Jump to content

Discussion Topic: Game Update 5.4 and the Next Roadmap


KeithKanneg

Recommended Posts

As I outlined in the Roadmap, we are returning to our MMO roots, but as everyone knows, we were focused on story development and left most MMO content alone for the past couple years.
Dear Keith, this got me worried. At the root of SWTOR is the story (see the overview page of SWTOR and of course its roots in KOTOR). It is what sets SWTOR apart from other MMO's. It is its USP: a personal story-driven game.

 

I guess PvP and OPs are considered the only true 'MMO content' by many, but that type of content can be found in most other online games.

 

Of course I understand that story-driven content is quite costly to produce compared to WZ's for example, but I really hope that SWTOR will not let go of its story roots.

Edited by Tisaren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As of right now, it is not a Legacy currency. But, I know exactly what you're thinking, so let me pre-announce something which I suspect will make you smile, while at the same time, irritate you because I won't tell you when until I update the Roadmap. :eek:

 

We are working to change currencies to be Legacy based. This includes unassembled components, credits, the Umbara currency, and more. I'm not aware of any major obstacles preventing this from happening, and doing so will help with a number of changes we are planning for the future.

 

I know that doesn't solve the concern about having to run the Flashpoint multiple times on one character, but once you have the Key to open the Stronghold, you can use the currency for other items on the vendor.

 

Have a good weekend,

 

-Keith--

 

This all sounds very exciting!

 

And I really don't mind doing Umbara on just one character some ten times.... BUT.... couldn't the Stronghold unlock be not a currency as such, but a certificate? I mean, we get those barrels from Manaan FP, there's the Ziost tokens - Legacy bound items to by stuff for. Why not the Umbara key? (Plus, each token could drop the price by, say, 250k? So eventually, if someone wanted to, they could run Umbara for three weeks straight and then purchase the whole stronghold without using any credits at all?)

 

Also, we need more decorations. No ifs or buts, we simply need more decos, both easily available ones and rare ones that drop only from raids/ranked PvP weekly rewards and that are BoU so they can be sold on GTN. And everything in between.

Decos crafted directly by crew skills, decos that drop from trashmobs, only from Command crates/heroic mission crates, quest rewards.... anywhere that gives a player loot could have a chance to drop a deco. Planetary themes could be a thing. We have this already, but only for a few items (Rishi rep vendor for example), so it shouldn't be hard to expand on it. Also, armor/weapon racks where we could display our favorite outfits and weapons in our strongholds...

 

Either way, I'm kinda excited. Gonna get myself online to start farming money just in case I find something to spend it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great questions. As I outlined in the Roadmap, we are returning to our MMO roots, but as everyone knows, we were focused on story development and left most MMO content alone for the past couple years.

 

To change our direction, we had to retool, reorganize, hire new talent, and get everyone on board with the changed direction. That takes time, so we made a choice and decided to release the Operation Boss encounters one at a time. This gave us more time to design, polish, test, and get insight directly from players, versus making everyone wait all year before we released 5 new bosses.

 

It wasn't an easy decision, as we knew we were going to be criticized while impacting progression efforts. But, honestly, it was the right call. We're discussing future content, how to release it, what's going to be included, and when, but we won't be ready to disclose our next year's plans for a while.

 

I know that's vague, yet it gives you an idea of where we're headed.

 

---Keith

 

All your work has no sense until you:1) make cross-server queues or 2) merge servers. Until one of these implemented, all your changes are weak and useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As of right now, it is not a Legacy currency. But, I know exactly what you're thinking, so let me pre-announce something which I suspect will make you smile, while at the same time, irritate you because I won't tell you when until I update the Roadmap. :eek:

 

We are working to change currencies to be Legacy based. This includes unassembled components, credits, the Umbara currency, and more. I'm not aware of any major obstacles preventing this from happening, and doing so will help with a number of changes we are planning for the future.

 

I know that doesn't solve the concern about having to run the Flashpoint multiple times on one character, but once you have the Key to open the Stronghold, you can use the currency for other items on the vendor.

 

Have a good weekend,

 

-Keith--

 

LEGACY CREDITS. LEGACY. CREDITS. *explodes into a fireworks show of confetti and joy*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great questions. As I outlined in the Roadmap, we are returning to our MMO roots, but as everyone knows, we were focused on story development and left most MMO content alone for the past couple years.

 

To change our direction, we had to retool, reorganize, hire new talent, and get everyone on board with the changed direction. That takes time, so we made a choice and decided to release the Operation Boss encounters one at a time. This gave us more time to design, polish, test, and get insight directly from players, versus making everyone wait all year before we released 5 new bosses.

 

It wasn't an easy decision, as we knew we were going to be criticized while impacting progression efforts. But, honestly, it was the right call. We're discussing future content, how to release it, what's going to be included, and when, but we won't be ready to disclose our next year's plans for a while.

 

I know that's vague, yet it gives you an idea of where we're headed.

 

---Keith

 

same old, same old. You word it more prettily than your predecessor, but the message is always the same. "We know what is right and you WILL enjoy it, we don't need to hear your opinion and don't care how it impacts you, shut up and pay packs."

 

Oh, and I forgot, the "Something great is coming but I can't talk about it yet."

 

We'll see if it was "the right call". I happen to disagree. Ignoring your customers because you think you know better may be a time-honoured Bioware tradition but I think the time where you could afford that attitude is way, way past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Dev Post
Will it screw up Preferred Status players? Or you just don't care about all your players
Actually, we do care about all of our players. That's why we will address currencies and content access for all players this year, too.

 

---Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Dev Post
Actually a lot of us want Bolster to go back to 250, which is as high as possible, 242 is not as high as possible. I guess you didnt read the whole thread or count how many individuals actually asked for that.
We did read the whole thread and remember we didn't offer that as an option as progression is still part of PvP. Moving Bolster to 250 virtually eliminates the need to get gear and reduces the value for those who have earned Tier 4 pieces.

 

The right answer is we need to resolve the PvP gearing issues, so Bolster gets removed as a central issue.

 

Keith---

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, we do care about all of our players. That's why we will address currencies and content access for all players this year, too.

 

---Keith

 

If you truly care about your players it is time you tell us about implementing server merges OR cross-server queues. Stop ignoring this important issue!!!!!!!!!!!!! Try to play on french or german servers (or any Other except tre), and you will see how bad is it: waiting for queue proc 5-30 minutes, always the same faces on warzones, often premades fighting each other, no people for certain contents (heroic missions, uprisings etc), and no,server transfer is not an exit (people dont want to leave their guild mates, guild ships and for many other reasons).

Edited by omaan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

same old, same old. You word it more prettily than your predecessor, but the message is always the same. "We know what is right and you WILL enjoy it, we don't need to hear your opinion and don't care how it impacts you, shut up and pay packs."

 

Oh, and I forgot, the "Something great is coming but I can't talk about it yet."

 

We'll see if it was "the right call". I happen to disagree. Ignoring your customers because you think you know better may be a time-honoured Bioware tradition but I think the time where you could afford that attitude is way, way past.

Heaven forbid game designers actually be in charge of the design for their game.

 

Developers should take player feedback into account as one factor --and an important factor at that-- that goes into their decision-making process for the game. But it is never going to be the only factor. Doing exactly what the players say is both practically impossible (so many different players want so many different things, there is no way they have the resources to implement them all at once) and logically impossible (some players want [X] and some players explicitly want [NOT X]). The playerbase isn't some monolith with a singular vision for the game.

 

So sometimes they're going to look at player feedback and say "Hey, this player feedback has an idea we like that we can fully implement" (e.g. removing training costs).

 

Sometimes they're going to look at player feedback and say "Hey, this feedback has an idea we like, but we just don't have the resources to implement it right now, we'll keep it in mind for later" (e.g. everything they add to their "wall of crazy").

 

Sometimes they're going to look at feedback and say "Hey, we have one idea for how this should be, a number of players are telling us they want something different, we'll try to meet those players half-way" (e.g. weighing their idea for GC to be the entirety of end-game gearing against some players' feedback that it should be removed completely, and compromising by bringing back gear drops and gear currencies and moving GC to a supplemental role in gearing up).

 

And yes, sometimes they're even going to look at feedback and say "Hey, that's just not something that jibes with our vision for the game, so we're not going to do that."

 

IMO that's exactly the way designers should go about their game development, and it seems to be something BW is doing. The most useful feedback for Devs is generally of the "Is this thing we're doing fun? Y/N" and "What is it you find fun / not fun about it?" variety (with the second being the more useful). Feedback of the "I demand that you do things this way instead of that way" variety ... not so much.

Edited by DarthDymond
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did read the whole thread and remember we didn't offer that as an option as progression is still part of PvP. Moving Bolster to 250 virtually eliminates the need to get gear and reduces the value for those who have earned Tier 4 pieces.

 

The right answer is we need to resolve the PvP gearing issues, so Bolster gets removed as a central issue.

 

Keith---

 

But the PvP players want a PvP paradigm where Skill is the determining factor.

The ONLY way to do that is to make Gear as near to irrelevant as is mechanically possible.

 

And that is 100% antithetical to your concept of "Gear Progression" as a part of PvP.

 

You can have A) Skill Based PvP, OR you can have B) Gear Progression Based PvP, you can't have both.

 

Your customers have told you they want A, and you have half said "No, you're getting B".

 

So you "read" the whole thread, but didn't actually take on board what was said.

 

I understand - you want there to be Gear Progression because that is a useful (from Bioware's PoV) proxy term for "Grind" - the continual rinse-repeating of already stale content just to get back to the same relative power level we were BEFORE the last content patch.

 

I have no problem with a grind to "get more powerful", but a grind to "get back to being as powerful as I was 1 year ago" is - frankly - insulting to our intelligence and to our prior efforts.

 

 

All The Best

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Dev Post
Heaven forbid game designers actually be in charge of the design for their game.

 

Developers should take player feedback into account as one factor --and an important factor at that-- that goes into their decision-making process for the game. But it is never going to be the only factor. Doing exactly what the players say is both practically impossible (so many different players want so many different things, there is no way they have the resources to implement them all at once) and logically impossible (some players want [X] and some players explicitly want [NOT X]). The playerbase isn't some monolith with a singular vision for the game anyway.

 

So sometimes they're going to look at player feedback and say "Hey, this player feedback has an idea we like that we can fully implement" (e.g. removing training costs).

 

Sometimes they're going to look at player feedback and say "Hey, this feedback has an idea we like, but we just don't have the resources to implement it right now, we'll keep it in mind for later" (e.g. everything they add to their "wall of crazy").

 

Sometimes they're going to look at feedback and say "Hey, we have one idea for how this should be, players are telling us they want something different, we'll try to meet them half-way" (e.g. taking their idea for GC to be the entirety of end-game gearing, players' feedback that it should be removed completely, and compromising by bringing back gear drops and gear currencies and moving GC to a supplemental role in gearing up).

 

Sometimes they're going to look at feedback and say "Hey, that's just not something that jibes with our vision for the game, so we're not going to do that."

 

IMO that's exactly the way designers should go about their game development, and it seems to be something BW is doing.

You nailed it.

 

Even though it may not be apparent, I send so many of your suggestions to the Dev Team. We discuss them, debate them, then if we like something, we determine the effort, and decide when to do it. Keep in mind, we have to work to a schedule to ensure we deliver all agreed upon parts at the right time.

 

What may seem a simple change could very well add weeks of not just Development time, but Engineering, QA, reschedule of VO recordings, localization, and more. Although I'm notorious about asking for changes mid-stream, we desperately try not to, as it can impact everyone and cause schedule delays.

 

--Keith-

ps...sorry for all the posts seemingly all at once. We've been heads down this past week on various planning activities (including the Roadmap update) and realized we hadn't kept you apprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the solution for the credit fears is to just add a credit tab to the legacy bank. You deposit the amount you want to save and done. I personally wouldn't mind a cap being in place. It certainly would drive prices on GTN down to that point at least. I expect them to not do this since people will probably stop buying packs if they knew they couldn't sell the items for a nice amount. Its just everything on the GTN is being affected by this inflation to the point even the simplest crafted item goes for such outrageous prices. I see no end to these prices which makes the packs even more appealing to those lacking funds. So the worse the economy is, the more the packs probably sell for. I've just decided being self sufficient makes the most sense and eventually we'll have a GTN where just pack items are traded.

 

I think if they make it so the currency tab can have items removed to take inventory spots then hopefully all these difference rep items (such as bounty certs) can kept there or traded which I'd be very pleased with. I have this stuff taking up space that is really currency. Nice its tradable but nicer to have it act like a currency and go into its tab.

 

I am hoping this will eventually lead to all things legacy wide become non-inventory taking space. I loved the way EQ2 did appearance gear. You add the item to you appearance gear tab, it removes from inventory and becomes another drop down item for that slot. No more stamping items in place then having to deal with them. Everyone starts out with 20 open choices to choose for each slot and you can buy more with CC. If they take those that have bought multiple tabs, they expand their choices for those slots. It saves time since you don't have to locate the item, stamp it then remove the item to wherever you decide to place it. You just pick from the drop down any time you want to change something. Of course they still work the old way.

 

I'm still confused about this key business. For the stronghold you have to have the key to purchase and the having the key has the reduced price. But doesn't that mean there's nothing to reduce it from if you can't purchase it without the key or do you get the key the first run and the additional runs is what reduces the price? That's where its still muddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the PvP players want a PvP paradigm where Skill is the determining factor.

The ONLY way to do that is to make Gear as near to irrelevant as is mechanically possible.

 

And that is 100% antithetical to your concept of "Gear Progression" as a part of PvP.

 

You can have A) Skill Based PvP, OR you can have B) Gear Progression Based PvP, you can't have both.

 

Your customers have told you they want A, and you have half said "No, you're getting B".

 

So you "read" the whole thread, but didn't actually take on board what was said.

 

I understand - you want there to be Gear Progression because that is a useful (from Bioware's PoV) proxy term for "Grind" - the continual rinse-repeating of already stale content just to get back to the same relative power level we were BEFORE the last content patch.

 

I have no problem with a grind to "get more powerful", but a grind to "get back to being as powerful as I was 1 year ago" is - frankly - insulting to our intelligence and to our prior efforts.

 

 

All The Best

 

One annoying thing on forums is when people offer advice, find out it was rejected, and accuse the devs of "not listening." It's entirely possible they listened, read what you wrote -- and, wait for it, wait for it -- disagree. And, FYI, with respect to the subject at hand, there has been disagreement in every single PvP thread I've read on these boards (as there has been on every MMO PvP thread).

 

With that said, I also don't believe the situation is as dichotomous as you say; i.e., it can only be skill or gear-based, it can't be both. Having gear as incentive encourages participation and some people like chasing the carrot. Yes, there will be the Mandalorian types who love just the thrill of the hunt and would be fine with no rewards -- as in -- the test of your skills is reward enough. But understand that not all of us share that bloodthirsty bloodlust -- we like being rewarded with something more tangible.

 

The question is the level of the gap and the pace of the grind. Personally, I would put bolster at 244, but that's just me. As for the rate of accrual and legacy-wide aspects of UCs, it appears that is being addressed, though the devil is obviously in the details.

 

TL;DR: Opinions on how bolster and gearing should work in PvP vary (shock!):rak_03:

 

Dasty

Edited by Jdast
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did read the whole thread and remember we didn't offer that as an option as progression is still part of PvP. Moving Bolster to 250 virtually eliminates the need to get gear and reduces the value for those who have earned Tier 4 pieces.

 

The right answer is we need to resolve the PvP gearing issues, so Bolster gets removed as a central issue.

 

Keith---

 

Fairly cheap 3.0 gear and really cheap 4.0 PvP gear was able to solve it - easier to farm and it was instanced from PvE gearing.

 

But suddenly you needed half-year long "gear progression" in PvP and literally killed alt-friendly system from 2.0-4.0... :(

Edited by Glower
Link to comment
Share on other sites

same old, same old. You word it more prettily than your predecessor, but the message is always the same. "We know what is right and you WILL enjoy it, we don't need to hear your opinion and don't care how it impacts you, shut up and pay packs."

 

Oh, and I forgot, the "Something great is coming but I can't talk about it yet."

 

We'll see if it was "the right call". I happen to disagree. Ignoring your customers because you think you know better may be a time-honoured Bioware tradition but I think the time where you could afford that attitude is way, way past.

 

They do listen to us, but sometimes what we say isn't always right. There are various opinions on what they should and shouldn't. do.

 

I been here long enough to have lived through nerfs on my favorite character (sawbones) and been able to adjust and still able to play my sawbones. I have yet to not be able to play any of my toons because of changes they make to a character.

 

People have been complaining about the lightning spec sorceress for a long time and yet I have not had any problems with mine, even in operations. Sure I don't do pvp but that is one aspect of the game, not the entire game as someone want to make it seem like.

 

I have spoken to a friend of mine, whose opinion I respect and trust, and he agreed that the healing on the sorceress/sage is a bit too much. I have given his feedback since he doesn't come to the forums.

 

Customers are not always right, no matter what they want to believe. There are times that a customer is wrong but they can be stubborn and not admit that because they want what they want and don't take into consideration what is actually beneficial to more than just them.

 

That is the main problem here, each person wants something different but yet each of us think what we want is more important than someone else that is not true. The devs have to go through everything we may suggest and see if it will work but they have to consider the whole picture, not just our view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did read the whole thread and remember we didn't offer that as an option as progression is still part of PvP. Moving Bolster to 250 virtually eliminates the need to get gear and reduces the value for those who have earned Tier 4 pieces.

 

The right answer is we need to resolve the PvP gearing issues, so Bolster gets removed as a central issue.

 

Keith---

 

I think that's only part of the answer. The other part being the point that in unranked premades can easily destroy the fun of more casual pvp'ers and new players. Gear won't fix that. Also because ranked is just 4v4 I can imagine that the more serious pvp'ers can get really bored there and want to have an alternative. So they go in groups and take over unranked as it pleases them.

 

The pvp set up just doesn't have a way to separate more casual/average players from the ones who pwn it.

 

Would it really be a problem to take the group option away from unranked or something in that direction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, we do care about all of our players. That's why we will address currencies and content access for all players this year, too.

 

---Keith

 

Knowing is caring. So the question is, how well do you know your customers? I don't presume to know, it's not a judgment but things like Galactic Command do make me wonder.

 

I do believe however that you look at the comments and take them into consideration. And I certainly don't expect you to act on everything that is being said here.

 

In the end I suppose that there are various aspects of this game that need help and it's a little bit of a "where to begin?" situation.

 

Whether it's Operations, FPs, stories, companions, Warzones, GSF, Strongholds or whatever this game offers, I think that every area of the game has been suffering for the last few years for a variety of reasons.

 

It's unfair to expect miracles at this stage but I hope that there will be some clearer light at the end of the tunnel for all these things within not too long a time.

 

There are two things that really made me angry: Galactic Command and Cartel Packs. I won't repeat specifics here, but at least you did something about Galactic Command. The one thing that is missing for me is a real sense of you guys investing into the game again instead of sitting back and lettting the cartel coin gambling flow. That may not be a fair representation but can you see why people might get that feeling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As of right now, it is not a Legacy currency. But, I know exactly what you're thinking, so let me pre-announce something which I suspect will make you smile, while at the same time, irritate you because I won't tell you when until I update the Roadmap. :eek:

 

We are working to change currencies to be Legacy based. This includes unassembled components, credits, the Umbara currency, and more. I'm not aware of any major obstacles preventing this from happening, and doing so will help with a number of changes we are planning for the future.

 

I know that doesn't solve the concern about having to run the Flashpoint multiple times on one character, but once you have the Key to open the Stronghold, you can use the currency for other items on the vendor.

 

Have a good weekend,

 

-Keith--

 

Hey Keith,

 

How will this affect credit caps? Will all the players' individual caps be combined?

 

I ask because I know a few people that have hit the 4.3 billion cap on most, or all of their toons, and also am wondering how this will affect free to play and preferred. 350K isn't enough for players to buy things anymore, not even basic supplies for crafting, stims, adrenals, medpacks, etc. The preferred cap really needs to be increased to probably 10 million, as this will also open up the market (I regularly play and understand the market, and somewhere around 5 to 10 million is really the optimal point for F2P/Preferred).

 

Thanks!

 

(P.S. If you're one of those people with dozens of billions and they reduce the cap so you're going to loose credits, I will gladly take them. :p )

Edited by FlavivsAetivs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We did read the whole thread and remember we didn't offer that as an option as progression is still part of PvP. Moving Bolster to 250 virtually eliminates the need to get gear and reduces the value for those who have earned Tier 4 pieces.

 

The right answer is we need to resolve the PvP gearing issues, so Bolster gets removed as a central issue.

 

Keith---

As much as I appreciate the increased communication, I need to read between the lines and still don't fully understand your intentions. For example, you write:

"it is our design intent that players in all gameplay have some form of gear progression"

"[P]rogression is still part of PvP. Moving Bolster to 250 virtually eliminates the need to get gear and reduces the value for those who have earned Tier 4 pieces."

 

I just can't understand your thought process. I did not study game design, but in the past 5+ years of playing this game, I learned a lot about MMOs, and your posts show me that I have a completely different understanding about it than you do. In my opinion, gear progression is required for PvE, but it is counter-productive for PvP.

You requested that we should always include details on why we dislike something, so I'll keep my post as reasoned and objective as possible.

 

--------------------------------------

 

Gear is the best reward you can offer in an MMO. Putting out higher numbers feels very rewarding, and will cause your players to do whatever is necessary to get the gear - assuming the grind is not too long, or they'd lose interest and quit the game entirely.

 

--------------------------------------

 

For PvE, gear progression is needed because the content is very repetitive. By offering loot, you encourage players to keep killing the same bosses over and over again without it becoming boring.

 

An exception can be made for the very hardest content (nightmare/Master Mode), which is tuned to such a high level that you'll have variances in daily player performance and RNG, which makes the content interesting for a long time. But for the average PvE player who can't run that content (instead doing e.g. flashpoints and SM operations), the content grows old very fast, and needs to offer gear as a reward.

Ideally, it should take everyone 3-6 months to get the full gear, then you can have another 3-6 months where everyone is BiS before resetting the gear and introducing a new grind, ideally together with new content so that players won't feel they need to regrind to get back to where they were before.

 

The traditional gear progression (locking gear behind the hardest content), as it is used in WoW, and was used in SWTOR pre-4.0, works if and only if that content becomes easier over time. When a new raid is added, you have trouble beating it not just because you need to learn the mechanics, but also because you need to acquire gear. As you get more and more gear, the bosses become easier. And with the next expansion and level increase, you'll be 5 levels higher and a group that can usually only do VM bosses can take a shot at the MM bosses from the previous expansion, prolonging their amount of content.

 

Unfortunately, since the 4.0 changes this is no longer possible. All content stays on-level, and players are stuck running their content. A VM raid group is stuck running VM, they'll never meet the DPS checks required to advance into MM because their player skill is lower, they will always play at e.g. 80% efficiency, and they need better gear to advance into higher content.

This is worsened by the fact that the learning curve is too steep. New players can no longer learn their class when leveling up because the content is too easy, and SM operations had so many mechanics taken out that the transition to VM is too difficult.

 

There appears to be some trend where your design team wants to make the new content as challenging as possible. We saw that with Rav/ToS/Monolith, with the Forged Alliance flashpoints and especially Blood Hunt/Battle of Rishi, and now with the new GotM raid. Umbara promises to be no different since you say it will require 242 gear.

Right now, GotM VM is tuned too difficult. Raid groups that can kill all other VM content (except for maybe Revan/M&B/Styrak VM), have difficulty beating Tyth. I can understand that with the operation spread across a full year, it should be tuned more difficult, but then it must be nerfed eventually. I was very sad to not see any nerfs for Tyth with 5.2 - in fact, because of the class changes, it is now much harder to beat the DPS checks. Any group who is still progressing on Tyth 3 months after release should now see a nerf for Tyth so that they have a chance to beat it. And if Tyth is nerfed, any group who already killed Tyth before will be able to get the Tyth lockout much faster (instead of spending 1+ hours on it), and can spend more time on the new boss.

 

I advocate for reverting the 4.0 changes. It should once again be possible to outgear and outlevel content. Without doubt, EV/KP/EC were too easy during 4.0, so you should never be 10 levels above the content. But I'd be fine with having current content on-level, and any previous content 5 levels lower. Alternatively, you could just nerf DPS/HPs checks to have the same effect. Ideally, you would offer a button for top PvE players to scale the content back to on-level difficulty; then they can still challenge themselves if they want.

 

A major problem is legacy gear. Usually, the purpose of lockouts is to prevent players from farming gear too quickly. By now, most veteran players have 5+ characters at max level, and they'd be able to farm a full gear set within 1-2 weeks. This must be prevented, as it unbalances any gear progression you intend.

One solution could be legacy-wide lockouts. For example, players could still kill the same boss on multiple characters, but they'd only receive loot on the first kill. But I'm sure you can come up with plenty of other solutions to prevent players from farming gear too quickly.

 

--------------------------------------

 

For PvP, a gear progression is not needed. Because of matchmaking, every match is different. A PvP player will be occupied in playing PvP for a long time even if there's no gear progression. As long as you offer a new map from time to time, and do some class changes throughout the year to keep the meta from becoming stale, PvP players are happy.

 

If you look at any bolster discussion thread, the consensus is that in PvP, everyone should be on equal footing and that the 4.0 period was the best time for PvP. There can be room for some player variance, e.g. the amount of Crit and Alacrity enhancements, but other than that, everyone should have the same stats.

 

The problem is that PvP is a very hostile environment, and the player retention there is much lower than in PvE. (This is easily proven if you look at any MMO, the PvP servers are always the first to die out.)

To some degree, this is because of bad player behaviour since PvP brings out the worst in people, but it's also because in PvP, there is always a winning and a losing side.

Good players in good gear who win every match will of course feel happy, but on the other end of the spectrum, you have the new player in bad gear. If he sees how much PvP he needs to play to get gear and become competitive, he will more than likely give up instead of trying to improve.

 

Close matches can be very fun for both sides. For example, a 5:6 defeat in Huttball doesn't feel as bad as a 0:6 defeat. And for the winning side, a close victory has more suspense than an easy victory. And these types of situations can be created by giving everyone the same gear. (Of course, the matchmaking should also be good so that you don't have two premades fighting against 8 random players.)

 

I realize that the server populations have gone down, and you need to encourage players to PvP so that queue times are short, but it should not come at the expense of the PvE players. Since 5.0, there has been a decrease in the amount of flashpoints and operations being run because PvE players are forced to PvP to upgrade gear.

I'm confident that PvP will survive if you add 248+ bolster. Already, PvP is the best source of conquest points, and you have succeeded in converting many PvE players into doing PvP; I'm confident that they'll continue doing PvP. Maybe not as much as now, but still queue 1-2 matches a day for fun, even if they don't get gear from it.

 

--------------------------------------

 

For myself, I'm mostly a PvE player and only play PvP when I'm in the mood for it. I got full 242 gear before 5.2, so when 5.2 launched, I was forced to play tons of PvP to upgrade it to 248.

 

I have a full 248 gear set now (and reached Valor 100 and completed the 1000 warzones achievement in the process), but I hated every second of it. Nearly everyone in my raid group has full 248 gear by now, except for the 1-2 players who don't play SWTOR as much (and we crafted 246 gear for them).

 

However, I would not be angry if the gear grind was nerfed and 248 gear became more easily available. From what I can tell, Galactic Command and the huge gear grind is the main reason why many veteran players left post-5.0, and it's the main deterrent preventing previous players to return to the game. Putting in DPS nerfs in 5.2 only helped some players with their decision in unsubscribing.

 

Right now, even though we got a new operation, I do not see a big uptick in PvE players. To some part, this is because during summer, it is always less busy in MMOs, but I'm confident that it's also because of the gear grind.

I already forgot most of my frustration with the forced PvP, and would rather have more people to play with, than sit on my 248 gear because it took so much time to get it. I do hope my long post could convince you that the current gearing system is flawed. The grind should have been nerfed months ago, and any week it goes on longer is wrong.

 

A quick fix would be to increase component rewards from PvP by 5x, and add components to all PvE content (operations, flashpoints, uprisings), with the amount depending on the difficulty. Then, you have some breathing room to get a better gearing system in place for 6.0.

Edited by Jerba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Credits too? (Cover your ears so you don't hear the scream) YAY!

 

I'm actualy worried about the credits part. preferred/f2p credit limits are low as it is. making credits legacywide will mean that your entire stable of characters has 200k/350k between them, unless credit limits are changed. and before people come along and engage in shadenfreude - you do NOT want to push even more people from this game with this. trust me.

 

Actually, we do care about all of our players. That's why we will address currencies and content access for all players this year, too.

 

---Keith

I'm hoping that this means non subscribers will actualy be able to afford to participate in content/market along with subscribers.

 

that said, the burning question in my mind is.... will the character transfer cost remain at it current number after the 5.4? or will it go up before the patch?

Edited by Jeweledleah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please ... please tell me that we'll have to defend our trains from masked bandits mounted on steeds of some biological or mechanical variety. We need a whole mini game where we ride Collicoid-Games-Esque turrets mounted on the tops of our Stronghold-Trains, and when we get overwhlemed and the masked bandits board, we dismount and defend the train with our sabers and blasters.

 

Rewards? I think a weekly crate with a guaranteed 248 sounds about right. A SELECTABLE 248.

 

Also, please PvP this too.

 

I don't think that's asking too much. That's like, what? A few days of development? At MOST?

 

Oh, almost forgot, guild stronghold trains can be used for guild-v-guild PvP for like a dozen crates of 248 gear per winner per week. That's like, a few extra hours of dev time.

 

I'm looking forward to this content. Thank you!

 

EDIT: ALSO, the reward crates should be delivered by a swooning companion of the player's choice. This needs a whole unboxing interface of epic companion swoonage, like the new unboxing interface you guys unveiled a while back. That's like another few hours dev time. Totally.

 

Now I realize this was mostly a joke post; however, I wanted to throw out the idea that having a PVP option for our stronghold would be an EPIC idea. For those that are so inclined it could have an option to "Allow PVP," "Open for PVP," "Allow Invasions?" etc. just like there is an option to make a stronghold open to the public so others can tour & admire our decorating skills. I've actually given this idea quite a lot of thought & rather than post all the ideas here in this thread I've started a new one Here I'd love to hear from some Devs about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...