Conquest pts for Advance Reputation nerfed

[khamseen_air]

Every update this game just gets worse. I feel like we're wasting our breath and money on them. 

[Thraka]

7 minutes ago, frutepy said:

The thing is, there's an easy fix that gives both groups what they want: put the reputation back to 43k, but make it 3 rep tokens instead of 1. That makes it take more effort the way the devs want instead of just doing the easiest space mission or 1 daily, and it still gives people the big whammy without having to spend hours. 

That being said, people are right that the whole conquest system needs an upgrade.

 

Not a fix. Lots of people are capped or close to capped, and this will simply make the rep fill faster and leave them with no options. In addition, there was no rep provided with this GS.

This is VERY simple to fix. They need to boost the conquest awards for non-pvp activities, especially for solo or small group stuff.

 

[damonskye]

Yeah, I’m not happy with the explanation either. I’m just gonna let my sub go to preferred and log in on one character for the 30 minutes of story in the eventual 7.5 … I don’t feel any compulsion to continue trying to hit conquest anymore. 

As I said before, this was a solution to a problem that was never a problem to begin with, and as long as they got our subscription money, who the hell cared how much time we spent? Now I don’t even see myself spending ANY time. Hope it was worth it, guys. 

[Thraka]

21 minutes ago, Jdast said:

Eric's post today sealed the deal for me, -- at least until dramatic changes are made. Given the substance (or lack thereof) and tenor of his post, however, change doesn't seem likely in the near future which leaves me with the impression that he and his team simply don't get it.

The whole benefit of the daily reputation gain was that it afforded me and my small number of friends who play the game the opportunity to: a) still make reasonable progress vis a vis Tech Fragment acquisition; and b) switch to playing content we enjoy on a different character. 

 

This right here is the heart of the problem. Dramatically increasing the time to hit conquest for alts results in dramatically reducing the number of tech frags small group/solo players can get, both from personal conquest and from guild conquest goals. Honestly, it seems to me they didn't even understand (and maybe still don't) that they have effectively cut off a large number of players from progression.

And I agree, it seems change in the near future is very unlikely.

[captainbladejk]

Problem is that they don't care and there are certain people in charge that don't need to be. They have zero idea how to make a good game, and only care about pure cash grabs. I get the game needs money to keep rolling and I expect they're going to do some stuff to try and get cash. However if you want my cash, you need to give me an equal or greater value back in the form of entertainment for said cash. I'm not going to just hand it over because it says Star Wars on the label. Of course actively reverting an unnecessary nerf would be certain people admitting they're wrong and their hubris won't allow them to do it. If they want people to spend more time conquesting they need to give people objectives worth doing aside from trying to pull the whole "you're going to play how we want and like it" junk. 

I've put out many a successful mod and map for other games over the years. Some of my maps were EA recommended for weeks at the time way back in the TimeSplitters Future Perfect days. Thing I learned early on, it doesn't matter how much I try to get people to do something, they're not going to do it if they don't want to. If I want to get someone to go somewhere or do something I have to give them a reason to want to go there or do something. Such as a particularly potent weapon in x spot on the map, extra health packs or similar. You can't just beat people over the head and expect them to do it one way "because I said or else". What you're going to do is drive people away and lose your game as a result. As a dev, be it small time modding or AAA studios, you need to accept you don't know everything and sometimes you are in fact wrong about what the players want. While alot of folks may share your vision and like what you're doing, not everyone does and not everyone enjoys playing like you do. If you want to appeal to the widest audience you need something for more than one group of people. 

In this instance I will NEVER be doing pvp or starfighter. If it came down to me doing pvp and starfighter or the game shutting down, then the game is shutting down. The heat death of the universe will happen before I ever do PVP or starfighter. You want me to put in more time doing conquest, give me additional objectives to do outside of the hot bantha droppings we've had for the last 3 weeks. It really is that simple but some of them don't want to get it. They've gotten away with giving people 1-2 new things and recycling 10 more and pretending they've done them a favor for too long now. 

[TepeshT]

 

@EricMusco Some things to consider as you reinstate at least SOME THINGS that give AS MUCH IF NOT MORE CONQUEST than the nerfed reputation:

• Everyone's points above about how making it more difficult to complete conquest decreases the desire to use alts, which in turn decreases the demand for cosmetic items

Quote

In connection to the first section is that although we lowered the points from this Conquest, our goal was to add in new objectives so that players who were jumping in for quick sessions and progression through Galactic Seasons, could then also be gaining Conquest points (the new Objectives focus on gaining GS levels).

• Did anyone on the team actually do math here? Reputation was worth 43k; a new objective for gaining a GS level gives 10k, and a new WEEKLY objective for completing GS objectives gives 22k. 22k+10k + 8k =/= 43k. In fact, 10k + 8k =/= 43k would be a more accurate assessment, since the 22k "complete 4 GS objectives" is a weekly, not daily repeatable. This stealth nerf removed 25k conquest points per day, with nothing in its place. In no circumstance is this equivalent or acceptable. Conquest has been forgotten a lot since 7.0.
• This thread brings up another good point: there are ZERO conquest objectives for the Interpreter's Retreat and Kessan's Landing, the two newest daily areas. Where's the incentive to play these areas if I'm wasting my time getting ZERO conquest? It's nonexistant, and it's caused me to not care about playing the latest stories. I'd play them in a heartbeat if I could actually get rewards from it (as you can with the weekly and daily missions in literally every other daily area: Ossus, Onderon, Ruhnuk, Manaan, etc.) https://forums.swtor.com/topic/933803-no-conquest-objectives-for-interpreters-or-kessans-intentional/ I hope that you take all 3 of these points and use them to ensure that SWtOR's conquest system -- the grinding system designed to keep people playing -- survives this update and all future expansions.

 

[Thraka]

10 minutes ago, captainbladejk said:

Problem is that they don't care and there are certain people in charge that don't need to be. They have zero idea how to make a good game, and only care about pure cash grabs. I get the game needs money to keep rolling and I expect they're going to do some stuff to try and get cash. However if you want my cash, you need to give me an equal or greater value back in the form of entertainment for said cash. I'm not going to just hand it over because it says Star Wars on the label. Of course actively reverting an unnecessary nerf would be certain people admitting they're wrong and their hubris won't allow them to do it. If they want people to spend more time conquesting they need to give people objectives worth doing aside from trying to pull the whole "you're going to play how we want and like it" junk. 

I've put out many a successful mod and map for other games over the years. Some of my maps were EA recommended for weeks at the time way back in the TimeSplitters Future Perfect days. Thing I learned early on, it doesn't matter how much I try to get people to do something, they're not going to do it if they don't want to. If I want to get someone to go somewhere or do something I have to give them a reason to want to go there or do something. Such as a particularly potent weapon in x spot on the map, extra health packs or similar. You can't just beat people over the head and expect them to do it one way "because I said or else". What you're going to do is drive people away and lose your game as a result. As a dev, be it small time modding or AAA studios, you need to accept you don't know everything and sometimes you are in fact wrong about what the players want. While alot of folks may share your vision and like what you're doing, not everyone does and not everyone enjoys playing like you do. If you want to appeal to the widest audience you need something for more than one group of people. 

In this instance I will NEVER be doing pvp or starfighter. If it came down to me doing pvp and starfighter or the game shutting down, then the game is shutting down. The heat death of the universe will happen before I ever do PVP or starfighter. You want me to put in more time doing conquest, give me additional objectives to do outside of the hot bantha droppings we've had for the last 3 weeks. It really is that simple but some of them don't want to get it. They've gotten away with giving people 1-2 new things and recycling 10 more and pretending they've done them a favor for too long now. 

This is pretty much the shape of it. I've been a game dev for >30 years, and this reeks of what I call 'design by spread sheet' or "Communist theory of game design". Some 'designers' are convinced that they have to force people into doing EVERYTHING, no matter if the player enjoys that thing or not. You MUST eat your vegetables AND dessert. If you just eat dessert because vegetables don't interest you, they will put salt in the dessert to make vegetables more desirable by comparison.

Maybe that works for exciting, new games, where players are subject to FOMO, but older games with older players? Yeah, no. I don't pay for things that I find unpleasant.

 

[HypSpec]

4 hours ago, TepeshT said:

This is the most succinct and useful idea regarding conquest I've ever seen. It should be pinned to the top of this thread and the devs should follow it exactly. You laid out the consequences of conquest nerfs to both players AND Broadsword's income source, and followed it up with practical solutions. I salute you, good sir. I name you Emperor/Supreme Chancellor of Conquest.

I accept the role of Emperor/Supreme Chancellor of Conquest with humility and a great sense of responsibility. I pledge to return the power you have graciously granted me as soon as this crisis has been averted. 😁

[NaiadL]

First as a note the stronghold is beautiful. The artists who worked on it did a fabulous job.

As far as the posts here so far, I agree with much of what has already been said.  I have been a sub since 2012, except for a few months due to a family emergency, and I am honestly sad the direction this game has taken.

 It appears that EA / Broadsword considers things the players / paying customers like as ‘over-represented’ which doesn’t even make sense, because you would expect a company to promote and give paying customers what they are interested in – to keep them as customers.

The nerfs and odd fixes / changes that the customers / players never asked for appears to be more of a priority than fixing bugs and other issues in the game. The devs / company seem to be completely out of touch with the players.

 

 I realize everyone has a different play style, what they consider fun, and different amounts of time to play, something that it feels the developers and management team forget, and sometimes even other players forget.  What one player likes or finds fun another may not.

 I have friends who can play long hours each week, but I don’t have that luxury. With my limited time I still want to have fun and be able to help my small guilds out reaching conquest, and that reputation objective was one of the ways I was able to do so. For me hitting conquest on a main toon, much less my alts, is difficult and requires me to focus on that for what I do when I log into game.

 

Due to being in the game since 2012 I have many alts and play on different servers, and there are several conquest objectives my primary toons can never get, since some objectives are self limiting and finite, such as strongholds, reputation, level requirement, etc.

The reputation and conquest change certainly will not get me to play more, in fact the opposite.

The rewards for conquest are not that great, but I do it to help out the small guilds I am in. I do play on different servers so some of my toons do get reputation for the various areas or events; however, that is limited to only toons that are level 50 and above.

As for my old primary toons the main way I was getting reputation for conquest was via the Galactic Seasons. I don’t understand how the amount of points for this conquest objective was an issue – it simply doesn’t make sense.

There had already been the change where reputation tokens from areas and events cannot be saved to use towards conquest later, which also felt punitive – you aren’t playing the way we want so we will fix that.

On my primary server I have long since maxed out most of the reputation so except for the new areas and recent conquest events my toons don’t get reputation very often, and since I am now unable to save reputation tokens for later those new areas are not much help with conquest.

  

I like the game or I would not still be playing; however, the main reason for playing now has primarily been focused around my friends.

While the content is old and it can feel like it is a grind in regards to conquest, we enjoy spending time with each other and doing things together in the game – the main reason we are all still subscribed.

Typically we are trying to figure out unique ways to do things, doing crazy things (pulling everything in an area, etc.), chatting, sharing videos, and other things while running the same content for conquest.

So, the main reason I play a game is to relax and with all of the changes that have occurred over time, many changes feel like they are made to punish the players making it become more of a job and grind than fun.

We have lost so many guild members, who love the game, but due to the various changes that feel negative towards the players they started to find it to be more like a job than a game.

 This rep change among other things was just one more thing that feels like punishment – taking something else away.

 So many promises made to players and so much customer / player feedback rarely listened to.

I am seriously reconsidering my subscription due to how expensive everything has gotten and the game is becoming much more like a job, when I already work full-time.  I don’t even want to calculate what I have spent on this game over the years, only to feel as a paying customer that I am not valued and that management could care less what I think.  

 My primary reason I have stayed subscribed has been to continue with the guilds and running with the few friends who have stayed, along with some misplaced hope the game will improve, but I am starting to realize that isn’t going to happen.

 

 

Edited March 14 by NaiadL

[DawnAskham]

The 'we are listening but still believe we are right' post isn't doing anything to get me to reconsider cancelling my subscription.

I've long since accepted the very limited amounts of fresh content we get, I don't like it, but it is what it is.

However, to expect me to pay for the game with real money AND then expect me to accept changes designed to pad in more time 'just because' WHILE still failing to deliver more than 30 minutes of content every few months is a bridge too far.

I'd be willing to compromise in a 'you add a bunch of new content that will keep me occupied for weeks instead of half an hour and I'll accept a bunch of grinds and time sinks'.

But you all can't even seem to do simple things.

Crafting has barely been touched in two expansions other than adding some augments last expansion, bugs throughout the game persist for months and year while the developer 'fix' things which aren't broken, even small things like adding the new areas to existing systems such as conquest don't happen.

I get you all have a very small team and budget. But use it to keep players delighted, or at worst content.

Don't throw it away on bad changes and prioritizing things no one wants or cares about.

Edited March 14 by DawnAskham

[VegaMist]

38 minutes ago, DawnAskham said:

The 'we are listening but still believe we are right' post

That's a great summary of his entire post. And the "listening" part rings false.

[Traceguy]

This is all from Wz and Arenas this week (I'm trying to complete PVP Season 5). Rep tokens are over represented? 

[Stradlin]

1 hour ago, VegaMist said:

That's a great summary of his entire post. And the "listening" part rings false.

Generally speaking, players often, in the long run,  don't really like the things they initially think they want. There are plenty of people such as playtester team leads and such who've spoken of this issue over the years. It often makes gathering feedback difficult,

People usually  pick and favor the path of least resistance in games. Activity that is fast, easy and boring is typically chosen over something that is less efficient but more  fun. People basically bore themselves to death.proceed to get tired of the game and quit entirely, instead of switching from most efficient  but bit boring activity  to the more fun activity. Gamers are often their worst enemies in this way, truly.;p

Game needs to trick and lure players into having fun.  If a game fails to do that, gamers usually get stuck with irrelevant, boring and efficient.

When community of any given game knocks on devs gates and goes " make it easy and simple and trivial for me to get free stuff fast!" its not always a great idea to take it seriously.

Conquest target of a single character was prolly never meant to be as trivial as clicking a reppy token.Making a huge drama storm about this nerf  prolly works though.Imho the freshly nerfed tokens were objectively speaking bad design that made people play in boring and irrelevant ways, but enough noise prolly makes devs reverse  the decisoon.Betting you'll get your OP rep tokens back in no time!

 

 

 

 

Edited March 15 by Stradlin

[DWho]

8 minutes ago, Stradlin said:

Conquest target of a single character was prolly never meant to be as trivial as clicking a reppy token.

It's not exactly just clicking a token. You do have to acquire those tokens in the first place which requires doing something else first. While 47K may have been too much, 8K is far to little when you consider to get the 8K you have to have fully unlocked 6 strongholds (at least they don't need to be fully decorated now).

[Samcuu]

39 minutes ago, Traceguy said:

This is all from Wz and Arenas this week (I'm trying to complete PVP Season 5). Rep tokens are over represented? 

Comparing the warzone conquest point total is a bad comparison because to get to the 150k you have to finish a weekly. If you win half the matches you have to play 6 warzones, which is 15 minutes each plus wait time in the queue. So maybe 2 hours or so? I can get around 200k cq in an hour running daily areas and heroics while doing crafting and whatever random non combat missions they give. Pvp racks up the conquest because it also grants you group finder points. I think conquest from pvp is balanced perfectly fine let's not give them ideas on more nerfs for conquest thanks 😂😂

[Stradlin]

1 minute ago, DWho said:

It's not exactly just clicking a token. You do have to acquire those tokens in the first place which requires doing something else first. While 47K may have been too much, 8K is far to little when you consider to get the 8K you have to have fully unlocked 6 strongholds (at least they don't need to be fully decorated now).

I bet unlocked SHs are pretty much a given for anybody who is truly worried about  conq points they earn. '

 

There are plenty of daily missions that give that rep token obscenely, ridiculously easily. . There are only so many rep bars to tackle though. Almost everybody still around been playing, on and off, for 10 years or more by now. You get quite a few rep bars capped in that time. Which creates another issue here: Somebody wtih easily accessible rep to grind has a massive advantage over somebody who has capped every rep bar they can access.

 

[VegaMist]

1 hour ago, Stradlin said:

Generally speaking, players often, in the long run,  don't really like the things they initially think they want. There are plenty of people such as playtester team leads and such who've spoken of this issue over the years. It often makes gathering feedback difficult,

People always pick and favor the path of least resistance in games. Activity that is fast, easy and boring is typically chosen over something that is less efficient but more  fun. People literally bore themselves to death.proceed to get tired of the game and quit entirely, instead of switching from most efficient activity  to the more fun activity.

When community of any given game goes " make it easy and simple and trivial for me to get free stuff fast!" its not always a great idea to take it seriously.

Conquest target of a single character was prolly never meant to be as trivial as clicking a reppy token.

This is very misguided. People choose the so called "path of least resistance", so they can finish the "required" content (in this case Conquest Objectives) - the boring part - as quickly as possible in order to move on to whatever game activities they actually like. What those activities are differs for every single player - in some cases, it may match "required" activities, and in others it won't. If the "required" part requires too much effort, the player will either a) try to do it and get increasingly bored in the process, especially if it leaves said player no time for the activities they actually like, or b) not do it at all and feel unsatisfied even during activities they do like - so, no matter how you look at it, if you ask for too much effort for "required" parts players are left unsatisfied. That reputation objective provided us balance for otherwise grindy and boring activity (conquest objective), and allowed us to place focus on what we actually logged in to do.

For example, I personally like PVP-ing. But I don't PVP on all of my toons. So, I was saving those rep tokens for the characters which I was not actively playing at the moment. I didn't need to worry about my PVP-ing toons, since I knew they would meet their objectives by finishing one weekly. There are people who can't stand PVP and prefer Flashpoints - they are only getting points for the first Flashpoint of the day. Having a reputation token allowed them to balance lack of points from their preferred activity.

And speaking of trivial, I'm maxed out on most Reputation tracks. So, in order to get reputation conquest points, I was running Kuat Drive Yards solo. Does that sound trivial to you?

Edited March 15 by VegaMist
Typos (it's always typos)

[Samcuu]

Just now, Stradlin said:

Somebody wtih easily accessible rep to grind has a massive advantage over somebody who has capped every rep bar they can access.

That's why the old system of introducing new rep tracks seemed to fit with conquest like a glove. Seasons is on more times than not in a calendar year btw. The devs disagree tho because the fomo aspect is considered "dark pattern game design", which I disagree with personally but many have made that argument on these forums. 

[DWho]

1 minute ago, Stradlin said:

Somebody wtih easily accessible rep to grind has a massive advantage over somebody who has capped every rep bar they can access.

That's no different than the "legacy xp" one either. Bioware (and now Broadsword) never really cared about advantages. I mean, honestly, if I was trying to grind tons of CQ point (which I used to do) I'd go for GSF. You advance multiple objectives with each match and even if people don't self destruct those matches go quickly. During normal server hours, GSF pops almost instantly on SF.

I mean one GSF match advances, the daily, the weekly, the CQ objective (which is infinitely repeatable), the GS objective, the socialite objective, one of the fly 5 ship objectives. It's even better than ground PVP.

[Stradlin]

13 minutes ago, VegaMist said:

This is very misguided. People choose the so called "path of least resistance", so they can finish the "required" content (in this case Conquest Objectives) - the boring part - as quickly as possible in order to move on to whatever game activities they actually like. What those activities are differs for every single player - in some cases, it may match "required" activities, and in others it won't. If the "required" part requires too much effort, the player will either a) try to do it and get increasingly bored in the process, especially if it leaves said player no time for the activities they actually like, or b) not do it at all and feel unsatisfied even during activities they do like - so, no matter how you look at it, if you ask for too much effort for "required" parts players are left unsatisfied. That reputation objective provided us balance for otherwise grindy and boring activity (conquest objective), and allowed us to place focus on what we actually logged in to do.

For example, I personally like PVP-ing. But I don't PVP on all of my toons. So, I was saving those rep tokens for the characters which I was not actively playing at the moment. I didn't need worry about my PVP-ing toons, since I knew they would meet their objectives by finishing one weekly. There are people who can't stand PVP and prefer Flashpoints - they are only getting points for the first Flashpoint of the day. Having a reputation token allowed them to balance lack of points from their preferred activity.

And speaking of trivial, I'm maxed out on most Reputation tracks. So, in order to get reputation conquest points, I was running Kuat Drive Yards solo. Does that sound trivial to you?

Just find anyone who is considered enough of an expert at playtesting to actually get money out of it. Such person knows the phenomena all too well. Easy, efficient and boring gets favored over fun and exciting, You can have a talk about this in next Hammer Station group. Fun how that keeps popping so often in LFG tool huh?:p

It is common for a brand new player who knows nothing of conquest and has 0 SH bonus to reach the conq target just fine during their first weeks in game. Conquest dings on one or two character happen without paying any attention to it as a game mechanic. Which in and ofitself is an issue imho..but that's a topic for another thread.

On the other hand, if you've decided you just -need- to reach conq target on two dozen characters each week...well, sounds like Conq is a major gameplay element of TOR to you. If you don't find gathering conquest fun,it might be great idea to just not do it. You keep putting "required" to scare quotes there for pretty good reason. It..truly is not required for anyone to reach conq target on multiple characters  in any way at all.

 "And speaking of trivial, I'm maxed out on most Reputation tracks. So, in order to get reputation conquest points, I was running Kuat Drive Yards solo. Does that sound trivial to you?"

Here is another huge issue with extremely rewarding rep token dings. It is such an unlevel playing field. A very established player such as yourself has all the easy rep bars filled. Meanwhile, somebody who hasn't gathered tons of railshooter rep can get that coveted rep ding in 2 minutes. This is prolly a real topic of conversation among the few remainign guilds who take conq very seriously.

 

 

Edited March 15 by Stradlin

[captainbladejk]

The whole "FOMO" copout is easily solved by allowing people to acquire those items after the fact by alternative means. Simply put this was them trying to sneak a bunch of stealth nerfs in because their hubris makes them think they know what players want more than players do. Then they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and are trying to justify the theft of 225k conquest points per week with a bunch of condescending corporate double speak. Frankly to be blunt if they worked for me and did something that dumb I would fire whoever made that call. Simply because some people are already maxed out and not effected by the reputation nerf doesn't mean others aren't effected or that it's suddenly okay. It's theft of points and then them doubling down on it basically saying to the playerbase "yeah we nerfed it. **** you gonna do about it".

in order to even be able to "just click and done" as some have tried to call it, I still have to grind out the rep token to start with meaning FPs, OPs, or what have you. Whether I pop 100 rep tokens at once or over the course of 100 days is irrelevant as my rep will be the same as is my amount of work I put in to get that rep. Kind of like paying off a car. I can either pay cash day one and be done, or pay it off after say 5 years. Whether I do it day 1 or after 5 years is irrelevant to the fact I paid it off. Giving new rep tracks gave people who were maxed out a chance to use the rep objective again so yes it actually does effect you in the fact they're stealing points from everyone. Now they're outright stealing the rep track itself and giving you nothing in return. 

1 hour ago, DWho said:

That's no different than the "legacy xp" one either. Bioware (and now Broadsword) never really cared about advantages. I mean, honestly, if I was trying to grind tons of CQ point (which I used to do) I'd go for GSF. You advance multiple objectives with each match and even if people don't self destruct those matches go quickly. During normal server hours, GSF pops almost instantly on SF.

I mean one GSF match advances, the daily, the weekly, the CQ objective (which is infinitely repeatable), the GS objective, the socialite objective, one of the fly 5 ship objectives. It's even better than ground PVP.

I would rather jump into a sarlack than do PVP or starfighter. Good for the folks who enjoy pvp but there are more people in the game than just them. Had enough of pvp from my time spent in other games to last a lifetime. Glad yall have some objectives you can roll with. Now they just need to give some to the rest of us. If they wanted people to grind more, they should've gave us more objectives we wanted to actually do such as rampage, heroics, or something else that paid similar. Stealing points from me then dumping a bucket of water on me and telling me it's raining isn't how you do it. 

[Traceguy]

1 hour ago, Samcuu said:

Comparing the warzone conquest point total is a bad comparison

Not at all. Reputation points is once per day, and leaves you with around 315k after 7 days.. This is after 3 days. I'm still climbing. Reputation points did not deserve to be nerfed

Edited March 15 by Traceguy

[DawnAskham]

52 minutes ago, DWho said:

That's no different than the "legacy xp" one either. Bioware (and now Broadsword) never really cared about advantages. I mean, honestly, if I was trying to grind tons of CQ point (which I used to do) I'd go for GSF. You advance multiple objectives with each match and even if people don't self destruct those matches go quickly. During normal server hours, GSF pops almost instantly on SF.

I mean one GSF match advances, the daily, the weekly, the CQ objective (which is infinitely repeatable), the GS objective, the socialite objective, one of the fly 5 ship objectives. It's even better than ground PVP.

You can thank the poster you quoted for all the GSF points - they spammed the forums for months on end about how unfair conquest was to GSF.
 

1 hour ago, Samcuu said:

Comparing the warzone conquest point total is a bad comparison because to get to the 150k you have to finish a weekly. If you win half the matches you have to play 6 warzones, which is 15 minutes each plus wait time in the queue. So maybe 2 hours or so? I can get around 200k cq in an hour running daily areas and heroics while doing crafting and whatever random non combat missions they give. Pvp racks up the conquest because it also grants you group finder points. I think conquest from pvp is balanced perfectly fine let's not give them ideas on more nerfs for conquest thanks 😂😂

I agree - I hate to see topics like this devolve into 'well if I can't get what I want, nerf the other thing'.

I do find it interesting that both PVP and GSF reward so many points with so few restrictions (low point objectives with no limits); and though they also take time and a group, they do not require the player earning them to be successful (though wins obviously help with time). But these are reasonable rewards for putting in the time to complete.

I would like to see them revamp the conquest system entirely, stop putting end game currencies and gear and crafting mats and everything else they have stuck in conquest that past few expansions and focus it back on guilds, planet conquests, and strongholds (the original focus). If they want a really casual route for gear, they could leave that in - but stuff like the boxes with set gear and tacticals, end-game currencies, or being the only source of Solid Resource Matrix when needed to craft anything have been poor design.

And with any revamp, they should look to include ALL activities and provide similar points for similar activities based on time commitments, as well as use similar restrictions (e.g. repeatable versus non-repeatable). They should probably look at changing the way competition between guilds occurs as well, instead of based on planet size, have tiers based on guild size and rotate planets through all tiers.

Lastly, Ops and FPs should have objectives and points in line with PVP and GSF, small points for completing them (any of them, not some 'you must do this one and only this one), with big points for completing a weekly (the weekly missions should be updated to be similar in time commitment - like complete X operations instead of complete KP).

 

Edited March 15 by DawnAskham

[Traceguy]

2 minutes ago, DawnAskham said:

I agree - I hate to see topics like this devolve into 'well if I can't get what I want, nerf the other thing'

I wasn't asking them to nerf the other thing. I was proving how asinine @JoeStramaglia claim was that Reputation Tokens were over represented 

I love CQP. I want nothing nerfed

Edited March 15 by Traceguy

[DawnAskham]

Just now, Traceguy said:

I wasn't asking them to nerf the other thing. I was proving how asinine @JoeStramaglia claim was that Reputation Tokens were over represented 

I wasn't calling you out - I myself have made comments that could be taken as wanting something nerfed.

I've used similar illustrations to show what the devs are saying doesn't make any sense given the facts.