest reward was repeatable, or rather it would trigger the reward every 50k points earned? It wouldn't really be any different as an end result for most of us, but it might be nice to be able to concentrate on one character rather than run about hitting 50k on 20 alts.

[DuchessKristania]

Some really good points in here, made me think... How would people feel if the personal conquest reward was repeatable, or rather it would trigger the reward every 50k points earned? It wouldn't really be any different as an end result for most of us, but it might be nice to be able to concentrate on one character rather than run about hitting 50k on 20 alts.

 

I quite like this idea. However, I would point out that the reason many members of small guilds go after multiple alts is to net more encryptions. If personal conquest handed out encryptions this would be fantastic. I mean, I have a bunch of alts, but I have toons I vastly prefer playing over others. If I could focus on those toons rather than spreading conquest out over multiple toons for the encryption gain it would actually make conquest a lot more fun.

 

Also, if they would look at the broad net of feedback there is a theme that seems to apply to players of all types. Repeatability. Here's the thing, players like playing what they like playing. When they make everything legacy or once a day it forces people to stop playing characters and activities they want to play in order to hit conquest. Make things repeatable. Why does it actually even matter what kind of a playing a player does to hit conquest? Make things repeatable and let people earn conquest organically by doing what they enjoy doing. Make the super easy stuff like decorating, gift giving, taxi's once per day, but really limit the amount of once per day or legacy and allow players to achieve their conquest goals through doing what they like for as long as they like.

 

Obviously, the more time consuming content would need to be worth a higher point value because it wouldn't be possible to repeat it as many times in a day, but I really think if there was more repeatable objectives for what a player does organically you'd avoid a lot of headache.

Edited September 25, 2020 by DuchessKristania

[Decalin]

I quite like this idea. However, I would point out that the reason many members of small guilds go after multiple alts is to net more encryptions. If personal conquest handed out encryptions this would be fantastic. I mean, I have a bunch of alts, but I have toons I vastly prefer playing over others. If I could focus on those toons rather than spreading conquest out over multiple toons for the encryption gain it would actually make conquest a lot more fun.

 

Ye I am much the same, I have a few characters that I much prefer, in fact some weeks I just don't bother with the conquest on more than a few characters because I don't feel like switching up to alt's.

 

The more I think about this actually, many of the folk in my guild, and also my wife, are always jumping round alt's as they like to finish the conquest on as many of them as they can. Its difficult some weeks to play with them due to this, as I like to play a bit of everything. This could be a really good way to break people out of the solo 50k on as many characters as possible mentality and get them to do something more interesting instead!

[Pamplonac]

It seems that when everything was great for a single solo player, someone had the need to change that and try to force a single player (who just want to play his/her game with a friend/family member in a group doing some Heroics/FP's) to quit Conquest completely or join some multiplayer PuG's for OP's to get that 100k points. In the two guilds, I am in, (Rep.level 64 - Imp.level 171 more or less, I don't remember the exact number) we never - ever played any Operations/PvP together. Not because we didn't want to do them, but there was always something missing. Missing players for the full 8/16 party, some of the players didn't want to do the OP's without headphones, others were busy grinding Heroics for a couple of alt's they have, so they can get that precious gear, and maybe one day enjoy OP's and some PvP, in full 306 gear?

 

We are a tight community, not a lot of people in the two guilds, but we are very friendly. We consider our small private SWTOR guild playground as a true gaming family, and we are really proud of that fact. Now, with new updates and cut to the Conquest numbers, a lot of us will have to grind the Conquest, again, as we did before a couple of years back, since no one wants to play PuG OP's or even try the PvP Ranked, with so much hate and poison in them games!

 

With a small guild, you cannot go for the stars and climb the ladder, dreaming of conquering the planet, any planet, but that's perfectly okay. That is the small price to pay if you want to stay true to your game, chose quality of players over quantity in numbers, and be happy having just pure old fun while doing any content with the people you love and respect. Instead of changing something in those numbers, giving small/active guilds a chance to raise the bar and be competitive, with this cut in Heroics, it will only get grindy and tedious to do any number and/or repeat them for much less amount of points than before. This will turn so many solo players off the board, but hey, nothing can be done about it now, they are applying the new numbers, materials... Once again, some of us just have to "hush up, and take it", or give it all up and leave.

[DuchessKristania]

Ye I am much the same, I have a few characters that I much prefer, in fact some weeks I just don't bother with the conquest on more than a few characters because I don't feel like switching up to alt's.

 

The more I think about this actually, many of the folk in my guild, and also my wife, are always jumping round alt's as they like to finish the conquest on as many of them as they can. Its difficult some weeks to play with them due to this, as I like to play a bit of everything. This could be a really good way to break people out of the solo 50k on as many characters as possible mentality and get them to do something more interesting instead!

 

I love my agents, I have a marksmanship sniper and a heal spec'd operative. These two are my favorite characters to play. I have other toons I enjoy and sometimes binge with, but these are the two I always come back to and will generally default to. If getting them hundreds upon hundreds of points didn't take from my guild's ability to collect encryptions I'd enjoy the conquest grind so much more.

 

It goes back to what someone else was saying about the need to look at the motivations for going after conquest. If the focus switched to that I think it would make the balancing act much easier. Also looking at what the differences between how and why guilds of different sizes go after conquest. As I said in another post, a large guild likely has very different motivations and styles for conquest than a small one. For small guilds opening up ships is likely and the end goal is encryptions. If that's the goal for them they are going to be alt hopping like mad and trying to spread personal conquest goals over as many toons as possible.

 

On the other hand, a large guild is far more likely to be focusing on winning control of a planet. They're more likely to be running large group content that's more time consuming both to organize and to play.

[Decalin]

I love my agents, I have a marksmanship sniper and a heal spec'd operative. These two are my favorite characters to play. I have other toons I enjoy and sometimes binge with, but these are the two I always come back to and will generally default to. If getting them hundreds upon hundreds of points didn't take from my guild's ability to collect encryptions I'd enjoy the conquest grind so much more.

 

It goes back to what someone else was saying about the need to look at the motivations for going after conquest. If the focus switched to that I think it would make the balancing act much easier. Also looking at what the differences between how and why guilds of different sizes go after conquest. As I said in another post, a large guild likely has very different motivations and styles for conquest than a small one. For small guilds opening up ships is likely and the end goal is encryptions. If that's the goal for them they are going to be alt hopping like mad and trying to spread personal conquest goals over as many toons as possible.

 

On the other hand, a large guild is far more likely to be focusing on winning control of a planet. They're more likely to be running large group content that's more time consuming both to organize and to play.

 

Aye, I think the main thing that I find (In smaller guilds), which allowing the personal conquest to be repeatable would help with, is people get caught up in that "Must finish on all the alts" mentality, often actual guild activities gets pushed back and sometimes never happen as people don't want to lose out on conquest rewards. For some that is about encryptions, for others they like the loot boxes and tech fragments.

 

If it were to be made repeatable, at the end of the conquest week we could just multiple the rewards by the number of conquest "dings" the character achieved though for the same end result. in practice it would be more difficult to obtain the same number of points compared to jumping round different alt's to complete weekly missions multiple times, but I think enough people would welcome the option to play this way even if it were at a bit of a disadvantage.

[DuchessKristania]

Aye, I think the main thing that I find (In smaller guilds), which allowing the personal conquest to be repeatable would help with, is people get caught up in that "Must finish on all the alts" mentality, often actual guild activities gets pushed back and sometimes never happen as people don't want to lose out on conquest rewards. For some that is about encryptions, for others they like the loot boxes and tech fragments.

 

If it were to be made repeatable, at the end of the conquest week we could just multiple the rewards by the number of conquest "dings" the character achieved though for the same end result. in practice it would be more difficult to obtain the same number of points compared to jumping round different alt's to complete weekly missions multiple times, but I think enough people would welcome the option to play this way even if it were at a bit of a disadvantage.

 

I like the idea of having the weekly rewards reflect how many "dings" a person hit. Granted, this is all theoretical since if this ever happened it wouldn't be likely to happen this go round. But they're going to continue to struggle to find a way to make conquest good for solo/group and large/small guilds as long as they keep trying to apply the same logic to the different styles.

[Darev]

My sense of the changes is this.

 

Making adjustments to what's already in the game is the easy way to reach their goal. That's something they can do, relatively easily, and PTS is just to make sure nothing really breaks the code and to get a sense of player feedback.

 

Well, they certainly got the feedback they wanted and are lessening the solo player CQ point nerf.

 

However, as a few people have stated, the things in GSF (as an example) that they CAN buff, and did, only happen randomly, maybe 2-3 weeks a year.

 

Adding more repeatable objectives...such as medals...I'm guessing...takes far more work than merely adjusting points and is more of a long term goal.

In order for that goal to be realized, the GSF players will need to keep the momentum on that going as long as it takes.

 

I would suggest, since it *MIGHT* be easier in the short term, make that objective for GSF that is tied to the invasion that only happens a few time a year and apply it to EVERY invasion cycle.

 

No one outside of GSF will care, and it will give the GSF crowd a means to get a higher level of points playing the way they want to play.

[DuchessKristania]

I would suggest, since it *MIGHT* be easier in the short term, make that objective for GSF that is tied to the invasion that only happens a few time a year and apply it to EVERY invasion cycle.

 

No one outside of GSF will care, and it will give the GSF crowd a means to get a higher level of points playing the way they want to play.

 

 

I don't play GSF, but this suggestion seems reasonable and fair to me. I hope the devs see it and put it into effect.

[CelynthePhoenix]

Alright here are my thoughts as the GL of a small and very casual guild (we prefer camaraderie over quantity, a fair amount of our members are solo players who joined the guild because they knew me and/or our officers from elsewhere and liked the idea of playing on their own while having the chance to hang out with us. At the moment, some are on a break while waiting for more story content)

 

The jest of it is that I feel conquest as it is now is in a good place for my kind of playstyle and could use buffs for activities I don't do much like operations, or at all like pvp and GSF.

 

I haven't gotten the chance to test the changes on the PTS yet as it's only been up during my working hours so far, hopefully next week.

 

1. All the points increase feel welcome to me.

 

2. Not happy about the points decrease, taking things away always feels wrong.

Chris' comment on the livestream "about patterns you see" doesn't really sit right with me, it goes against your "play your way" statement.

 

3. Glad you changed your mind about this:

[*]The planetary restrictions for <Planet> Defeat Enemy Objectives and <Planet> Heroic Missions Objectives have been removed.

• This should once again function how it does on our live server, restricted only by Level Brackets (so for example, a Level 25 character will not have Defeat Enemies for Mek-Sha)

[*]The restriction on Defeat Enemies 2 has been removed from the 50-70 and 71+ Level Brackets, and will continue to function as it does on our live server for characters of all levels restricted only by Level Brackets.

I am generally against restricting activities to location and levels.

Locations because a whole lot of players have limited gaming time, and for a good amount of us that playing time is prime time, more competition between players for objectives lead to frustration at best, toxicity at worst.

I also believe only giving points for the harder content for the 71+ level bracket is not a good idea, people don't focus solely on harder content once they reach level 71. It also defeats the purpose of items like the Master Datacron. While our guild is still relatively "young," most of my guildies have played the game for years, some were there at launch, a lot of us like to bump up to level 70 to replay the class stories so we can focus on the story parts we love, avoid the more repeatable ones and not worry too much about abilities and utilities. At the latest update of the proposed changes, this kind of playing will be penalized for conquest.

 

4. A reminder that the "Legacy advancement" objective cannot be complete by a good amount of players, veteran players have maxed their legacy level forever ago, I would like to see that objective work the same way as earning renown ranks do for people who already reached renown 999 if possible.

 

Other things I'd like to see for conquest in general:

 

1. Give us the rewards for every 50,000 points earned. As of now a player who earns 150,000 points on three characters gets three rewards while a player who earns them on one gets only one reward, this doesn't feel fair. This would tremendously help small and/or casual guilds like mine with opening their flagships.

 

2. Get rid of the "once per day per legacy" restriction, ideally I'd like to see it changed to no restrictions at all but I'd settle for "once per day per faction"

 

3. From what I've understood from when you finally added a small yield planet to the swoop even conquest week, it's not as easy as it seems but I would like to see:

a) more than one planet per yield objective every week, ideally 3 small, 3 medium and 3 large every weeks and more for the conquest week where we already have more (can't remember the name right now)

b) rotate the invasion targets between yield objectives, this would give smaller guilds who want to compete on the leaderboard a better chance.

 

4. Let us completely turn off the pop-up for the conquest objectives completed, let us finally turn off the pop-up for "[guildname] is controlling the planet"

The latest is annoying and buggy, I've lost count of how many times I had to completely reset my UI because it would just not go away.

The former is obnoxious when doing actives that require space awareness like space missions, swoop racing, certain operation fights, etc.

 

5. Let us also buy "Iokath recombinator" with tech fragments, it'd help smaller guilds with crafting dark projects to speed up opening the flagships but 260,000 credits is a LOT considering how much of a credits sink opening flagship rooms already is. Ideally, I'd like to see the options to buy them both ways, credit or tech fragments.

 

6. The respawn time for the enemies that drop the clinic key for the "The Face of the Merchants" heroic on Coruscant need to be considerably shortened.

 

(Edited to add point 6.)

Edited September 26, 2020 by CelynthePhoenix

[SmorgishBorg]

Reading through the Fourms, and watching the Livestream Thursday, I Didn't hear or see anyone addressing INVASION TARGETS.. x3 targets was great for 3.0 Could we get more TARGETS to INVADE for the system. More guilds earn 1st place, More get interested in the system. Its 6.X we should have 6 or More targets a week. The old setup was great as we learned about conquest, suffered through all the changes and learned a NEW conquest system, it's high time you gave some love to TARGETS PER WEEK. It really would bring more people into the fold. More would want to invest in this system that currently can only be taken by guilds willing to BOOT out anyone that doesn't participate in there conquest THAT WEEK. It may be great for the 3-4 Conquest ONLY guilds. But those that focus in PvE/PVP and partially conquest haven't got a chance of taking a planet... MORE INVASION TARGETS! = More Guilds Winning!! = More Players Enjoying the System!! - There is NO reason I can see why you WOULDN'T or COULDN'T make this implemented... there is one conquest that has 12 targets... One has 6... 3 I mean 3...... it was great for 3.0

[xordevoreaux]

Reading through the Fourms, and watching the Livestream Thursday, I Didn't hear or see anyone addressing INVASION TARGETS.. x3 targets was great for 3.0 Could we get more TARGETS to INVADE for the system. More guilds earn 1st place, More get interested in the system. Its 6.X we should have 6 or More targets a week. The old setup was great as we learned about conquest, suffered through all the changes and learned a NEW conquest system, it's high time you gave some love to TARGETS PER WEEK. It really would bring more people into the fold. More would want to invest in this system that currently can only be taken by guilds willing to BOOT out anyone that doesn't participate in there conquest THAT WEEK. It may be great for the 3-4 Conquest ONLY guilds. But those that focus in PvE/PVP and partially conquest haven't got a chance of taking a planet... MORE INVASION TARGETS! = More Guilds Winning!! = More Players Enjoying the System!! - There is NO reason I can see why you WOULDN'T or COULDN'T make this implemented... there is one conquest that has 12 targets... One has 6... 3 I mean 3...... it was great for 3.0

 

1. Consider paragraph breaks, they help with readability.

 

2. EA could have 300 targets a week and it wouldn't matter, there'd be a guild out there complaining three's not enough targets because they didn't get to take over a planet. Someone somewhere is going to lose out. That's how contested content works.

Edited September 26, 2020 by xordevoreaux

[Stradlin]

Reading through the Fourms, and watching the Livestream Thursday, I Didn't hear or see anyone addressing INVASION TARGETS.. x3 targets was great for 3.0 Could we get more TARGETS to INVADE for the system. More guilds earn 1st place, More get interested in the system. Its 6.X we should have 6 or More targets a week. The old setup was great as we learned about conquest, suffered through all the changes and learned a NEW conquest system, it's high time you gave some love to TARGETS PER WEEK. It really would bring more people into the fold. More would want to invest in this system that currently can only be taken by guilds willing to BOOT out anyone that doesn't participate in there conquest THAT WEEK. It may be great for the 3-4 Conquest ONLY guilds. But those that focus in PvE/PVP and partially conquest haven't got a chance of taking a planet... MORE INVASION TARGETS! = More Guilds Winning!! = More Players Enjoying the System!! - There is NO reason I can see why you WOULDN'T or COULDN'T make this implemented... there is one conquest that has 12 targets... One has 6... 3 I mean 3...... it was great for 3.0

 

When it comes to guild vs guild aspect of conq, this has been the most urgent thing to fix ever since the mega merges. Three planets wasn't many even back when we still had more than 3 servers in this game. Each server has so many huge guilds now. All of them crammied in 3 planets during most weeks seems bit brutal.

Edited September 26, 2020 by Stradlin

[xordevoreaux]

back when we still had more than 3 servers in this game.

Just curious which two of the five servers in this game you're discounting as being servers.

[Stradlin]

Just curious which two of the five servers in this game you're discounting as being servers.

 

I'm glad you managed to find at least - something - in my post to compain about, good work! Of course, you had to walk wayy past the point to arrive there but hey. You made it. And Complaint is a complaint.

 

But since we got here,

It is pretty valid to talk about English, German and French servers as three different cosmos: they have their own forums, own language sets and so on. We are on Forums that are about the English servers. Server forum section here excludes the other two. People within English speaking servers move all over the place with some ease. Lots of folks are in guilds on all of the 3 servers, for example. Veil between English server, French and German server is much larger. Majority of people prolly don't view French or German speaking guilds as valid options since they do not speak those languages well enough. Majority of English speaking guilds prolly don't view French or German speaking servers as potential homes since it is difficult to recruit there and all in-game support you get is in French//German by default.

 

Thus, when we speak of guilds' options available for conquest, it is pretty valid to talk about those three servers. If you are fluent in all of those 3 languages mentioned and present on all 5 servers SW:TOR has open, then good for you:) I recommend switching "3" to "5"in the part that troubled you. If you want to talk about this further, maybe some other forum and some other thread is better suited for it.

Edited September 26, 2020 by Stradlin

[DeannaVoyager]

Is this a mtf joke?

You are buffing braindead solo activities YET AGAIN

How about bringing something to multiplayer people? Like, the ones who actually pay for your game?

There are alot of suggestions in this thread alone.

If you'd care you'd read it.

But aye. Feeding a companion is niw worth 2 GSF matches or 3 heroic missions.

Guys, you are INSANE.

 

I'm playing solo acitivities for conquest, as I got tired of the toxic, braindead bads ruining flashpoints and even gf ops to some extent. At late evenings I raid with nice people I choose to play with, not with the toxic loud crowd who demands nerfs to solo activities imagining that it would force everyone to group up with them and be exposed to their verbal abuse. No thank you.

 

I am paying for this game too, like everyone else who has participated in this discussion. They need to be subs to post here. We are as much paying customers as you are. Besides it's only you and a handful of other haters who don't want solo players to enjoy the game THEY are paying for. What other players do in the game, and get their points from is not your business. If they aren't getting what they want from their favorite activities, they won't join yours either, they will just find another game.

 

So yeah, I'm glad the devs have listened to reason.