So, this has been a nice distraction and all, but when are we getting last weeks Leaderboard rewards? I have 7 toons who do not have their rewards. I only heard about it once which was the preemptive warning about not getting them and to have them handed out manually. How are you doing that for the xp/cxp cause items can be mailed, but xp and cxp can't? I really would like those soon as I have a lot of stuff I'm trying to craft that needs that stuff and the prices are ridiculous on the GTN.

last time they did a massive reward we didn't get any cxp/xp rewards it was just the conquest rewards.

Yup, it's just like Command levels all over again - screw it up totally then spend 12 months pretending to half fix it.

 

Not good enough, not even close to the same galaxy as good enough.

 

All The Best

Hmm ... but at least they're not getting it in the neck any more about Command levels ... their evil plot to divert attention away from that has been successful

As for the conquest changes ... as a crafter, it sucks big cahoonas ...

As pretty much the only group content I do is FP's for the points and possibly the weekly if I need it to get to personal goal again it sucks ... same with pvp/gsf participation ... I'd do a couple to get the points if I needed to.

A possible way to adjust crafting on CRAFTING weeks only would be for the repeatable to be doable once per day per guild that way someone with 50 alts in the same guild would only be able to do it once per day for that guild, effectively removing/reducing the crafting bombs.

On non-crafting weeks keep it as it was, or change it to once per alt and reduce the value to 500 (1250 with max bonus) points. 2000 points was way too high in my opinion for maybe 20 seconds work setting the companions crafting and then logging to another alt.

As for how to get separation between small, medium and large guilds, one solution would be to have the planets rotate through low, medium and high and the planets a guild could invade would be determined by the number of contributing alts the guild had in the previous week's conquest. So for example up to 100 alts can invade small, medium or large, 100-500 alts can invade medium or large, over 500 can only invade large.

Obviously the numbers I used are arbitrary and would need some analysis on the back end side to be done to work out where the boundaries should be. This way small guilds would have a shot at getting all planets for Galactic Conqueror title.

Atm, I have very little incentive to even play the game as the main reason I did was weekly conquest goals on 4-5 alts over 2 servers.

About the only good thing they did was remove the stronghold decoration requirement needed for full strong hold bonus, it now means I might even get round to decorating mine properly ... on that note

"FOR SALE: 993 basic chairs, used and (possibly) slightly stained - 2000 Credits each"

No UI fix other than "fly text" and "tooltips"?

The UI is atrocious and then you blame the user by saying there's "confusion." A UI should be intuitive - if there's "confusion" it means you *failed.* You've increased the number of mouse clicks it takes to get information. You've decreased the meaning of subject matter icons by removing content color cues and stuffing them into a single must-scroll list that will change every week, so the user can't learn it. Then you added the ambivalent daily and repeatable icons that people are still getting "confused," despite your post to clarify it. Then, making the rookie UI designer mistake, you believe that you can fix the "user" by giving them tooltips, instead of actually designing something usable.

Test your stuff before you release it. That includes usability testing. I join my voice to the "Roll it back" chorus.

 

Punishing to Alts // Legacy

With the rebalance of Objective points and the reclassification of some Objective types, there is some concern over the ability for a player with multiple characters in a Legacy to be competitive in Conquests. Additionally, there are similar concerns for folks with characters within a Legacy in more than one Guild.

Plan: One initial step to resolve this is the lowering of the Conquest targets as highlighted above. Also, by adding more repeatable Objectives (like PvP participation) as noted, this should give players more ways to gain points and make it easier to achieve targets. Beyond that we will continue to monitor data and your feedback to seek other possible changes in 5.9 and beyond.

 

-eric

The best way to "save" alt conquest participation is to make daily repeatable missions character specific instead of legacy. Even having the daily pvp available won't be great for all alts (some aren't used in GSF and have basic un-upgraded ships the player isn't interested in grinding on. While some may be a class where the player doesn't enjoy warzones on). I mean, just allow us to do the daily repeatables once on each character per day. Then we can at least do the things we enjoy on multiple characters each day.

Hey folks,

 

In this thread we want to cover a few things about Conquests: our goals for the revamp, the feedback we are hearing from all of you, and what we are changing (and when). I recommend you start by reading our write-up of the changes that were coming to 5.8. Let’s jump in.

 

The Conquest Revamp – Goals

We had a few things in mind that we wanted to address as we moved from the old system into the new one. First and foremost were rewards. This includes ensuring that the new system delivers the rewards you earn, but also increasing the overall rewards for participating in Conquests. Here are is what you receive now when you and your Guild complete a conquest:

• A large amount of Credits and CXP via completion of Objectives
  
• Personal rewards, including crafting materials, credits, and more
  
• Invasion rewards, including crafting materials, credits, Encryptions, and more, which is now rewarded to all Guilds who meet the invasion target.
  
• Access to the Fleet vendor which sells special decos and the Master Compendium (Companion Influence boost)
  

 

Here are some of the other areas we were aiming to address:

• Objectives and their points – Conquests are meant to be an activity that someone can work on throughout the week as they play the game. Previously, Conquests were very homogenized in that there was very little diversity among each week. We used this opportunity to spread out what objectives were available in each Conquest.
  
• Crafting - Crafting is a key part of Conquests, and we certainly did not want to remove that. However, we know the use of War Supplies and crafting was contributing too much to the overall competition of Conquests. For that reason, we reduced the overall effectiveness of Crafting, but added new functionality to War Supplies that they can be consumed to add Conquest points. Allowing you to get points out of them twice if you want, or you could craft them on one character and then move them to other characters to gain conquest points.
  
• Yield Targets – Competition among different sized Guilds has always been a problem in Conquests. We introduced yield targets to assist in separating out Guilds by various sizes, as they have differing targets and rewards.
  
• Interface – We gave the interface a facelift (as outlined in the other post) to make it easier to find activities you may want to complete.
  

 

Your Feedback

We never saw this revamp as being a perfect change out of the gates, but it is a first step for us in crafting an improved Conquest system. Your feedback is incredibly valuable as we can immediately start making changes to get things to a great place. Now that you understand what our goals were, let’s talk about the things we are hearing from you.

 

Changed / Missing Objectives

This feedback was most commonly expressed from PvP’ers who saw a daily objective for winning a Warzone, but not one for participating. Our plan to combat the old system’s homogenization was to spread out all Objectives. This week may not have participation as an Objective, but it isn’t gone, it is just in a different Conquest. However, this information was not clear and breaks too far from the old system.

Plan: We are going to add a repeatable GSF and Warzone Participation Objective into all Conquest weeks. This will go into our next patch (possibly next week).

 

Objective Points Too Low

With the rebalance to Conquest Objectives, there is a general sense that completing your Personal Conquest takes too long and by proxy, Guild Invasions as well.

Plan: We are going to lower the Personal Conquest target to 15,000 per week (down from 20,000). We are also adjusting the Planetary Yield Targets to be:

• Small is now 200,000 (down from 460,000)
  
• Medium is now 550,000 (down from 1,380,000)
  
• Large is now 1,130,000 (down from 2,530,000)
  
  • This will happen in our next patch (possibly next week).
    

 

Crafting Changes Too Harsh

Crafting in Conquests was just too good prior to 5.8. There is a feeling though that we cut a bit too deep on its overall impact to Conquests. The War Supply schematics were combined which made them harder to craft, and their point contribution went down, even with the added functionality of being able to consume them.

Plan: We are going to give it some time and monitor the impact of these changes, and then we will make any needed adjustments in 5.9 or beyond.

 

Large Yield Target Rewards Aren’t Good Enough

We are seeing concerns that the Large (and possibly Medium) Yield rewards simply aren’t good enough to warrant the extra points required. That this may cause most Guilds to simply filter down into Small Yields, which is counter-productive to the goal of getting Guilds to split a bit by Guild size.

Plan: This is something we are sensitive to but without seeing actual participation data around Conquests, we are hesitant to make changes just yet. We will monitor in the coming weeks and make any needed changes in 5.9 and beyond.

 

New UI Confusion

There definitely is some confusion around the iconography in the new UI, especially for Objectives. For quick reference right now, Yellow icon means infinitely repeatable, Blue means daily repeatable, no icon means once per week.

Plan: With 5.9 we will be adjusting some text along with adding tooltips to ensure that is a bit clearer. We’re also going to be swapping the yellow/blue to be consistent with the rest of the game. In addition, we’ll be adding some additional fly text for Conquest Objective completion.

 

Punishing to Alts // Legacy

With the rebalance of Objective points and the reclassification of some Objective types, there is some concern over the ability for a player with multiple characters in a Legacy to be competitive in Conquests. Additionally, there are similar concerns for folks with characters within a Legacy in more than one Guild.

Plan: One initial step to resolve this is the lowering of the Conquest targets as highlighted above. Also, by adding more repeatable Objectives (like PvP participation) as noted, this should give players more ways to gain points and make it easier to achieve targets. Beyond that we will continue to monitor data and your feedback to seek other possible changes in 5.9 and beyond.

 

That is most of the major points of feedback we have seen coming in regarding the Conquest revamp, but we know it isn’t everything. Let us know your thoughts on the changes we have planned. Also, even after these changes are out the door please keep your feedback coming. We are committed to getting Conquests to be enjoyable, challenging, and rewarding.

 

Thanks everyone!

 

-eric

Rubbish.

Crafting was too easy? Our small guild would spend months preparing for a conquest to win a title. Do you have any idea how many hours it took farming just to do the crafting conquests on the old system? I don't want to even think about how long it will take now. I'd never seriously contemplated quitting the game in 4 years, but now most of our guild is talking about what other games we could move to. The one thing smaller guilds like us could compete with was crafting week and it's now gone with a "We'll leave it as is for now and look at it again later" statement?

 

If you tried simply talking to players or having some kind of play testing you would avoid scenarios like this. Did any of you actually do the math to figure out how much time or materials it would take to do conquest now? It's like when GC came out. At the old rate of CXP it would have taken 200-300 hours of playtime to get to max level on just one toon.

 

My sub is about up and I was about to add another timecard, but I'm holding off and seeing what you actually do. I don't want to waste my money on a game that I'll just end up not playing out of frustration with the devs.

^ agree.

Clearly they don't play on any real live servers, only on the aka test ones using their codes to get anything and everything they want.

Rubbish.

HAHahahaha, Funniest thing I've seen in a while, made my day.

[*]Objectives and their points – Conquests are meant to be an activity that someone can work on throughout the week as they play the game. Previously, Conquests were very homogenized in that there was very little diversity among each week. We used this opportunity to spread out what objectives were available in each Conquest.

The problem with this is you think you're providing a mechanism to get everyone to login everyday. Great for whatever your boss thinks of as stats. What you're forgetting is this is a game. Supposed to be fun and it should be fun on demand. Making your users login everyday to maybe get 3 characters to their personal conquest totals is not what I call fun.

The old system may not have had people logging in everyday but that should be far better than subscribers unsubbing b/c they're now forced to in order to earn any rewards. If you want to cater to hardcore grinders and players then revert everything back to version 1 of the game. At least then you might die in an encounter and have to actually learn to play your character by interrupting, etc during leveling quests. But I digress.

You need to remove all thoughts of small guilds doing anything with the systems you've implemented. After all, war is about who has the biggest baddest army and not about competing fairly and equally. If you want to give small/medium guilds opportunity, take your tier system and ensure that only a small guild can participate in Tier 1 and a medium guild in Tier 2. Set member limits on those two tiers like 1-100 members equals a small guild and 101-500 equals a medium guild. Let the GM choose, at creation, what size they want their guild to be and then cap them so they don't accidently exceed that number (like the current cap of 1000 members for everyone).

After you do all this, revert the CQ stuff back to what it was. This legacy stuff and daily logins is not in the best interest of the player and is/will cost you subs. Everyone wants to be able to play at their leisure and still be rewarded. The old elements allowed this to be so. The new stuff doesn't and it should be removed for adding no value.

a gamer like my, with around 30 chars on CR300 i am not amused about the conquest system. If i would need 4-5h per char for personel conquest it would be fine. Now i have one char finisht and i am done - no eager do to more, even i would like. My guild choce the 2.5kk planet, we araound 800k and all the stuff with a lot of points are done - so yeahh just a few ppl more not happy with the changes.

PLS BW do your homework!

It seems too soon to lower the guild quest objective points, to reach the large/medium/small yield rewards, but I'll bow to your data gathering and decision making.

I thought of a UI change that I think will be helpful.

How about when it is a certain week's conquest (Relic of the Gree for example) in the Guild Invasions tab, it says "Relic of the Gree guild highest conquest week" and show the number for the most conquest points that guild ever earned during a Relic of the Gree week. And also show "Last Relic of the Gree week" and show the final numbers for the last time it was Relic of the Gree week. That way guilds can track themselves, and make personal bests, trying to out preform the previous accomplishments.

This suggestion is in addition to my previous comments

I am happy to see some changes to conquest. I am particularly happy about the nerf to lock outs. That is one of the parts to my suggestion # 27 in my suggestion thread found here

 

I like how you are playing with the UI, trying to make it better. I particularly like how you are trying to give bragging rights to players who are top conquest earners. I also like how you are trying to make small guilds competitive, and able to earn the Galaxy Conqueror title.

 

Here are a few suggestions on how to improve what you already have.

 

1) Improve the UI further.

 

a) Under the "Conquest Tab" where you have the drop down arrows for "Sort by Points," "Sort by Name," "Sort by Repeatable," and "Sort by Percent Complete," change that to have the drop downs be "Sort by Points (All objectives)," "Sort by Legacy (One time objectives, some people on this thread recommend getting rid off this category completely)," "Sort by Character (Once per toon per week) objectives," "Daily objectives (Once per toon per day)," and "Repeatable objectives (multiple times per day per toon)"

 

b) Make the top five character contributors for conquest be the top five legacy contributors. Players can already see who the top five character contributors are for conquest, by hitting G for guild, and then changing the drop down window from "Guild Rank" to "Conquest Points." Changing it to legacy would save players the time of having to sort through names and do addition.

 

 

2) Make earning points easier (more points per activity) or Improve rewards (multiple ship plans if you invade a medium or large yield planet). I recommend making earning points easier since that helps alts earn conquest. After all, this is an alt friendly game, might as well make your alts work for you.

 

 

3) Make it so you earn points for participating in Player vs. Player (PvP) and Galactic Star Fighter (GSF). Win or lose, you should earn points to encourage people to que, but winning should award more points.

 

 

4) Bring back conquest points for doing a random flashpoint, with more conquest points for doing a random Hard Mode (HM) flashpoint, to encourage progression.

 

 

Here are some suggestions that would also improve conquest.

 

1) My suggestion #27: TL;DR - Give points for killing a Story Mode (SM) Boss, more points for killing a Hard Mode (HM) Boss, and even more points for doing a Nightmare Mode (NiM) Boss, with bonus points awarded if it is the daily operation. This will encourage progression.

 

 

2) Make it show the top 10 Legacy contributors for conquest, instead of the top 5 characters for conquest, so it can mirror the top 10 conquest guilds. This is for the same reason you show top 10 guilds, to encourage competitiveness, even at lower levels.

 

 

3) Change PvP and GSF to be "Repeatable Objectives" (by the definition in this post).

 

 

Again, great job nerfing raid lockouts that was an exploit that needed to be squashed. .

Hey folks, Beyond that we will continue to monitor data and your feedback to seek other possible changes in 5.9 and beyond.

 

We are committed to getting Conquests to be enjoyable, challenging, and rewarding.

 

Thanks everyone!

 

-eric

We've just given you 70 pages of feedback that you've pretty much totally - except one or two token gestures - thrown back in our face and said "we don't care, like it or lump it".

And if you genuinely wanted Conquest to be fun 5.8 would've been binned BEFORE it went live.

You keep "talking that talk", but no one at Bioware seems even slightly interested in "walking the walk".

Let me remind you of the impact of that arrogant attitude over the last few years:

2011: 200 Servers.

2018: 6 Servers.

All The Best

Yup, it's just like Command levels all over again - screw it up totally then spend 12 months pretending to half fix it.

 

Not good enough, not even close to the same galaxy as good enough.

 

All The Best

I thought the same thing. Look at all the things bioware has to "watch" before they will do anything. Look at the minor changes they are talking about making but have no idea when the can do it next week? Maybe. 5.9? Maybe... or just LATER... Wow!

It's just like the fiasco of galactic command and how slow that was to get even acceptable changes. It took months to a year or more jsut to be acceptable. Not great, just acceptable. I'm now sold bioware had a clue what they wanted to do with conquest and that joke of a post of "their thoughts" was about as shallow as the effort they put into the revamp. Maybe if they just keep watching....

We've just given you 70 pages of feedback that you've pretty much totally - except one or two token gestures - thrown back in our face and said "we don't care, like it or lump it".

 

And if you genuinely wanted Conquest to be fun 5.8 would've been binned BEFORE it went live.

 

You keep "talking that talk", but no one at Bioware seems even slightly interested in "walking the walk".

 

Let me remind you of the impact of that arrogant attitude over the last few years:

2011: 200 Servers.

2017: 6 Servers.

 

All The Best

All of the above, really. There is nothing more to say. Repeating suggestions that are being ignored anyway is a waste of time.

No icon = once per legacy per week.

 

Blue icon = Once per day per character, not counting bugs that allow a few of them to be completed multiple times.

Except that ism't how they work. For example, Ilum heroics are once per day (even though they are once a week). If you complete it on one toon, you can not run it on any other toon for that day, so the max number of Ilum heroics you can do in a conquest week and get points for is 6.

They need to show if a daily is a legacy wide or toon by toon restriction, which they currently don't

It also seems like some dailies are on 4 hour limits (like invasion forces). Not sure if this is a bug or how it is supposed to be working. Also, sometimes I can repeat on other toons, sometimes it block legacy wide.

It would have helped to have a full description of what was supposed to be happening so we can make plans as to how to conquest, and know if something is bugged so we can report it.

Finally, the "fix" for allowing alts to get conquest is a joke with the low point rewards.

Objectives and their points – Conquests are meant to be an activity that someone can work on throughout the week as they play the game. Previously, Conquests were very homogenized in that there was very little diversity among each week. We used this opportunity to spread out what objectives were available in each Conquest.

UGH.

Please, don't try to force players into activities they dislike. You say the activities were too homogenized. I say they weren't homogenized enough. But there was often enough for people to do what they liked--Ops, Heroics, PvP, Flashpoints, GSF--to make their goals. If you try to force PvPers to run flashpoints or PvE'ers to PvP or solo players to run Ops, you're going to lose them for good.

Options are GOOD. Letting people do what they like is GOOD. If you want to give different weeks/invasions flavor, make bonuses for doing those activities, or add very specific activities in addition to the more generic ones. But leave the other options in place and let them be repeatable.

As for guild size and planet invasion size, unless you start giving away very valuable things (CM Crates for example) then the rewards will make almost no difference to them. They will still go after planets based on what specific planets they want to win. Big guilds will always have new players missing a planet here or there, and so that is what they will go after. The only real cure for this--unless you want something radical which I am happy to suggest--is to make more planets available each week, allowing more winners, and eventually fewer guilds making all-out efforts to win a planet thus giving someone else a chance.

As for crafting: yes, it was too dominant, but only on weeks where it was repeatable. But what these weeks did was allow even very small guilds to have a chance to win with enough preparation, especially because Total Galactic War had so many planets. In fact, I say that it didn't go far enough: EVERY SINGLE PLANET should be available in Total Galactic War, and with reasonable, repeatable crafting, thus giving every guild a chance to win every planet if they are dedicated enough. That wasn't the case in the old system, and it laughably impossible even with your suggested revisions to the new conquest. This is discouraging, and makes Conquest seem a lot more pointless with the Galactic Conqueror title/achievements out of reach. Players will either give up on their guilds and slink away to join the giants, or give up on their guilds and the game altogether.

Alas, I predict that it will be very similar to Command XP: you'll tweak and adjust and a year from now you'll have a system very much like the old system, only more clumsy.

Get these added back in and you can take the rest of 2018 to fix the rest for all I care.

At the current point value, I doubt these will amount to much. With these I might be able to get alts to 5 or 10k points if I really work at it, but what good does that do.

Having more repeatable content is a start, but the points for completing each objective are too small to amount to much of anything, and will make conquest a grind pure and simple.

What they are doing here by only addressing half of the problem is like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound.

They need to do more.

Crafting Changes Too Harsh

Crafting in Conquests was just too good prior to 5.8. There is a feeling though that we cut a bit too deep on its overall impact to Conquests. The War Supply schematics were combined which made them harder to craft, and their point contribution went down, even with the added functionality of being able to consume them.

Plan: We are going to give it some time and monitor the impact of these changes, and then we will make any needed adjustments in 5.9 or beyond.

I understand the reason for the change, but not the amounts. Prior to the change, you might have to combine 4, 6, or 8 Components, grafts, or whatever to get 1 war supply item. If we are going to combine all the tiers for 1 war supply, there is no reason to require a higher amount of the low tier items. All the amounts should be equal (each tier should be 4)

Even then, I doubt crafting for conquest points will be very appealing to me anymore. It was in the old system, but not so much at this rate.

On a related note, having 8 companions at level 50 was good for the old system, but if there isn't much reason to craft more than 1 item a day for conquest, you can just use a low level comp. That means less effective credit sinks in the game as well.

Hey Eric,

I think that we as players have had enough of the Dev's ********.

Time to call this what it is. You guys are murdering the game to get out of working with it since EA and your corporate overlords have been basically stripping you guys of budget / resources / and more.

YOU COULD HAVE PUT ALL OF THIS ON THE TEST SERVER and got the feedback beforehand,you didn't. That tells me that you didn't want us to know until you patched it in because you KNEW it was hot garbage.

No. I'm done listening to you drivel on about listening to us for feedback and such.

I've turned off my sub, I'm walking away.

Peace out.

Alright I don't know if this was asked or mentioned.... but....

 

Why are there only 3 targets? I thought with this patch there would be more planets, thus more targets, to help out guilds? How in the world does 3 active targets help anyone? Regardless of the rewards (which are mentioned to be WAY too little of a difference for anyone to bother with), having everyone clumped together on 3 targets basically leaves everyone who doesn't have a large guild out of the running, regardless of the point change. You could triple the amount received and these guilds would STILL not be able to compete.

 

What happened to the idea of having more targets? Why do we have LESS targets now?

Good question. I had thought, to help the small guilds, they would use the unique accounts in a guild to determine which planets they could invade. For instance, a guild with 100 could invade any of the tiers, but a guild with 400 couldn't invade any but the top tier.

Also, each planet would have a tier tied to it so you could win it. Someone earlier said they must have no idea how guilds choose which planets to invade. The big guilds will invade ALL THE PLANETS to secure the win, no matter they yields. This new system does nothing for small guilds except give them the very small payout we use to get, only now, you can get that many toons to the weekly so you aren't really getting anything.

Well done Grind-o-ware.

Crafting was too easy? Our small guild would spend months preparing for a conquest to win a title. Do you have any idea how many hours it took farming just to do the crafting conquests on the old system? I don't want to even think about how long it will take now. I'd never seriously contemplated quitting the game in 4 years, but now most of our guild is talking about what other games we could move to. The one thing smaller guilds like us could compete with was crafting week and it's now gone with a "We'll leave it as is for now and look at it again later" statement?

 

If you tried simply talking to players or having some kind of play testing you would avoid scenarios like this. Did any of you actually do the math to figure out how much time or materials it would take to do conquest now? It's like when GC came out. At the old rate of CXP it would have taken 200-300 hours of playtime to get to max level on just one toon.

 

My sub is about up and I was about to add another timecard, but I'm holding off and seeing what you actually do. I don't want to waste my money on a game that I'll just end up not playing out of frustration with the devs.

Yout Speek the Truth my Friend. I think and feel the same like you!

Farming Mats and crafting/preparing for a Crafting Week is much time an effort. The Bioware Devs dont know this.

Some People farming Mats over Months! And they craft over Months! And now it is nearly impossible to Farm/Craft for Conquest.

Leveling all the companions to a high Level for fast and efficient crafting is a hard Mission. This is a Money and Time sink! All this is for some guilds a Event and hard to organize.

They is nothing to Monitor Eric. You have to make it much easier!

This is the ONLY thing I'll say in defense of Bioware on this horrible patch.

Relics of the Gree was NEVER an alt friendly week for getting multiple alts to 20k conquest points.

Unless you enjoy endless warzones (now supposedly going to be put back in)

Unless you enjoy endless GSF (now supposedly going to be put back in)

Unless you did lots of Flashpoints (daily GF and Weekly 5 vet FPs/3MM FPs)

In today's update Eric didn't mention anything about the points they'd assigned. Looking at the points for the repeatable Ilum flashpoint this week, it's a laughably small amount.

On to my more "normalized" thoughts on 5.8.

You GUTTED crafting weeks. Ok, fine, that was clearly your intention. I think it was wrong, but you did it in a way that also GUTTED the points from crafting during NON-Crafting weeks. The cost of the resources, either by buying on GTN or time spent harvesting on lower level planets is NOT at all worth the reward you get from crafting a single invasion force. Let alone 10 to then turn around and "donate" for a measly amount of points.

The way to fix that is to either adjust the points up for invasion force, or revert back to the tiered recipes. I'd like to see the tiered recipes again, they let new players participate while leveling their crafting crew skills. That was ALWAYS a good thing.

Splitting the planets up into 3 difficulty levels is only going to hurt the guilds going after small/medium planets. I looked at the list, one of the historically most sought after planets, Rishi, is a medium planet goal.

MOST guilds choose planets based on the titles their guild members need.

Until ALL Conquest Content is Alf-Friendly Conquest is dead to me.

 

Fed up of being incentivised to start ever more Alts because new content is rarer than an honest politician, just to get punished for having Alts when someone at Bioware has another "Dim Bulb" moment.

 

The core concept of this game is predicated on us having and playing Alts - anything you do that punishes that is just counter-productive.

 

I can't believe Bioware are too stupid/ignorant to have failed to learn this lesson from the Command Levels fiasco.

 

All The Best

You speek Words of Wisdom.

Playing and Leveling Twinks is ab big Content in this Game.

For me this is like a bad dream. Back to Galactic command.

Where Playing/Gearing Twinks was nearly impossible because of "Thrill of the Hunt" and horrible CXP-Rates.

Ok. The participation stuff does make sense for being specific conquest weeks as I recall some are fp focused and others crafting and others events and so on.

However, bringing back in ONLY PVP/GSF objectives for all conquests is so incredibly focused on those players that it leaves the PVE players like myself jilted. Not cool. If you're going to do that for PVP/GSF, why not OPs and FPs?

PVE players, even with the rollout of 5.8 raw as it is now, were not excluded. We had not one but two rampages, and they were repeatable, meaning that you could kill 250 mobs on Hoth and 250 mobs on Illum for points as much as you wanted, and going forward, with the point requirement reduced from 20k to 15k for personal conquest goal, those points will go farther.