A good idea for SWTOR

[dariusantoniotz]

Hello everyone. The aim of this thread is to get the developer's attention on the issue of conquest yields. Most of the recent requests regarding conquest brought up some interesting proposals but, I have one that will solve everything. My proposal is to increase the number of available weekly yields from 3 to 6. I am making an appeal to the guild leaders and members that understand this problem. This increase will give more guilds the chance of getting planetary names and titles, especially now when the SWTOR population has increased and conquest competition is more serious. This change will encourage more guilds to grow, and encourage more players to work together to gain achievements that are attainable in this scenario. Changes like this will result in more guilds that stay active and more people playing more often.

[codydmaan]

Anything to encourage more competition and fun on the server im down for. And this would seem to me like it would help and at least add to the end game conquest. I support that.

[Turkinaterr]

I agree with your idea! As it is now, the larger yield planets are always blocked by one specific guild and no idea how they are always able to get first place and no one coming even close to their points. With more yields, other guilds would have the chance to improve and more people would be able to enjoy the game. I mean, isn't this game meant for everyone to participate and enjoy rather than feeding only a group?

[SyriMarius]

Why, to let a certain guild's opposite number on the opposite side cheat to be top dog in that one too? So they can cheat and monopolize large yield in two categories rather than just one? No, the only acceptable option is to remove the ability to exploit the system in the first place. I order to do that the one thing that must be removed is the one CQ earning thing that is exploited most, "Crafting: Infinite".

[dariusantoniotz]

Why, to let a certain guild's opposite number on the opposite side cheat to be top dog in that one too? So they can cheat and monopolize large yield in two categories rather than just one? No, the only acceptable option is to remove the ability to exploit the system in the first place. I order to do that the one thing that must be removed is the one CQ earning thing that is exploited most, "Crafting: Infinite".

 

Of course, at one points the developers need to understand that by keeping that crafting inventor infinite they are basicly not just protecting the macro programs, they are also encouraging them

[ceryxp]

At the risk of shamelessly plugging my own thread, allow me to shamelessly plug my own thread.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=989139

 

The problems are not the infinitely repeatable objectives, or the street sweeping guilds, or anyone else doing something amoral or unethical. The problem quite simply is that rewards are locked to the top spot on the leader boards and that incentivizes guilds to do what they can to hold that spot; whether that be through purely moral and ethical means, or amoral and unethical means.

 

As I propose in my thread, remove the rewards. Open up the achievements to all guilds and base it upon invasion completions. Change the Conquest Commander shield mechanic and open that up to all guilds that complete their invasion. If that happened the Commanders would be open to all guilds, not just those that find their way to the top of the leader board, and there would be actual competition to get to the Commander and defeat them before another guild comes along. Make the leader board positions purely about vanity and bragging rights and not about any in-game benefits.

 

If all that happened then it would not matter in the least that a guild made over 500 million points on a large yield because they would get nothing more than every other guild that hit the 5 million target on that yield. The only reason it would matter is if you care about having your guild name on a planet.

[dariusantoniotz]

At the risk of shamelessly plugging my own thread, allow me to shamelessly plug my own thread.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=989139

 

The problems are not the infinitely repeatable objectives, or the street sweeping guilds, or anyone else doing something amoral or unethical. The problem quite simply is that rewards are locked to the top spot on the leader boards and that incentivizes guilds to do what they can to hold that spot; whether that be through purely moral and ethical means, or amoral and unethical means.

 

 

Of course i am definitly agree 100% , we need more equality in this system , infortunetly bad constructed. You can see in SF for several years a guild take the large yield into the custody and nobody else have acces to those planets.

But in my opinion, it is need a re-examination and a balance in this. The thing is if the conquest is eliminated not just the guilds will not really have a big purpose to play together , the people will also become ineficient in detecting which guild is active. Beside that, conquest is the developers way to make some part of the games relevant again. I mean nobody will do heroics or world bosses and especially crafting because that will make no sense anymore . Maybe some people will do those for fun but without conquest those activities will die irelevant.

The only solution is more yields in order to give the other guilds a real chance to take something, at the point we are right now with a guild who locked for several past years large titles and planets cannot keep going. This is not a fun competition anymore is humiliation to the entire game, it's a shame nobody acted until now and i am glad to meet people like you who also stand up for justice.

[dariusantoniotz]

Well, this did not take long, here we go again with thread #15 by the same usual suspects. There are allegations of blocking planets? Are you referring to the “Alliance” that only lets the guilds allied with them to be able to win one of the planets? The same Alliance that brought us the spam ninja invites for which they have yet to explain but instead choose to try to redirect everything and imagine everyone has amnesia. There are a lot of allegations and opinions in this thread, people talk about justice, the same people creating a so-called alliance to control what guild gets a planet in more than one server, the same calling for justice are silent to the atrocities going on in Darth Malgus, are silent to the thousands of new players they used without a second thought as disposable trash. Where was the justice in that, where was the honor in that? I welcome any guild that stands up to the so-called alliance trying to take over the servers to control who gets what. The same alliance that did not give a second thought to running through thousands of new players, spam inviting and kicking, without any thought as to what was best for others. The alliance only wants what is best for them. The alliance is run by greed and is silent to the atrocities it has committed and to the foul play it has coordinated in Darth Malgus and Star Forge.

 

No i am talking about an idea of having 6 yields insteed of 3. What are you talking there?

[KaiserImperium]

We desperately need more yields. Here’s the thing.. I’m a GM of a guild that wins conquest weekly, I want to see more guilds get out there and take over more planets as well. Someone could always say “ahh well why don’t you guys just not invade then or push” well we’re a conquest guild. We’re not going to stop trying every week. Giving more guilds a chance to compete with more yields will ensure that these people don’t get discouraged, keep trying hard to be the best they can be, and kick some Republic behind!

 

The Darth Malgus server has been heavily monopolized and really it’s turning into the same thing here on Star Forge. Yeah my guild won’t be able to control as many planets at once with more yields every week, but who cares? It’s the process of doing it that’s fun. I think we really need to remove crafting as a repeatable objective though, it’s been used by several guilds to cheat with Macro Recorders. I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but the people on this thread saying that “crafting is the way they win conquests” are out of their minds. It’s only a major benefit if it’s used on a large scale with macro recorders.

 

My next plea is to not make it so people who join can’t contribute CP for 7 days. That really just cripples anyone who isn’t an already established conquest guild from gaining CP. “Hey LórdJimmy you just joined and wanna join rampage? Sorry bud! You can’t contribute and we need that slot open for a member who has been here longer than you”. Really, the system is fine as is. I completely agree that if you were to remove someone with CP, that it should be taken away from the leaderboards, but if they were to leave it stays. That is a good call 100%, it stops people from getting abused invited to a guild, working hard and getting booted by the second day.

 

I love this game and my guild loves conquesting, but I feel like we are to butcher Padme’s quote.. we are going down a road we shouldn’t be following. Please make the right adjustments to the system where needed and not the adjustments that are just going to hurt newer guilds because I don’t wanna see the player base fall off the game out of frustration over it. That hurts all of us when population goes down.

[DawnAskham]

For the titles and achievements, they could add more planets each week, heck put all of them up each week so guilds spread out more, and / or award the achievements / titles / access to commanders to anyone in a guild that reaches the weekly goal.

 

Regarding the post on the main page (closed and redirected here) asking if it is ok for one guild to win every week for years - my answer is both yes and no.

 

Yes, as far as it is ok for a guild to win every week if they are following the current rules and happen to be the most active and organized guild. Of course, the current system encourages this behavior as a) most weeks only have one large planet and b) large planets provide more rewards (e.g. credits, gear, frags, SRMs) for the same efforts.

 

No, as far as providing an engaging system that provides reasonable means for every player to gain the various titles and achievements associated with conquest, as well as access to commanders and rewards required to unlock guild ships.

 

Of course, there are two potential solutions for the above - one would be to increase the opportunities each week, the other would be to add a bunch of restrictions to keep the same guild from monopolizing the few opportunities.

 

I would prefer to see the former rather than the later - provide more opportunities each week by adding more planets each week and / or allowing more guilds to 'earn' the titles / achievements / commanders each week (e.g. top 5, leaderboard, complete the guild yield).

 

Lastly, no amount of 'remove x' or 'nerf x' requests will change the fact that the largest, most organized guild is going to win in a zero-sum game environment - so please stop with all the useless posts asking to remove specific aspects of conquest just because your guild cannot win in the current winner take all system.

Edited January 28, 2021 by DawnAskham

[ceryxp]

For the titles and achievements, they could add more planets each week, heck put all of them up each week so guilds spread out more, and / or award the achievements / titles / access to commanders to anyone in a guild that reaches the weekly goal.

 

Regarding the post on the main page (closed and redirected here) asking if it is ok for one guild to win every week for years - my answer is both yes and no.

 

Yes, as far as it is ok for a guild to win every week if they are following the current rules and happen to be the most active and organized guild. Of course, the current system encourages this behavior as a) most weeks only have one large planet and b) large planets provide more rewards (e.g. credits, gear, frags, SRMs) for the same efforts.

 

No, as far as providing an engaging system that provides reasonable means for every player to gain the various titles and achievements associated with conquest, as well as access to commanders and rewards required to unlock guild ships.

 

Of course, there are two potential solutions for the above - one would be to increase the opportunities each week, the other would be to add a bunch of restrictions to keep the same guild from monopolizing the few opportunities.

 

I would prefer to see the former rather than the later - provide more opportunities each week by adding more planets each week and / or allowing more guilds to 'earn' the titles / achievements / commanders each week (e.g. top 5, leaderboard, complete the guild yield).

 

Lastly, no amount of 'remove x' or 'nerf x' requests will change the fact that the largest, most organized guild is going to win in a zero-sum game environment - so please stop with all the useless posts asking to remove specific aspects of conquest just because your guild cannot win in the current winner take all system.

 

There is a third option. See my post in the Suggestion box.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=989139

[codydmaan]

I've been on the Starforge server for about 6 months now. I was in previous servers before but came back to the game about 6-7 month now. I was a previous beta tester GO BETA

 

Now what I've noticed and this had been confirmed by the community also. The whole time I've been back I've noticed a game mechanic problem.

 

I see the guild conquest is broken as is confirmed through the community and my 7 months being back there remains 1 guild that has never lost rank 1 on large yield planets for over 3 years. Never losing for 3 years doesn't seem to me like this system is constructed in a way that allows even compettition.

(While I do say large yield rank 1 in starforge server I do no call out any guild specifically by name and henceforth is not against forum rules thank you )

 

Here's a question for the community.

 

If a guild has placed first for 3+ years do you think thats fair?

 

Do you think having a guild rank 1 for over 3 years allows for friendly competition?

 

I think somehow the developers need to address this system so that competition between guilds is more well balanced than obviously 1 sided dont you think?

 

Thanks

[Roinin]

The truth of the matter is yes changes need to be made to the system. However if you have not been in this GUILD you speak of and amie everything at and took the time to see what they do and how dedicated the leadership is and how much goes into the creating of there daily schedule that they grind for those points every day and the sheer size of active accounts they have on almost all the time and not just jampacked with alts. If you have not done any of that then stop pointing fingers and stop whinning and go work hard all i see id a bunch of people crying and complaining about a guild winning it is not from cheating at all i am there and watch it myself.

[dariusantoniotz]

There is a third option. See my post in the Suggestion box.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=989139

 

I seen it and i love it, this is also a great way how to solve the problem

[LilyCrow]

I read this thread and I am seeing a lot of discussion about specific conquest goals and I agree that somethings are being exploited and need to be cleaned out.

 

I do have an observation that I have not seen addressed that goes along with the idea of adding more targets each week. As GM of a very small guild, the number one reason we aren't even trying to win planets on conquest is because of our size. Even if everyone followed the rules 100%, the simple fact that there guilds who are maxed out with their player slots competing in the small yield targets. There is no way my guild with 30 players and 100 slots, will never be able to bring the numbers that a huge guild can. This is why it is the same handful of guilds that will always win at conquest in all three categories week, after week, after week. There is just no way an actually small guild can compete in even the small yield conquest target. The current leader for the small Mek_Sha target (as of right this moment) is a guild that has 37 Million. + points. We are only halfway through the week. There is no way I'm even going to suggest to my guilies to try to complete with that number.

 

I really think adding more conquest targets would be a big help but I suggest that there might be some value in considering the size of the guild determine what they can select - i.e. keep the largest guilds out of the small yield targets or giving the small guilds some kind of boost to be able to at least have a somewhat level playing field.

[Exly]

To JackieKo,

 

I saw that you closed a thread about conquest guild ranking problems earlier today. By doing so, you made it seem to me that you are more concerned about protecting BioWare and those that use exploits to circumvent the games terms of service.

 

My question for you is, why are you providing cover for, and siding with those who have been reported for their exploits, and taking actions like deleting and closing threads against those questioning or reporting them?

[RikuvonDrake]

I really think adding more conquest targets would be a big help but I suggest that there might be some value in considering the size of the guild determine what they can select - i.e. keep the largest guilds out of the small yield targets or giving the small guilds some kind of boost to be able to at least have a somewhat level playing field.

 

blablabla

I see the guild conquest is broken as is confirmed through the community and my 7 months being back there remains 1 guild that has never lost rank 1 on large yield planets for over 3 years. Never losing for 3 years doesn't seem to me like this system is constructed in a way that allows even competition.

blablabla

 

All of these sounds like pretty terrible bandaid solutions, more targets would work at the start but after a while, we would return to square one where ~3-4 big conquest guilds were dominating instead of the current 2-3 and you would have people requesting 10+ planets in threads again. Personally, I don't mind more planets, but there should be a purpose and a specific number, not just a number made up willy-nilly. Capping membership sounds like a terrible idea, successful and well-organized conquest guilds will just cap their members at exactly the required amount and, again, we will be back to square one.

 

the reason why you see the same conquest guilds on win plants every time they invade is cause they combine an intention/willingness to do conquest amongst the members with a well-organized guild and leadership who organize/run events etc. These guilds are an advantage to Bioware otherwise they would have done something about it before, on the other hand, the sandcastle guilds which recently started appearing (and disappearing on a few servers) who spam invite and spam kick new/returning/lowbie players were identified as a problem by Bioware and we will be seeing the end of their approach in the next patch.

 

In the end, Bioware wants well-organized guilds to cause these provide activities for the player base without Bioware having to invest anything, they have a sea of volunteers to lead everything from training story mode raids to flashpoint farming, class training sessions, pvp events, warzone challenges, open-world content and achievement hunts, to name a few things. This increases the replayability of the game, encourages the social aspect and keeps player in the game and playing, small guilds do this as well of course but to a lesser extent.

 

levelling the playing field isn't a bad idea, but the approach you suggest is very poor and short-sighted, punishing larger guilds for being well organized and attracting members is a terrible mindset. now i don't have a great idea myself since i am not sure how bioware intended for conquest to function (it would be great if someone could speak about this) but in general suggesting similar to yours that disincentivizes players to play the game are pretty unrealistic

Edited January 28, 2021 by RikuvonDrake

[CeciliaW]

the reason why you see the same conquest guilds on win plants every time they invade is cause they combine an intention/willingness to do conquest amongst the members with a well-organized guild and leadership who organize/run events etc. These guilds are an advantage to Bioware otherwise they would have done something about it before, on the other hand, the sandcastle guilds which recently started appearing (and disappearing on a few servers) who spam invite and spam kick new/returning/lowbie players were identified as a problem by Bioware and we will be seeing the end of their approach in the next patch.

/QUOTE]

 

A couple of issues with this statement dude. Issue #1: The guild that has been taking the #1 slot in the large yield a certain server has been using macros for the infinite repeatable crafting objective. This has become an open secret in that server that plenty of people are pissed off about but the devs have not addressed - also an open secret that the guild leader is friends with some people in some high places in the game. So, this is not a well-organized guild with events that run actual content on the game - instead it is a guild that relies heavily on the crutch of bots to keep the #1 spot every. Single. Week. (Real Life Example that has happened: 60 players in a competing guild running OPs, GSF, Heroics, and WBs did not make as much conquest as 8 players on the guild in question...)

Issue #2: The spam invite/spam kick was resolved already (rather poorly I might add - it hurts new players more than helps them). Interestingly enough, the devs were investigating this right after it was brought to their attention, and yet they remain suspiciously silent about the reports on the bot exploits...regardless of the number of tickets already submitted reporting it.

However, I do agree with the OP about his suggestion. There's too many guilds all competing for the same thing, especially with the influx of the new/returning players from Steam. I will add, however, that it could also be modified so that if a guild currently has control of a planet, that they be unable to invade the same planet again the next time it comes up on the leaderboards. This will open up the game to more competition and allow more guilds the opportunity to win the achievement - without crippling the role of conquest in the game.

[dariusantoniotz]

We desperately need more yields. Here’s the thing.. I’m a GM of a guild that wins conquest weekly, I want to see more guilds get out there and take over more planets as well. Someone could always say “ahh well why don’t you guys just not invade then or push” well we’re a conquest guild. We’re not going to stop trying every week. Giving more guilds a chance to compete with more yields will ensure that these people don’t get discouraged, keep trying hard to be the best they can be, and kick some Republic behind!

 

The Darth Malgus server has been heavily monopolized and really it’s turning into the same thing here on Star Forge. Yeah my guild won’t be able to control as many planets at once with more yields every week, but who cares? It’s the process of doing it that’s fun. I think we really need to remove crafting as a repeatable objective though, it’s been used by several guilds to cheat with Macro Recorders. I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but the people on this thread saying that “crafting is the way they win conquests” are out of their minds. It’s only a major benefit if it’s used on a large scale with macro recorders.

 

My next plea is to not make it so people who join can’t contribute CP for 7 days. That really just cripples anyone who isn’t an already established conquest guild from gaining CP. “Hey LórdJimmy you just joined and wanna join rampage? Sorry bud! You can’t contribute and we need that slot open for a member who has been here longer than you”. Really, the system is fine as is. I completely agree that if you were to remove someone with CP, that it should be taken away from the leaderboards, but if they were to leave it stays. That is a good call 100%, it stops people from getting abused invited to a guild, working hard and getting booted by the second day.

 

I love this game and my guild loves conquesting, but I feel like we are to butcher Padme’s quote.. we are going down a road we shouldn’t be following. Please make the right adjustments to the system where needed and not the adjustments that are just going to hurt newer guilds because I don’t wanna see the player base fall off the game out of frustration over it. That hurts all of us when population goes down.

 

I could not say the thing better.

Agree 100% and yes on SF is the same thing infortunetly. Hope devs can fix it

[matthaxian]

I just wanted to say that after many years of trying I think they finally got things right with the conquest point and objective balance and I really enjoy the quality of life improvement and find myself dedicating a great deal more time to conquest now. So thank you devs, and I am uneasy about any large scale further changes.

 

I think getting rid of the repeatable craft any item objective is a good idea for so many reasons.

Replace it with a daily objective of craft 100 items or something.

You could even add a new objective to learn a new schematic.

There are plenty of other ways to make crafting a viable way to earn conquest without making it so easily exploitable.

 

Have a targeted crafting based conquest that runs every couple months like they used to with infinitely repeatable war supply and prefab objectives where crafters can flex their muscle.

 

If there is one thing I am disappointed in, its the lack of rewarding ops-based objectives.

Some of the most fun I had in conquest was in the old last boss lockout farm days.

I can't stomach joining a rampage group.

 

My proposal would be to add an infinitely repeatable "kill any op boss" objective that runs every week.

Could even make different obective for each difficulty:

5000/sm 7500/vm, 10,000mm (pre multipliers).

I guess people just wouldnt like the CQ objective pop-up during a boss kill.

Edited January 29, 2021 by matthaxian

[dariusantoniotz]

When Bayern Munich wins the german Bundesliga for 8 years in a row, do you change the system of the Bundesliga?

 

If one guild, despite all changes they made to the system, wins every week, every month, every year,... why do you fail to see, that they put the extra work in, that others don't?

 

What has a competition to do with the word "fair"? Why are other obliged to win? Why is it their turn to win? They fail to compete. They don't deserve to win. They should step up their game and do what is necessary. But they don't.

 

You monitor every competitor, to make sure they don't use doping, and that's it.

 

There are no changes made in the system in order to prevent cheats happen.

No changes yet,

Yet.

[matthaxian]

I would make a change where you earn the conqueror title not by finishing #1 on the leaderboard, but by the guild hitting a targeted # of CQ points. It would have to be significant, like 50 million or more in the current meta.

Could be different targets for different size yields.

 

It would still make you earn your title, but the leaderboard would be just for bragging rights.

 

I had a few characters in the guild that dominates star forge, for 3-4 years. One by one they were kicked as the requirements to stay in good standing got stricter and stricter, until the last one was kicked after about 10 days of not logging in.

 

A big problem with the guild balance is the non-stop kicking and recruiting that goes on.

A lot of this is because many many people want one or two toons parked in the megaguild so they can get their titles.

If you can get your titles in a guild with your friends by all coming together, it will kill the megaguilds ability to non-stop recruit. People will actually play with people they want to play with, not beg to join some monolith.

[DrakoOnasi]

To the OP they have lost quite a few times Before the Large Medium and Small yield conquest was implemented The reason that guild has not lost much recently is because it requires x number Conquest points for each and every Character in the guild. If you do not get those points the Character gets booted to one of their lower guilds. That guild also has Full membership both Republic and Imperial sides. They also run Events such as World Bosses, Operations Rampages Enemy commanders, multiple times a day everyday of the week. that doesn't include Flashpoints, Uprisings, PVP or GSF. You would swear the people running the guild do it as a second job, there is a lot of work put into it. So when a guild has Full Membership and runs 10 to 12 group events everyday multiple times a day and has people working hard you don't lose.

The new changes by limiting new players and characters that join a guild, have to wait to contribute to conquest will hurt them and help them. It means them changing people out will hurt numbers but it will also hurt guilds that build an alliance with other guilds by joining each other to gain more conquest.

The only way to fix it is to limit the number of consecutive times a guild can win each size conquest.

So to recap it is a lot of work, and there is not much that can be done to stop people from working hard.

[ceryxp]

When Bayern Munich wins the german Bundesliga for 8 years in a row, do you change the system of the Bundesliga?

 

If one guild, despite all changes they made to the system, wins every week, every month, every year,... why do you fail to see, that they put the extra work in, that others don't?

 

What has a competition to do with the word "fair"? Why are other obliged to win? Why is it their turn to win? They fail to compete. They don't deserve to win. They should step up their game and do what is necessary. But they don't.

 

You monitor every competitor, to make sure they don't use doping, and that's it.

 

Poor comparison. Would you expect a team of adolescents to be able to compete against a professional team? No, of course not. There are professional leagues, there are amateur leagues, and there are youth leagues. So why do you think it is appropriate for small guilds to compete against the mega-guilds for the same achievements and opportunities (the ability to take down the Conquest Commander's shield)?

 

As is it currently, whether anyone is doing anything immoral or unethical, there is only one league in which everyone competes, whether they are on the same level or not. That is the problem. Even with the upcoming changes, even if BW changed the crafting objectives, there would still be guilds that dominate the leader boards and eventually it would filter down to just a handful of guild that are always in the top spots on the leader boards effectively locking out all other guilds. Which is what we have now.

 

Having three yield sizes is not the same as having different leagues. Not unless you are okay with BW restricting guilds of certain sizes from invading the small or medium yields. And having more invasion targets is not the answer because that will merely spread out the guilds that already dominate the leader boards. The only answer is to change the rewards, to decouple the achievements and the Conquest Commander's shield from the top spot on the leader boards, and open those up to all guilds that complete their invasion target.

[TrixxieTriss]

With all the whining and spam posting about crafting and the finger pointing by certain people every week for the past month or so, it has put a lot of legitimate players and crafters against any changes being made to conquest. And I will put my hand up and say those people have rubbed me the wrong way too. Which is why I’ve been against talking about any changes.

 

If we can skip all the “remove crafting or change crafting” discussion rubbish and agree that it should be left alone. I’m sure we can have a more mature and constructive conversation on how some very small changes could be made to open up conquest planet conquering to more than a handful of guilds per server.

 

My 2 cents worth would be to make it so every week is like galactic conquest where you have 3 planets per yield. At the same time you decouple planets from specific yields so they are random or RNG each week. That way the mega guilds don’t feel like they need to invade small yield planets. You can then look at capping or putting some restrictions on the mega guilds invading small-medium yield planets. You could then have the top 3 per week per planet that would get the title.

 

Essentially, 28 guilds could then get a planetary conquest title per week.

3 planets per yield = 9

Top 3 per Planet x 9 = 28 titles per week.

 

And if top 3 turned out to not be enough, you could make it top 5 or top 10.

 

One thing I’ve always wanted and has been asked for by other players over the years, is for the scoreboard to be bigger. A change to the conquest scoreboard UI to include more guilds would be great. Maybe add a scroll function or a page flipper so that every guild can find themselves on the scoreboard and see how they are placed.

Edited January 29, 2021 by TrixxieTriss