7.0 Conquest Changes

[Lakemine]

So, TL;DR here is that you want to make sure the gear grind is a lot slower, and that Conquest as a whole is a lot slower, with worse rewards, to hell with anybody that actually had fun with the current system. Cool.

 

I'm not even gonna give you in depth thoughts here. There's no point. It's like I said in a post yesterday. We'll get more blog posts, more write ups like this, but you're not looking for feedback or player opinions here or you'd have asked for it months ago.

 

I wish I was wrong here, but Bioware's overall silence over the last week to the major issues players are having with 7.0 speaks volumes. The 10 year anniversary was supposed to be exciting, but the way you've packed the final month of it with crap like this has sucked all excitement I had right out. Adding that to your utter refusal to respond to player feedback and it's just been frustration. Even if the story in 7.0 ends up being amazing, it will always be marred for me by how you've handled the build up to it. The utter disdain you've shown towards the players actively trying to give you feedback and make the game better is embarrassing.

 

I'm sorry if this all sounds harsh, but I've tried to be nice throughout this PTS cycle and that's gotten us almost nowhere. You're not going to respond to feedback either way, so I'll tell you how it is so if you actually read this, you'll at least understand the impression you're giving your players for your big 10 year anniversary update. Spoiler: it's not good.

 

 

 

Having gone for the Conquest goal on the PTS for the purposes of testing some of the gearing changes out, I can tell you for certain that it's a very noticeable thing. We won't know how the restrictive weeklies will impact things until we see how restrictive they are, but the loss of Renown rank ups and their points will slow everybody down in addition to the doubled goal.

 

You know whats sad? They are saving the reveal of the Digital Collector's Edition for later, too drive hype and "positivity!" to cover over all of this negative feedback so it gets lost and buried. (At least that's what I would do if I didn't care about actually answering questions and trying to paint "positivity" in the news cycle around when this 7.0 launches.)

[Lakemine]

Removing the extra xp and credits from conquest goals is fine. I like that change. Levelling is way to fast as it is and hitting those conquest goals (without trying) makes it even harder to stay on-planet level for those players who don't like outlevelling story content.

 

I'm not sure why you had to double the number of points for personal goals as well as removing the xp/credit rewards though. Just removing the credit rewards would be enough to help with inflation, and still allow smaller/new guilds to play catch-up to the older guilds. Flag encryptions don't add credits to the game.

 

Although it does slow down gearing considerably for solo players who have multiple alts. Which is probably the goal, especially combined with forcing resets on weeklies.

 

Just use the White Acute Matrix on fleet, it slows your XP gain. It was added for people who don't want to level faster. I find more people DO want to level faster, then not. Hence why options and choices are a good thing. Removing options only makes people upset and mad, and then leave.

[DWho]

How does this bring conquest to a screeching halt? so it takes you an additional 15 minutes to get the extra 50k per alts. Big deal. It's not like they are reducing conquest points for all of the activities. So people won't necessarily get 30-40 characters through conquest each week. Now they'll get 15-20 with the same amount of work. It's not really a big deal everyone. Doing 15-20 conquest a week is still very alt friendly.

 

Doubling the points needed for personal conquest is the same as reducing the points for all conquest objectives by 50% which straight up doubles the time required (not even considering the objectives that are going to go away like Reknown levels, carryover of dailies and weeklies, etc). If you are really against 30-40 characters per week (I only manage 6-8 and that takes up most of my play time since I don't min-max objectives or play GSF that rewards way out of proportion to the time spent and skill level required), increasing the points need as you complete more and more toons would have been much fairer to small guilds and more casual players. These changes will encourage abusive play like objective theft (to minimize the time they spend acquiring CXP) and doing minimal damage to a mob then phasing out to get credit for the kills while contributing really nothing.

 

That doesn't even take into account the massive reduction in conquest rewards, which is way out of proportion of the "problem" they cause. Conquest isn't just about getting a toon to it's goal, it's about the reward for time spent and the reward for time spent is nerfed into the ground with these changes.

[xordevoreaux]

Interesting. So if I don't get credits, and I don't get experience, my guild ship is fully unlocked, remind me again what my motivation is for doing Conquest under 7.0? Just the "social pressures" to do so?

 

Just the gear grind? JUST the gear grind?

[DWho]

Interesting. So if I don't get credits, and I don't get experience, my guild ship is fully unlocked, remind me again what my motivation is for doing Conquest under 7.0? Just the "social pressures" to do so?

 

Just the gear grind? JUST the gear grind?

 

I think they meant the guild pressure. You know, generate 500,000 CXP a week or get booted from the guild. I'd call that blackmail or extortion rather than "social pressure" though.

[xordevoreaux]

I just deleted some alts that in the long-run are now essentially worthless. That's fine. Less toons to drag through the gearing track of Tartarus.

 

I torched 16 characters yesterday that were dedicated commander run toons, positioned on pvp instances of planets.

[The-Kaitou-Kid]

I think they meant the guild pressure. You know, generate 500,000 CXP a week or get booted from the guild. I'd call that blackmail or extortion rather than "social pressure" though.

 

I mean, that's not gonna go away just because they doubled the Conquest goal, it's just gonna make those guilds more hawkish about it. If they were already taking the stance of "x CXP or get booted from the guild", they have no reason to stray from that now, players just get even less for doing so.

[xordevoreaux]

I think they meant the guild pressure. You know, generate 500,000 CXP a week or get booted from the guild. I'd call that blackmail or extortion rather than "social pressure" though.

 

I'm the GL of my guild, and if anyone of my guildies are reading this, YOU ARE IN NO DANGER of being booted from either Empire's Destiny or There Is Only Peace because you choose to log on and play the game your way, when you want to, how you want to, even if that means zero conquest points sitting there playing space barbies in your stronghold. Knock yourself out.

[DWho]

I mean, that's not gonna go away just because they doubled the Conquest goal, it's just gonna make those guilds more hawkish about it. If they were already taking the stance of "x CXP or get booted from the guild", they have no reason to stray from that now, players just get even less for doing so.

 

Exactly. I think that is one of the negative aspects of conquest.

[DWho]

I'm the GL of my guild, and if anyone of my guildies are reading this, YOU ARE IN NO DANGER of being booted from either Empire's Destiny or There Is Only Peace because you choose to log on and play the game your way, when you want to, how you want to, even if that means zero conquest points sitting there playing space barbies in your stronghold. Knock yourself out.

 

That is my position as well. I was not suggesting that you would do anything like that, just pointing out that the only "social pressure" is in the Conquest focused guilds and it is generally a negative aspect.

[Darcmoon]

They are not outright restricting the weeklies. All weeklies will still be available to complete at any point, they are just making some of them give better rewards (ostensibly upgrade-based, although we don't have full details on this - likely only these missions will drop the Aquatic Resource Matrices) each week.

 

From the post of "Changes and New Features in 7.0": "You can still access Missions that aren’t a part of the rotation if you choose, they will just have reduced rewards". If you want to go run Oricon even if Ziost and Yavin are the highlighted weeklies, you can, and still get CQP for doing so.

 

If they still have those weeklies available and I can get conquest point like currently, it won’t be too bad. My issue is that with how they worded the ‘press release’ on the changes it gave me the distinct impression that if that area wasn’t one of the ‘focus’ areas that the weeklies wouldn’t be available. I took the reduced rewards as just doing the dailies and getting those rewards.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Darcmoon

[LordCamTheGreat]

So to my understanding, not only will it take potentially more than twice as long to complete conquest (due to the higher point objectives taking more time), but the only thing we will get from conquest is a guild ship component and a piece of gear? I'll probably stop caring about conquest altogether on my alts.

[Darkbloom]

Yeah see, I get it. But Bioware has to deal with reality.

 

There are only three options when it comes to the current hyperinflation.

 

Option 1: Just let hyperinflation happen.

 

Option 2: Reduce credit rewards for in-game activities.

 

Option 3: introduce credit sinks that remove credits.

 

No other option besides 2 and 3 will remove enough credits from the system to have any noticeable effect on hyperinflation.

 

If they follow option 1 they will lose some players because people will be frustrated that they can't buy anything cool with their credits. Sure they're making a lot of them, but the credits aren't worth anything.

 

If they follow option 2, which they are, they will lose some players who are used to getting more rewards.

 

If they follow option 3, they will lose some players because the only way for option 3 to work is for those credit sinks to be so large and so attractive that they pull literally billions of credits out of the system.

 

I don't know that there's a good option here. I would probably focus on option 3, but that's just a guess.

 

(A side point: Inflation in an MMO is good. It means people are playing the game. But hyperinflation is not good, because it gets to the point where people start to feel that credits are worthless.)

[Toraak]

Doubling the points needed for personal conquest is the same as reducing the points for all conquest objectives by 50% which straight up doubles the time required (not even considering the objectives that are going to go away like Reknown levels, carryover of dailies and weeklies, etc). If you are really against 30-40 characters per week (I only manage 6-8 and that takes up most of my play time since I don't min-max objectives or play GSF that rewards way out of proportion to the time spent and skill level required), increasing the points need as you complete more and more toons would have been much fairer to small guilds and more casual players. These changes will encourage abusive play like objective theft (to minimize the time they spend acquiring CXP) and doing minimal damage to a mob then phasing out to get credit for the kills while contributing really nothing.

 

That doesn't even take into account the massive reduction in conquest rewards, which is way out of proportion of the "problem" they cause. Conquest isn't just about getting a toon to it's goal, it's about the reward for time spent and the reward for time spent is nerfed into the ground with these changes.

 

this still allows people to easily get conquest on alts. Getting 10-20 toons done a week is still very alt friendly. Compare it to before the conquest overhaul when people were complaining they had issues getting 4-5 characters done per week.

[Gwena]

I don't mean to seem negative here, but my takeaway points from this post are that Conquest is going to take more time and give less rewards. After reading how they made it take longer, I was expecting a "but look how we made it better!" bit, but . . . nope.

 

Alts were already getting to be less pleasant to have with the Story Slog being so long (due in no small part to having no way to skip KotFE/ET on some characters without having the default choices go against their alignment), then we hear about the new gearing system, and now it looks like it will be more of a pain to do Conquest on them too. Unlike some folks, I'm not about to go on an alt deletion spree, but this expansion is shaping up to be one that most of them get retired for.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Gwena
typo

[codydmaan]

I have a few reservations about this update and i really hope you read this and not scan over it. I think we all want this update to be as smooth as possible.

QUOTE

1. "Personal Conquest will be increased from the previous 50,000 points to 100,000 points for “Legacy of the Sith”.

'We want to ensure that Conquest remains a viable and enjoyable loop for all types of players, while also ensuring that it is promoting a healthy relationship for players and the connecting systems.'

 

Most of the guilds have their own chat platform. Most are on Discord. Being so, raising the minimum only increases the pressure on players to hit 100k on all of their toons. and Believe me a lot of players have a lot of toons. Heres the thing, some guilds have "REQUIREMENTS" that are not set by the game itself, some of the larger guilds that have been in the top spot for many years now will kick you from the guild for not joining them in certain activities, so technically this will only increase the pressure on players to do more for their guilds.

QUOTE

2."Starting with 7.0, Conquest Objectives will no longer reward experience or credits for completing them. We are making this change to help reduce the number of credits being generated in the game, as well as removing the experience loop Conquest has had in the past."

 

So this is fine to a point. Not rewarding credits takes more credits out of the game which is good to help with economy. More of these systems should be taken out, like a certain run of heroic missions will reward you with 15m credits by the end of it, so technically heroic missions give more credits for completing. Taking experience points out of conquest though may hurt newer players. Please make sure the newer players are also cared for, with the game so inflated at the moment its going to be increasingly difficult for newer players to get items in the game.

 

QUOTE

3. "As an example of this, one of the more completed Objectives, “Missions: Story Time”, has generated nearly 64 billion credits into the economy alone."

I'm sorry but if you think 64 billion is a lot id really suggest you take a closer look at players legacy banks. This is a "small fry" in the bowl people dip into. I mean its a good start but there is more players already at credit cap then you think there are. Take additional missions out so it reduces the amount of credits by the "trillions" that's what we need. perhaps you can take a closer look at that.

 

The removal of the amplifiers is a removal of one of the "Credit Sinks" in the game. When you remove a credit sink another MUST take its place. I suggest you take into consideration the TOTAL AMOUNT of credits generated in 1 day, then compare that with the TOTAL AMOUNT of credits "SUNK" in one day. That is where your problem lies in the economy. You have 1 credit sink in the taxes on the GTN but that alone is not enough. You need to develop a whole different system that balances the amount of credits generated by the amount sunk. Those have to be nearly equal to achieve some sort of balance. I'm sure you have a system in place to see these numbers and I hope you develop a system that can achieve some sort of equilibrium.

 

I do thank you that you are aware of the "Inflation Issue" and I do thank you that your putting in measures to combat

he issue to make the game environment more pleasurable. Also i think we all are looking forward to 7.0 Keep up the hard work!

[streunekatze]

I think those changes are a good idea. I remember all the times we were in an operation and someone asked us to stop so they could change their char. Or just doing one weekly with a char and conquest goal was reached.

and 100k isn't that much more. I think it will be nice to be online with the same char for a little bit longer.

 

When I first started the game I got a lot more connected to my chars, after a while and a lot of alts that just changed. They were simply there for me to reach the 50k and that's it.

[Baletraeger]

We want to ensure that Conquest remains a viable and enjoyable loop for all types of players, while also ensuring that it is promoting a healthy relationship for players and the connecting systems.

 

The changes to daily/weekly quest design is going to create the same unhealthy relationship that conquest has today. I would say it is in fact making it worse since the mission goals are not only for currency and experience, but also for gear.

 

[*]How many characters a player decides to run through the Conquest cycle

 

Why do you think that you should control how many characters a players wants to run through any game loop cycle? Especially for solo and story players who tend to have more alts? This is removing player agency and is bad game design

 

What we have seen throughout 6.0 was that the rate of Conquest completion was not contributing to these facets in a healthy manner. It was increasing the rate of acquisition for what should be long term goals for players, promoting a playstyle of interruptive play as players hit their Conquest target and then swap out their characters, creating social pressures to participate in Conquest as often as possible, and adding to the on-going economic changes we have seen in the game over the past year.

 

This is laughable and antithetical. You are literally bringing in a new daily/weekly mission board system that is going to actively promote the behavior that you are now trying to stem for Conquest. Players are going to be encouraged to log into multiple characters to complete mission board only as the most efficient gearing path, at the exclusion of any other ingame activity. In the same way they find the most efficient path to Tech Frags and Conquest Points today. Instead of taking a nuanced approach to creating fun game systems with intrinsic rewards, you seek to control the overambundance of extrinsic rewards you crowd into a content starved game.

[DurdensWrath]

So "Play Your Way" is a total lie.

 

Screw me for having alts, right?

 

Screw YOU, for not putting better sinks in the game.

 

It is obvious you don't play your own game, nor have any clue how to keep the piddling amount of people that still play happy.

 

Why do you think that you should control how many characters a players wants to run through any game loop cycle? Especially for solo and story players who tend to have more alts? This is removing player agency and is bad game design

 

This is typical BioWare dev arrogance, where they feel THEIR way is the best way, and damn feedback, common sense or listening to the players. All the time they made dumb decisions based on "this isn't how we intended" instead of doing like the Hitman devs did and rolling with the Homing Briefcase meme

Edited November 5, 2021 by DurdensWrath

[Falensawino]

Update to the Personal Conquest Goal

As some of you may have noted from our most recent PTS, the goal for Personal Conquest will be increased from the previous 50,000 points to 100,000 points for “Legacy of the Sith”.

 

There are numerous facets to Conquest we have been reviewing:

• The economic impacts the system has had over the 6.0 era
  
• The engagement impacts of the system and how that has affected not just the individual player but how it has affected the greater community as a whole
  
• How Conquest is going to be tied into the 7.0 systems and gameplay loops

We want to ensure that Conquest remains a viable and enjoyable loop for all types of players, while also ensuring that it is promoting a healthy relationship for players and the connecting systems.

 

We believe the starting point of all of this is in the rate of which Conquest can be completed. This rate has an immediate and direct effect on every facet mentioned above.

• It contributes to how many additional credits are being generated per week across the game
  
• How many Guild Flagship Encryptions can be obtained and thus how rapidly a Guild can progress their Flagship
  
• How many characters a player decides to run through the Conquest cycle
  
• Which Conquest Objectives players favor in order to maximize their goals

 

We hope this helps shine some light on the intent of the 7.0 Conquest changes!

The removal of the experience reward is being done to help contribute toward the health of the leveling process, while also removing a self-generating loop in Conquest where completing Conquest Objectives would grant experience to level a player up. This would complete the ‘Advancement: Gain a Level’, ‘Advancement: Gain 5 Levels’, or ‘Renown: Rank Up’, thus gaining a player more experience. This loop in combination of the impact on the leveling experience are the reasons we are removing experience rewards from Conquest Objectives.

 

We want to maintain that the activity you are doing is the focal point and should provide the Credits and experience reward; not the Conquest Objective itself.

so you reviewed conquest's effect on the economy and somehow decided Experience had to be gutted from conquest objectives

 

leveling new alts just got a lot slower

Edited November 5, 2021 by Falensawino

[casirabit]

So what you are saying, the only guilds that should get encryptions and unlock their guild ships are large guilds. If you have a small guild we don't care that you don't get to unlock the ship. The only guilds we care about is the large ones.

 

You guys seem to want to push people into the operations well not this person. Since you don't like me running my alts in things I like to do and getting conquest points for my guild so we can unlock our rooms then so be it but that means if (and a large if) I stay I will be playing less not more.

 

The behavior you devs are showing is the reason I left wow and I will not deal with this behavior in another game.

 

To the players: Take care everyone and Happy Holidays. Not sure I will even wait for the expansion to be release to check it out. Good luck. Been fun.

Edited November 5, 2021 by casirabit

[NeoBlakkrstal]

Hi all,

 

Following up from Musco’s post last week, I wanted to swing around and chat about some of the 7.0 changes we are making to Conquest. We want to provide you all a heads up on these coming changes, and also go into some of the thoughts and reasoning behind them.

 

Update to the Personal Conquest Goal

As some of you may have noted from our most recent PTS, the goal for Personal Conquest will be increased from the previous 50,000 points to 100,000 points for “Legacy of the Sith”.

 

There are numerous facets to Conquest we have been reviewing:

• The economic impacts the system has had over the 6.0 era
  
• The engagement impacts of the system and how that has affected not just the individual player but how it has affected the greater community as a whole
  
• How Conquest is going to be tied into the 7.0 systems and gameplay loops

 

We want to ensure that Conquest remains a viable and enjoyable loop for all types of players, while also ensuring that it is promoting a healthy relationship for players and the connecting systems.

 

We believe the starting point of all of this is in the rate of which Conquest can be completed. This rate has an immediate and direct effect on every facet mentioned above.

• It contributes to how many additional credits are being generated per week across the game
  
• How many Guild Flagship Encryptions can be obtained and thus how rapidly a Guild can progress their Flagship
  
• How many characters a player decides to run through the Conquest cycle
  
• Which Conquest Objectives players favor in order to maximize their goals

 

All of these are a direct result of the rate in which Conquest can be completed. What we have seen throughout 6.0 was that the rate of Conquest completion was not contributing to these facets in a healthy manner. It was increasing the rate of acquisition for what should be long term goals for players, promoting a playstyle of interruptive play as players hit their Conquest target and then swap out their characters, creating social pressures to participate in Conquest as often as possible, and adding to the on-going economic changes we have seen in the game over the past year.

 

We reviewed various goal amounts, both with their impact on the systems currently and soon to be associated with Conquest, but also with the player experience in mind. After this review, we found that 100,000 was the best bridge between the goals of maintaining the health of these systems while minimizing the impact for all players. We want to maintain that Conquest is an enjoyable system which rewards you for doing virtually anything the game has to offer, while also proactively working to ensure we can provide a healthy and responsible symbiotic relation to the economy, and additional systems and progression tied around it. We want to ensure that Conquest is still a system where players feel that they can run it with multiple characters each week, but that it is not the only way to enjoy Conquest.

 

Update to Objective Rewards

Starting with 7.0, Conquest Objectives will no longer reward experience or credits for completing them. We are making this change to help reduce the number of credits being generated in the game, as well as removing the experience loop Conquest has had in the past.

 

While Conquest is not solely responsible for some of the economic shifts we have seen in the game, it is definitely a strong contributor. The credit amount for individual Objectives was never considered high; however, over time those values begin to add up to a non-zero impact sum.

 

As an example of this, one of the more completed Objectives, “Missions: Story Time”, has generated nearly 64 billion credits into the economy alone. This is not taking into consideration the Credits players earned for completing the Story Mission itself (which could exponentially expand this value). As you can see, the combination of the Objective Credit reward with the Mission Credit reward is generating more credits into the game than necessary.

 

The removal of the experience reward is being done to help contribute toward the health of the leveling process, while also removing a self-generating loop in Conquest where completing Conquest Objectives would grant experience to level a player up. This would complete the ‘Advancement: Gain a Level’, ‘Advancement: Gain 5 Levels’, or ‘Renown: Rank Up’, thus gaining a player more experience. This loop in combination of the impact on the leveling experience are the reasons we are removing experience rewards from Conquest Objectives.

 

We want to maintain that the activity you are doing is the focal point and should provide the Credits and experience reward; not the Conquest Objective itself.

 

We hope this helps shine some light on the intent of the 7.0 Conquest changes!

Once again EAware proves itself to be anti-alt, anti-player, and deaf as a post. Well done guys, I have already stopped my reoccurring subscription, guess it's time to find a new game to play as you have literally killed how I play the game. As an Altaholic, all I can say is thanks a bunch. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time here, but it seems that it may be time to move on.

[NeoBlakkrstal]

Every time I read an update to what is coming with 7.0 it decreases my desire to play this game. It has already effected the amount of time I have played this week, I just can't get motivated to log in. And even when I do get motivated, I discover yet another Dev Tracker post telling me that they are killing how I play, and enjoy, this game that I have loved so much. It is truly becoming depressing to even open Discord. I am extremely discouraged by the direction the game is taking. I just don't know if I will continue playing once 7.0 drops.

[TrixxieTriss]

Hi all,

 

Following up from Musco’s post last week, I wanted to swing around and chat about some of the 7.0 changes we are making to Conquest. We want to provide you all a heads up on these coming changes, and also go into some of the thoughts and reasoning behind them.

 

Update to the Personal Conquest Goal

As some of you may have noted from our most recent PTS, the goal for Personal Conquest will be increased from the previous 50,000 points to 100,000 points for “Legacy of the Sith”.

 

There are numerous facets to Conquest we have been reviewing:

• The economic impacts the system has had over the 6.0 era
  
• The engagement impacts of the system and how that has affected not just the individual player but how it has affected the greater community as a whole
  
• How Conquest is going to be tied into the 7.0 systems and gameplay loops

 

We want to ensure that Conquest remains a viable and enjoyable loop for all types of players, while also ensuring that it is promoting a healthy relationship for players and the connecting systems.

 

We believe the starting point of all of this is in the rate of which Conquest can be completed. This rate has an immediate and direct effect on every facet mentioned above.

• It contributes to how many additional credits are being generated per week across the game
  
• How many Guild Flagship Encryptions can be obtained and thus how rapidly a Guild can progress their Flagship
  
• How many characters a player decides to run through the Conquest cycle
  
• Which Conquest Objectives players favor in order to maximize their goals

 

All of these are a direct result of the rate in which Conquest can be completed. What we have seen throughout 6.0 was that the rate of Conquest completion was not contributing to these facets in a healthy manner. It was increasing the rate of acquisition for what should be long term goals for players, promoting a playstyle of interruptive play as players hit their Conquest target and then swap out their characters, creating social pressures to participate in Conquest as often as possible, and adding to the on-going economic changes we have seen in the game over the past year.

 

We reviewed various goal amounts, both with their impact on the systems currently and soon to be associated with Conquest, but also with the player experience in mind. After this review, we found that 100,000 was the best bridge between the goals of maintaining the health of these systems while minimizing the impact for all players. We want to maintain that Conquest is an enjoyable system which rewards you for doing virtually anything the game has to offer, while also proactively working to ensure we can provide a healthy and responsible symbiotic relation to the economy, and additional systems and progression tied around it. We want to ensure that Conquest is still a system where players feel that they can run it with multiple characters each week, but that it is not the only way to enjoy Conquest.

 

Update to Objective Rewards

Starting with 7.0, Conquest Objectives will no longer reward experience or credits for completing them. We are making this change to help reduce the number of credits being generated in the game, as well as removing the experience loop Conquest has had in the past.

 

While Conquest is not solely responsible for some of the economic shifts we have seen in the game, it is definitely a strong contributor. The credit amount for individual Objectives was never considered high; however, over time those values begin to add up to a non-zero impact sum.

 

As an example of this, one of the more completed Objectives, “Missions: Story Time”, has generated nearly 64 billion credits into the economy alone. This is not taking into consideration the Credits players earned for completing the Story Mission itself (which could exponentially expand this value). As you can see, the combination of the Objective Credit reward with the Mission Credit reward is generating more credits into the game than necessary.

 

The removal of the experience reward is being done to help contribute toward the health of the leveling process, while also removing a self-generating loop in Conquest where completing Conquest Objectives would grant experience to level a player up. This would complete the ‘Advancement: Gain a Level’, ‘Advancement: Gain 5 Levels’, or ‘Renown: Rank Up’, thus gaining a player more experience. This loop in combination of the impact on the leveling experience are the reasons we are removing experience rewards from Conquest Objectives.

 

We want to maintain that the activity you are doing is the focal point and should provide the Credits and experience reward; not the Conquest Objective itself.

 

We hope this helps shine some light on the intent of the 7.0 Conquest changes!

 

The only thing I agree with is the credit situation. But you still didn’t need to remove all of them because new players will suffer. You don’t need to remove XP and you don’t need to double the goals. This will ruin conquest for us.

 

I’m sorry David, but it seems each time you guys post something about 7.0 it makes us want to play it less and less. This post about Conquest being Nerfed into the ground is the last straw for us.

We (My family) won’t be subscribing to the game once 7.0 is released and you can see from our logins to the game that ever since 7.0 was announced, we’ve played about 90% less than we usually play.

 

There is only two things we looked forward to with 7.0 and you’ve ruined those with every subsequent announcement of how you are going to wreak the things in this game we love.

So this is adios from my family. We loved swtor, but you’ve killed it for us.

 

edit: Dear BioWare, my family and I have now made the decision to unsubscribe as of today. I’ve just filled in your exit questionnaire with a list of reasons. Hopefully you’re still reading them and paying attention to how many people are going to quit. I think you’ll have quite a lot more to read if you don’t make a course correction to your proposed changes for 7.0.

Edited November 6, 2021 by TrixxieTriss

[TrixxieTriss]

Every time I read an update to what is coming with 7.0 it decreases my desire to play this game. It has already effected the amount of time I have played this week, I just can't get motivated to log in. And even when I do get motivated, I discover yet another Dev Tracker post telling me that they are killing how I play, and enjoy, this game that I have loved so much. It is truly becoming depressing to even open Discord. I am extremely discouraged by the direction the game is taking. I just don't know if I will continue playing once 7.0 drops.

 

That’s exactly how my family feels. So we’ve made the decision this morning that we won’t be subscribing for 7.0. We are discussing right now on when to actually unsubscribe because none us actually feel like playing at the moment.