Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Timed weekly needs to be renamed to GSF weekly

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Timed weekly needs to be renamed to GSF weekly
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

Sareeph's Avatar


Sareeph
05.24.2019 , 04:59 AM | #111
Quote: Originally Posted by olagatonjedi View Post
Ive never found a loot system that 100% of the population was ecstatic about. I likely never will.

That said, im all for a system that allows direct purchasing of the specific item a player wants.....BUT it needs to be gated so no specific population can just overabundantly collect their full set within an extremely short period of time.

If a direct loot system is implemented, it needs to have these specific criteria to maintain balance.
Endgame items need to be available for all regardless of interests, skill or average playtime
Endgame items need to be limited to 1 every 2 weeks or so (possibly more due to legacy gear)
How would the direct system you describe work? You say 1 piece every two weeks or maybe longer due to legacy gear but I fail to see how this would add anything of value to anyone. There are 14 pieces to a set, soon to be 15. If your system is per toon and all gear is legacy, then everyone could have a fully geared toon on week one with 15 toons. If the restrictions are set per account then you are describing a system that would take 30 weeks to attain one set. Really? 7.5 months to acquire a single set? Possibly longer due to legacy gear? How would this be any better received by the players than what transpired with the first iteration of the Command System from 5.0 release or from the Ossus time gating? These questions are not an attack but a desire to understand your view point.

Lakemine's Avatar


Lakemine
05.24.2019 , 09:38 AM | #112
Quote: Originally Posted by phalczen View Post
No, this is a false presumption.

1.) The developers could choose to make all four as equally difficult as the GSF mission, instead of what everyone is assuming they would do, which is to normalize around the "8 medals in a single unranked match" mission.
2.) People complain just as heavily when GSF is a conquest event. They also complained when GSF was a bonus activity for CXP when CXP was more important. They'd still complain regardless of how easy it is. This is because players still feel like the rotating timed weekly is an entitlement, rather than a bonus pathway.
3.) Those that are willing to risk account actions by going into GSF matches and hoping to be carried, whether its for conquest points, CXP, or hoping to be carried to a win, don't care about how it affects the gameplay of GSF veterans who are truly invested in the mode and want to see it succeed. Making it easier to complete the requirement will exacerbate the problem of AFK'ers or whatever you like to call them. Just ask the ground pvp'ers how they feel about the "desert-after-my-8" people.
Oh this is very true that they could make it "Win 3 pvp matches, do 2-3 GF OPs." then what it is currently, but I highly doubt they would since this would just make people give up and leave, or cause a uproar.

GSF is ok, I don't hate it, but pretty much the only main issue I have with it is the queue times. Imo, cross server queues would do wonders for all game modes and types. Btw, was it ever explained as to why they cant do cross server queues or have they never answered it?

Also, I havnt pvped for the past few months, but I have been these few weeks, I don't see anyone just afking at all in my pvp matches. I see people leave all the time at the beginning because its huttball for the 6th time in a row, but that's it. But you are correct in this is a issue that needs to be corrected. Hence why I was saying for medals in GSF also, because it means you actually have to do something in the game instead of just sitting around waiting to get carried for a win. Maybe the pvp one should be upped to 16 medals or 28? So it means people have to play more instead of just sitting around doing nothing? Also I get 8 medals a lot by sitting and defending points, but im not sitting and not doing anything.
I love Star Wars.

Lakemine's Avatar


Lakemine
05.24.2019 , 09:44 AM | #113
Quote: Originally Posted by olagatonjedi View Post
The game doesnt cant decipher what is the most optimal relic for your specific build. Just because one person wants mastery/power relics doesnt mean the next person does. While your experience and expectations may feel ephemeral mending and crit are wasted relics, the guy beside you might actually be happy he got those. Besides, you can disintegrate them anyways.


This is still RNG that the boss will drop the itemin the first place, then RNG that you will win. You cant escape RNG in a game like this.
]
But does 300 UC = the time invested for all the dailys you did? I don't see that as equal. All they have to do is give a option to pick the relic and it solves both player issues. One player who wants SA, gets SA. Another player who wants ephemeral, gets ephemeral. That seems equal to me.

Which is why RNG needs to be removed or have a catching mechanic to it. So say the blade drops is RNG, ok that run didn't drop it, but you get a token where after you farm enough of them, you can go to a vendor and buy it there. But its a once a weekly item, and you need 100 or so of them. (That's either 2 years for one character, or less for people with alts. Or if 2 years so too high for one character, put the limit to 50 then. I would say use it as a daily item, but since OPs lockout are weekly and not daily, the number needs to be less then if it was daily.)
I love Star Wars.

Lakemine's Avatar


Lakemine
05.24.2019 , 09:46 AM | #114
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeCobalt View Post
I don't believe any game can Totally get away from RNG, but I absolutely Do believe it can be fine tuned to work for the players in many different ways.
Think of when the program *Cycles from previous to next (In this case the Weekly) in order to Prevent this but to keep the range of Possibilities when the time to cycle comes the *Previous activity would get a "Very Low Bias" this also would only last for the cycle event. This would Prevent or "Greatly Reduce" the Chance of getting the same event two times in a row. On the next cycle the last event would get the very low bias. This Retains the same range but chances are greatly reduced. From here the system can be further Fine Tuned indefinitely as phases, trends or situations evolve. Some items, activities are liked by more, some less this process can be modified over and over to satisfy changing situations.
Or.....just have a set schedule which has no RNG to it? Even though this fixes the issue, sadly Bioware will never do it because of the guild conquest mess.
I love Star Wars.

kodrac's Avatar


kodrac
05.24.2019 , 10:29 AM | #115
Quote: Originally Posted by Lakemine View Post
Btw, was it ever explained as to why they cant do cross server queues or have they never answered it?
Yes they have. The engine can't handle it. Basically, during testing, characters would get "lost" when returning back to their origin server.
Quote: Originally Posted by aerockyul View Post
Id find it hard to believe this sort of thing goes on in the preferential treatment forum.

olagatonjedi's Avatar


olagatonjedi
05.24.2019 , 10:36 AM | #116
Quote: Originally Posted by Sareeph View Post
How would the direct system you describe work? You say 1 piece every two weeks or maybe longer due to legacy gear but I fail to see how this would add anything of value to anyone. There are 14 pieces to a set, soon to be 15. If your system is per toon and all gear is legacy, then everyone could have a fully geared toon on week one with 15 toons. If the restrictions are set per account then you are describing a system that would take 30 weeks to attain one set. Really? 7.5 months to acquire a single set? Possibly longer due to legacy gear? How would this be any better received by the players than what transpired with the first iteration of the Command System from 5.0 release or from the Ossus time gating? These questions are not an attack but a desire to understand your view point.
Perhaps the gate would need to be more open to allow gearing slightly faster than i initially proposed, but i hope it doesnt allow people to gear up extremely fast for competitive balance, but also doesnt take forever to gear up either. People will use every possible trick and strategy they can find to tip the balance in their favor, so each of these methods need to be gated in some form. The system needs to be balanced for the player who players 18 hrs a day 5 days a week AND the player who plays 2-3 hrs a couple days a week. Its hard to create a system that maintains that balance, but its important for the health of the game.

Warblack's Avatar


Warblack
05.24.2019 , 11:08 AM | #117
They can see which timed weekly there was last week and if it is the same as the current week, then choose another.
The solution is that simple.

Monoth's Avatar


Monoth
05.24.2019 , 04:27 PM | #118
The last two days I've decided to grin and bear it , so I started playing GSF to try and get my 3 wins, hoping I got on a good team, after several matches I found myself finally getting the hang of combat, after upgrading my equipment on the ship it became even easier... now I'm kind of enjoying GSF where before I hated it with a passion....

I think they need to put in some tutorial where you can fight against PvE opponents so you can get the hang of flying and what not..
F2P is like driving on a long stretch of highway with toll booths every 1/2 mile

spatnatz's Avatar


spatnatz
05.24.2019 , 11:36 PM | #119
Quote: Originally Posted by Joonbeams View Post
Yes on geometric distribution. That's what I was thinking of.
And I think you're referring to the law of large numbers (probability theory)?
Law of large numbers is close, it has to do with n > 30. The condition I listed is actually a more rigorous condition that must be fulfilled before we can assume a set of proportion data is normal (bell-shaped), which would demonstrate that a large portion of the data clusters around the mean, with only a minority on the outer tails of the curve (more than 2 standard deviations above/below mean).

Lakemine's Avatar


Lakemine
05.25.2019 , 01:25 PM | #120
Quote: Originally Posted by kodrac View Post
Yes they have. The engine can't handle it. Basically, during testing, characters would get "lost" when returning back to their origin server.
Ahh....that is sad As cross server queues would fix a lot of population in modes issues for pops. Oh well, maybe in the future they can figure it out lol
I love Star Wars.