A guild that is casual in all its normal functions are ignored by the devs. Larger guilds that have people who run are REQUIRED to run things like PVP cause it makes up for 99% of conquest points always dominate everything. Seeing things like Solo Ranked: Achiever 178,490 points is down right ridiculous.

 

Not everyone who plays the game is there to PVP. Most the time in PVP you find some of the worst players there cause "My numbers are better then yours, go learn your class!", even if someone is just there for fun. Catering to PVP like that is just saying "Oh we don't want you all out there in the main worlds." Re-balance them numbers make it fair for everyone again.

That's a particular week's conquest, not all conquests. I don't PvP either, there was a few weeks ago a Heroic Achiever non-repeatable one on the list. I ran a conquest for my guild to try and expand the flagship asap, I didn't have to do PvP for anything. But with careful choices of which character did what missions(usually two per planet per character inc bonus/Heroic), how many killed (75 for Defeat Enemies 1&2), which sold credits for junk, which caught a taxi, which decorated a stronghold; and my focus was on the Gree event gray helix component rewards.

I had by weeks end managed to push through 23 characters to conquest goal, with a day to spare for rest, and a day during the conquest in a day surgery. It can be done, and that particular week/planet had no focus on PvP, just as this last week's World Boss targets weren't there during that week either but last week managed to snag a few quick points joining random ops groups for a grand slaying.

 

You need to focus on what is there for your playstyle. I assure you some weeks the FP/Ops/PvP fanatics feel as you do now.

My point wasn't that my guild doesn't hit conquest. It does every week. The point I am trying to point out is that due to the large number for PVP and large that force people do things in their guilds. It forces casual guilds to NEVER BE ABLE TO EARN ACHIEVEMENTS for conquest. When a guild has 2 or 3 off shoots and each one is 1 2 and 3 on the boards.. where is the fairness to other guilds? Why Should guild like that be able to hit 170-200 MILLION conquest?

My point wasn't that my guild doesn't hit conquest. It does every week. The point I am trying to point out is that due to the large number for PVP and large that force people do things in their guilds. It forces casual guilds to NEVER BE ABLE TO EARN ACHIEVEMENTS for conquest. When a guild has 2 or 3 off shoots and each one is 1 2 and 3 on the boards.. where is the fairness to other guilds? Why Should guild like that be able to hit 170-200 MILLION conquest?

 

You need to decide what your guild is chasing in conquest. Be it encryptions, or glorious top ten rankings to wow people with. If it's encryptions, who cares about rankings, hit your 50K total and play a different character, aim at low level target planets because it doesn't matter. If it's the big WOW factor, good luck to you? I was in a guild previous to making my own that thought itself a contender, but didn't even communicate let alone play with eachother except for the most powerful players in the guild. Their end goal was encryptions, but they wanted that ranking too. They failed miserably at both because they weren't a unit. These guilds you speak of, are dedicated to the win. And for enjoyment of the game and friendship, I'm personally content to be as far away from those mega-guilds as possible.

 

To me it sounds like that would be a good idea for you, as it's pissing you off so much. Ignore it, or jump ship and swim with the sharks. Conquest is a very small area of a very large gaming experience. Some forget that. TOO many forget that.

Edited October 20, 2020 by lusskat
grammar

I have to laugh at this, not so long ago people were campaigning there wasn't enough pvp rewards, now someone is giving out there are too many.....lol

My point wasn't that my guild doesn't hit conquest. It does every week. The point I am trying to point out is that due to the large number for PVP and large that force people do things in their guilds. It forces casual guilds to NEVER BE ABLE TO EARN ACHIEVEMENTS for conquest. When a guild has 2 or 3 off shoots and each one is 1 2 and 3 on the boards.. where is the fairness to other guilds? Why Should guild like that be able to hit 170-200 MILLION conquest?

 

With all due respect as someone who is a very small guild, you can not expect to match the numbers achieved by the mega guilds. Those guilds were topping the charts before the pvp points were adjusted and will remain there unless those guilds are banned from earning conquest. Which kind of defeats the purpose doesn’t it.

 

In short if you want to top the conquest rankings you can do one of two things. One, you can join one of the mega guilds and aid them in staying on top. Two, you can dedicate your gameplay into building a mega guild of active players all your own and go head to head with the big guilds.

/snip

You, and your guild, have the same opportunities and access to tools and players as everyone else. This is your foundation of real 'fairness' and 'equality', neither suite your actual issue(s).

 

You, in your own words, have self identified as casual. This is your choice, and you choose daily to maintain it.

In your own words, your guild also identifies as casual. This is their choice, and they choose daily to maintain it.

 

No matter how you try to box it or brand it, conquest = Guild vs Guild. War is hell, and "Casuals" will never "win" CQ.

 

This is a basic blend of free will and natural selection. Don't like it? ok, no one has forced you to do anything one way vs another, so choose to do things differently, then act on those choices.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Kaveat

If you want the achievements, your best bet is to join the top CQ guild on your server, it's the only way to get them. Just put one toon in there, let it get the rewards/ achievements, and leave your other casual toons, in the casual guild

I agree to the points made above. People complain about one thing. Those complainers get what they want which sets off another set of complainers. With a large population in the gaming community, it's literally impossible to make everyone happy.

 

Regarding the smaller guilds not having a chance to compete with the "mega guilds," literally every guild on the server started out the same size (with 4 members). The mega guilds had a LOT of work put into them. It's literally impossible to create a guild and expect it to thrive on its own. The success or failure of every guild in this game and others is determined by the amount of work the leadership puts into it and by the style in which the guild is managed. If you want your guild to be competitive, put the work in to improve yours. In my mind, complaining about other guilds being better than yours is synonymous with complaining that you, yourself, didn't do the work required to make your guild competitive. Don't resent the bigger, more successful guilds. The cost of a successful guild doesn't come cheap and there is never a successful, sustainable mega guild that was an overnight sensation.

As a member of one of those “mega guilds” on the Star Forge server, I can say that PvP doesn’t factor into why we stay on top. It’s the hard work, communication and organization of all our members that does it. Casual guilds, by their very nature, don’t do these things to the same extent. Saying that your casual guild can’t compete with the top guilds and it’s all EA/BioWare’s fault is like saying that you only play basketball once a week, and it’s the NBA’s fault that you can’t beat LeBron James in a 1-on-1.

As a member of one of those “mega guilds” on the Star Forge server, I can say that PvP doesn’t factor into why we stay on top. It’s the hard work, communication and organization of all our members that does it. Casual guilds, by their very nature, don’t do these things to the same extent. Saying that your casual guild can’t compete with the top guilds and it’s all EA/BioWare’s fault is like saying that you only play basketball once a week, and it’s the NBA’s fault that you can’t beat LeBron James in a 1-on-1.

 

Sure, but the NBA also does not put LeBron James up against a peewee player and actually expect any competition. The peewee players are kept in their league, the youth players are kept in their league, and the professionals are in their own league. No one in a small guild is realistically asking that they be given an advantage so as to compete against the larger guilds. The small guilds would just rather compete against comparable opponents rather than being forced to compete against professionals where they have no chance whatsoever.

 

Now, how exactly could BW achieve this? Do they limit which guilds can invade the different yields by guild size? That would not work so long as planets remain tied to the yield. There is also the question of how do you determine size? Is it number of characters, number of accounts, or number of active characters or accounts?

 

They could decouple the Conqueror of [Planet] achievements from the top spot on the leaderboard. Instead make it something to do with completing conquest whilst invading that planet a certain number of times. For example, the planets for this week at Ziost, Rishi, and Alderaan. In order to complete the Conqueror of Ziost achievement one's guild would need to invade Ziost and complete their yield target for the week five times. Not five times in that one week, but invade Ziost five times and complete conquest each time. There is still the problem of planets being tied to yield, which would still put some planets out of reach, but they have indicated that they intend to decouple the planets from yield size. If they did that then everyone could complete the achievements.

 

They could keep the "[Planet] Controlled By" message limited to which ever guild holds the top spot on the leaderboard whilst still opening up the achievements to others and getting LeBron James out of the peewee games.

/snip

 

the problem I see is that you are falling for the same trap that many of the BW content designers and devs have been mucking about in for years.

 

TLDR: stop, just stop. CQ is broken, and the more you try to 'fix it' the worse you are making it. The potentials for a 'properly balanced AND engaging system' do exist, but ffs, stop with this imperialistic bloat. You now have this run-away process that, at this rate (and in the not too distant future), will make us hit hundreds of thousands (if not millions, plural) for personal goals and double million digits for guild - and in the process so many people are just going to quit rather than deal with more of the same.

 

You mentioned decoupling the planetary conqueror titles & achievements, and I'll just stop with it at that. Great idea, should have been done ages ago. Rather than just adding more and more planets to the galactic conqueror list and there by jacking up the original achievement that much more (which btw also nukes the old achievement dates every time this happens) - MAKE NEW BLOODY )(^%^%@! ACHIEVEMENTS! Same goals, just new names and ID's, that's all it would have taken.

 

Rant Time:

 

 

Prime example of how to bring about a few small(ish) but explosively positive changes:

 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Kaveat

Rant Time:

Achievement dates matter to players, as do the time and efforts relevant to the period in attaining those achievements (and titles) - so kindly stop trivializing our efforts and the relevant rewards by stealing them and/or re-branding them for new generations, because that kind of track record really is not conducive to encouraging players to work towards any new ones. I know it killed achievements for me all together. Esp when the achievements were reset for DvL because you were too damn lazy to make new ones. So I'll state it again just so you get the point: Same goals, just new names and ID's, thats all it takes.

 

This is literally what should be done every time there is a release that causes a major shift in the gearing /stat system(s). Those that had the achievements (and titles) when they were current get to keep them. Those that want to repeat them under the new auspices can do so, and have something to show for it (again).

#endrant

 

 

I loved Rant Time. I see people getting peeved about this stuff all the time. I don't care much about Achievements except those that grant me free CCs and I chase em like a greyhound chasing that rabbit. I only hope, alike what you've pointed out as the issue there, that the rabbit's not a fake by the time I get around to attaining the Achievement completion to earn it.

Hmm I guess it peeves me too when they keep adding to or reconfiguring the whole Achievement line for it.

As disheartening as it sounds, there are very few ways to design a conquest system that is neutral to guild size. I don't even think it's possible without changing the entire system from the ground up.

 

Conquest systems such as node control and castle sieges usually always favour the bigger guilds. In Albion Online, bigger guilds control zones, and bigger groups are safer in the open PvP zones. In EVE Online, bigger fleets can control bigger market shares and secure low-sec routes more efficiently. Yes, you can stick to high-sec space, but that isn't the point.

 

The thing is that whenever there is something like that, bigger groups have an intrinsic advantage. And that's not always a bad thing in MMORPGs. They are games that thrive on group content and social interaction. Yes, you probably can't match a guild with 100+ people active each week for #1 spot on conquest, but your ten people guild can get to spot 5-10 to get some engrams. My former guild on Darth Malgus did it all the time.

 

It seems "unfair" as a smaller guild, but jumping in and trying to take the advantage of an MMO feature away from bigger guilds doesn't always end well. I agree that the point-system and final amount of scoreboard points needs to be looked at, but you probably never get to a point where Jimmy and his four friends have an equally big shot at conquering Corellia than Steve and his 110 people mega guild without creating something equally frustrating in the process.

Edited October 23, 2020 by Alssaran

snip

 

Tells people it is a trap to try to fix Conquest. Proceeds to offer suggestions for how to fix Conquest. BTW, there are already Liberator of [Planet] titles. They are tied to the Star Fortress missions.

 

Do not misunderstand. I do not completely disagree with that you posted, but you might not want to tell people to stop trying to fix Conquest and then proceed to tell people how you would fix Conquest.

Tells people it is a trap to try to fix Conquest. Proceeds to offer suggestions for how to fix Conquest. BTW, there are already Liberator of [Planet] titles. They are tied to the Star Fortress missions.

 

Do not misunderstand. I do not completely disagree with that you posted, but you might not want to tell people to stop trying to fix Conquest and then proceed to tell people how you would fix Conquest.

 

ah, ok. been years since I did any SF's and had forgotten about those. but meh, i have pointed in the general direction, they can figure it out from there. it was late, i was on a tear, there were voices in my ears offering pro/con advice (guilty parties feel free to remain seated /silent... #jabsinribs), so i ran with it for an hour or so.

 

And on one hand it is still very much a trap, but this was not so much of a targeted fix as it is a rip its guts out, lay out all the parts on the floor, make wanted /necessary changes, put back the relevant important bits and their dependents, see whats left as 'spare parts', evaluate parts as waste of code space vs putting them back into CQ.

 

There was a fair bit discussed that never got posted, these were just the highlights that were deemed to have the most combined effect on CQ with the smallest effort while maintaining relevance to each other.

Edited October 23, 2020 by Kaveat

For my two bob's worth.. I find it always helps to remember that this is a suggestion box, and the title and content of the OPs message is what needs looking at, responding if need be(hopefully with some useful advice/fixes they're maybe unaware of), and not get bogged down in the deeper debates of a much larger issue.

 

...title and post. These messages are for the dev' team afterall. Some may be outlandish or misdirected, most don't deserve to be picked to pieces for it.. and every other reply that may follow.

For my two bob's worth.. I find it always helps to remember that this is a suggestion box, and the title and content of the OPs message is what needs looking at, responding if need be(hopefully with some useful advice/fixes they're maybe unaware of), and not get bogged down in the deeper debates of a much larger issue.

 

...title and post. These messages are for the dev' team afterall. Some may be outlandish or misdirected, most don't deserve to be picked to pieces for it.. and every other reply that may follow.

 

The problem is that you can not simply peel back the outer layer of the onion and call it good. that's the kind of approach that has landed us in this position to begin with. Nothing is ever 100%, but as a direction this has potential. 2 pages in almost as many days that have been kept civil and more or less on track. Will they take it unabridged and make it a thing? unlikely, but it may spark some ideas and new directions that do impact the premise of the OP's train of thought.

 

OP (short version):

1) CQ is broken and biased

- in general, most agree with this in that some things are more broken /biased than others, and each will have their pet peeves and positions to champion relative to their personal perspectives.

- the nature of the beast is that there is no 'simple' or 'completely balanced' band-aid to slap on it, thus the peeling back to those underlying and larger issues.

2) balance and equality

- balance being a somewhat misleading term here, so the example posed in was also a sample of what it might take to reduce the impact of heavier hitters on smaller guilds.

3) PvP rant

- ok, lots of those around. I for one would rather focus on the underlying premise of 'balancing' CQ goals than get dragged into another pvp pro/con discussion.

 

 

as to being picked apart: SURE! pull at it until it falls apart, so long as you can keep it objective it has purpose. I'd rather have 20k objective comments over a handful of threads that do this than have the devs waste both our times and resources cranking out "solutions" that are anything but.

Edited October 23, 2020 by Kaveat

That's my point right there Kaveat, any replies should be to enlighten the OP of what can be fixed, or just that they may be unaware of things, so that the dev team doesn't need to bother with it, right?

 

When I said picking them to pieces, I meant picking over the OP(the person) like a carcass, and then picking eachother in a long line to pieces until the OP's message is lost in our own petty squabbles.

 

My own first visit here the first person who replied to my 'title and post' I assumed was a dev', they spoke like they had the authority of one, they continued to talk back and forth on how/when such a suggestion would be most suitable. I really thought there was some actual power behind this person and they made it appear that they did without outright coming out and saying it. When they said 'whispers around the dev's office are..' of course that made me think he was exactly that at the end of the back and forths.

 

Even an idiotic posting here, or one that you've seen dozens of times before, doesn't deserve some of the crap 'we' put them through.. sometimes a little mockery, but some here are just cruel, and genuinely deceptive by omission.

Edited October 24, 2020 by lusskat
clarifying a 'you' & 'your' with a broader 'we' & 'our'

I actually get this, hence my post just now (http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=985603).

 

The thing is, I don't think it's a bad idea to have competition and a system where top guilds can strive for better rewards, but there are limitations for even them in the current system. If the top 3 guilds target a system each, even the 4th place guild fails to achieve anything consistently. It does make the system fall far short of being something that adds value for the wider community, and let's be honest, there was never good design in a system that provides content for 1% of the player base, at least not when it comes to trying to retain players.

 

I don't think we should take the competition elements away, but they should be opened up in a manner that retains a rank / reward system but allows more players to make some sort of achievement progress if they work on it.

 

Hence my suggestion that they change the system to tiered. They might reward the top 1 with a bonus, but ideally (for example), the top 25% should get Gold, the next 25% Silver and the next 25% Bronze. This still potentially excludes guilds with 1 or two members, but rewards 75% of guilds and gives an incentive for the tiny guilds to club together.

Edited October 26, 2020 by simonxxx

I actually get this, hence my post just now (http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=985603).

 

The thing is, I don't think it's a bad idea to have competition and a system where top guilds can strive for better rewards, but there are limitations for even them in the current system. If the top 3 guilds target a system each, even the 4th place guild fails to achieve anything consistently. It does make the system fall far short of being something that adds value for the wider community, and let's be honest, there was never good design in a system that provides content for 1% of the player base, at least not when it comes to trying to retain players.

 

I don't think we should take the competition elements away, but they should be opened up in a manner that retains a rank / reward system but allows more players to make some sort of achievement progress if they work on it.

 

.

 

Personally I think you are wrong on this, the way cq is now, especially with the new changes , it's the best it's ever been, it's more widely available, guilds and people can get the rewards. It's true, you can't get the title , but no matter how the arrange the system, it will always be the top guilds, in starforge, it's basically Sanctuary & Spear, with a couple of others fighting for third. Nothing will change that. Everyone who gets the planet yield, gets the reward, and with the latest changes, more guilds are going to be able to up their yields. If the title is important, both Soc & Sant are always recruiting, not to mention the third placers.

 

 

Hence my suggestion that they change the system to tiered. They might reward the top 1 with a bonus, but ideally (for example), the top 25% should get Gold, the next 25% Silver and the next 25% Bronze. This still potentially excludes guilds with 1 or two members, but rewards 75% of guilds and gives an incentive for the tiny guilds to club together .

 

The system at the moment rewards nearly every guild that picks a yield, even one man guilds can now potentially get a small yield alone. My own small guilds (about 20 members, roughly around 12 accounts) have enough points to get their medium yields, something we've never even tried before.

Edited October 26, 2020 by DarkTergon

A larger guild who has gone after and completed the whole thing already (IE all achiv's) why keep going after it over and over and over? Also on the server I play on there are guilds that have 4 (four) guilds running conquest of the same name, same icon, same people. I wont name guilds publicly but they are trying to take more then one system on both sides, Imperial and Republic. IMHO that should not be allowed. Yes I can see having a pub and imp guild sure. But come on 3 imp guild 1 pub guild or more? Just to take over the whole board, where is the fairness to casuals and lower number guilds? Why should I have to move a toon to a guild I don't want to be in to get achievements I want? I shouldn't have to.

 

Kill off the CLONE guilds and things might better still. Guilds who can manipulate the conquest system need to be checked too. I heard of some who will make toons all week long just to get get big numbers then delete them and start again. Like really.

Edited October 28, 2020 by Neruil

I think the devs did allot for small guilds when they increased the conquest points so much. I have a one man guild, but never been able to cap conquest with the guild, thus I was missing the rewards that would give me flagship plans. But now I can. I chose the small yield to test it first, and with only a few alts I reached cap with ease, so I might try medium yield next time. Anyway, thank you BW! Edited October 31, 2020 by Lirtoo

I think the devs did allot for small guilds when they increased the conquest points so much. I have a one man guild, but never been able to cap conquest with the guild, thus I was missing the rewards that would give me flagship plans. But now I can. I chose the small yield to test it first, and with only a few alts I reached cap with ease, so I might try medium yield next time. Anyway, thank you BW!

 

yes, but, the downside will be when they readjust the personal and guild goals to 'compensate' for all this inflation... then they re-compensate on the rewards... then the goals again.... where does it end?

A larger guild who has gone after and completed the whole thing already (IE all achiv's) why keep going after it over and over and over?

 

New people are always joining, so they keep getting top, so these people can get the title.

 

Also on the server I play on there are guilds that have 4 (four) guilds running conquest of the same name, same icon, same people. I wont name guilds publicly but they are trying to take more then one system on both sides, Imperial and Republic. IMHO that should not be allowed.

 

This sort of behaviour is bad ( a polite way of putting it) , I'm not sure BW can stop it though. Thankfully on SF the top guilds, so far only go after one each time, even though they have multiple guilds.

 

Why should I have to move a toon to a guild I don't want to be in to get achievements I want? I shouldn't have to.

 

 

You don't have to move a toon, just create a new one, with the sole purpose of it being your CQ 'achievement' toon. If you want them, it's your only choice. As they can't just award them to everyone.

 

 

Kill off the CLONE guilds and things might better still. Guilds who can manipulate the conquest system need to be checked too.

 

How can you kill 'clone' guilds? are you going to make it illegal to have multi guilds, and how can you tell if one is, or isn't. All they have to do is have a different name, but keep the same players.

 

I heard of some who will make toons all week long just to get get big numbers then delete them and start again. Like really.

 

Do you have proof, or just hearsay.... I heard that some people are really lizards in disguise ....

And even if they are, is it against the ToS? (if it is, post your proof to the devs)