Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Is This A Joke? A Bug? Intentional?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Is This A Joke? A Bug? Intentional?
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

Pietrastor's Avatar


Pietrastor
08.30.2017 , 05:20 AM | #121
Just tie the conquest bonus to unlocking full strongholds.

1 Fully unlocked SH = +25%
2 Fully unlocked SHs = +50%

That simple. No more pointless filling with chairs, cash reward spent on full unlocked is rewarded with bonus and those who enjoy decorating can tinker with their houses and furnitures forever without having to worry about conquest number.

MrufkaZ's Avatar


MrufkaZ
08.30.2017 , 06:05 AM | #122
I was entertaining the idea of taking second character through Umbara. One that is not
Spoiler


But I will not sacrifice my other SHs. They may not be finished yet, but each has a theme and I've been working my *** off, to decorate them the way I want. Which is supposedly what I should have been doing. And yet I feel like I'm being punished for it...

So, it's a second time I play new content only one time (first was Iokath, of course). This is not a good trend you're setting, BW. Not good at all.

raverbane's Avatar


raverbane
08.30.2017 , 06:09 AM | #123
Wow! I am SO glad I didn't grind out the new flashpoint. No way I am dumping one of my current strongholds for a train! lol.

SteveTheCynic's Avatar


SteveTheCynic
08.30.2017 , 06:51 AM | #124
Quote: Originally Posted by Khaleg View Post
Oh yes, we know that, the cap was raised to five about a bit over a year ago. Actually I was one of the first people to coincidentally realize this while I was waiting for someone, coincidentally standing near the stronghold terminals on the fleet and clicking on them out of pure boredom. Suddenly I realized it offered me to buy the Yavin stronghold unlike before. So I bought it, eager for the conquest bonus only, fully unlocked and decorated it, and bang, really 125 % conquest bonus.
After this I've contacted the CS to get an explanation and details about this change and talked with a live agent. He admitted they've put that into the game silently without any mentioning in the patch notes. I think that was a patch in May 2016 or something. He said they did that intentionally for the people to find out about this themselves.
He also said there are no further strongholds planned. :-)
OK, but did they, in the post-Yavin patch, raise it to 5 or to 6? (It's hard to see how, if they didn't say one way or the other, you'd be able to *know*, since there were only 5 available, and nothing in-game says "you have 5 of a maximum of 6" nor "you have 5 of a maximum of 5."

That said, I do have this recollection of them saying it would be (had been?) raised to *five* at the time, but there's no way I have the slightest interest in digging through the devtracker to find it.
http://www.swtor.com/r/Hg3sV2
Buda-buda-buda-buda-buda-buda-CHING!
PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!
To go to Belsavis, you must go to Belsavis.

STARBORN's Avatar


STARBORN
08.30.2017 , 06:53 AM | #125
Total D**k move Bioware

I understood capping the weekly FP so we had to wait a week for the new stronghold. I understand that thinking.However,not allowing people to have something in the game without loosing something they spent time MONEY and passion on is BS!...I don't just put chairs down,so why do I suffer because half the game has no style.I waited for this SH.Did the "grind",and now I can't have it without dropping another SH?...WTH Bioware? You don't bother telling anyone till the release and then don't have the simple intelligence it takes to JUST CAP THE CONQUEST!!!...In 5 yrs that was damned close to the last straw.LEARN HOW TO COMMUNICATE!...had I known you were going to screw people again,I would have never logged into be disappointed again.

You are on probation,one more screw up like this.My money goes elsewhere.

Guinness's Avatar


Guinness
08.30.2017 , 06:57 AM | #126
You could always remove reactivation costs for all Strongholds until you have figured out how to sort this mess out. Reactivation costs are just punitive anyway.
How come you cannot update the game so that it only takes into consideration 6 Strongholds with regards to the conquest bonus? That way you could have 10 SHs, but only 6 would count... problem solved. This could be patched into the game very quickly and easily and I'd hope you get on this asap to resolve the issue.

Stellarcrusade's Avatar


Stellarcrusade
08.30.2017 , 07:22 AM | #127
Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
Hey folks!

It is intended that we did not raise the Stronghold cap, due to its impact on Conquests. The idea of "place chairs in every hook" for your bonus is not a great experience. We would like to allow you to have the Strongholds you want and decorate them the way you want, without negative impact on Conquests. Right now those things are integrally tied together.

We may increase the Stronghold cap in the future, but first we want to address some of the issues related to Conquests.

-eric
Wow, just wow. There is nothing wrong with increased limit and allowing 175% conquest. Its a credit sink and everyone who does earns the same conquest. "we want to address some of the issues related to Conquests" is rediculous. Every change since 5.0 has been a bad one, so how about you guys just fix bugs, no more changes. What really gets me, why do all changes negatively affect the majority of players and typically cater only to the 3 actual OPS groups on each server, or the 7 people who play ranked. It seems like you are trying to encourage more participation in OPS/Ranked but fail horribly.

Do your self a favor, examine your roadmap of planned changes (I mean the real roadmap, the stuff you do not tell us about ahead of time included) for the rest of 5.x and see if each one passes these tests, and if it doesn't, just cancel them:
1.) This change doesn't cater to a small group of players (like OPS/Ranked PvP) but at the same time negatively affects the larger group.
2.) This change doesn't discourage players from doing something they enjoy.
3.) This change improves game play for the largest group of players affected by said change.
4.) For whatever group this change improves game play, are there any groups left out which should be included.

I bet you'll cross out most of every planned change left.

Khaleg's Avatar


Khaleg
08.30.2017 , 07:24 AM | #128
Quote: Originally Posted by SteveTheCynic View Post
OK, but did they, in the post-Yavin patch, raise it to 5 or to 6? (It's hard to see how, if they didn't say one way or the other, you'd be able to *know*, since there were only 5 available, and nothing in-game says "you have 5 of a maximum of 6" nor "you have 5 of a maximum of 5."

That said, I do have this recollection of them saying it would be (had been?) raised to *five* at the time, but there's no way I have the slightest interest in digging through the devtracker to find it.
Ok, now I understand what you mean. I'm not entirely sure about this but the live agent said it was raised to 5. But sometimes they have not the slightest clue what they are even talking about, so who knows. :-)
I didn't care about that back then because only 5 were available anyway. I would rather believe they have raised it to 5 and when Manaan was introduced by another +1. Any reasonable person or company would have done the same with the introduction of the Umbara train as well, BECAUSE what kind of dumb explanation was given here?! As if raising the cap to 7 now would block future tweaks to the conquest bonus/hook count correlation in any way!?! It's so dumb and ignorant I can't even...As I said before I rather beleive it was forgottoen due to extremely flawed and unprofessional, I would guess chaotic, working processes and now they want to keep their straight face claiming it was "intentional". The other option is they have made an obviously outstanding dumb decision, and that 100 % intented...both is not very charming.
But even this unique dumb move should have been announced BEFORE the 5.4 release or at least in the patch notes. I think that is the very minimum any slightly reasonable or smart person can agree on. Given this fact I question what kind of people work at Bioware... lol. Not really blaming Eric here since he has to announce the bs he is allowed to, at the given time, bs others decide or f8ck up unintenionally.

Jerqa's Avatar


Jerqa
08.30.2017 , 07:25 AM | #129
Quote: Originally Posted by YlliyaXor View Post
You should spend less time thinking of new ways to slow player progression, and more time putting the chairs we can actually sit on, in the game as decos.

How is it that you can recode conquest to nerf crafting, but you can't do it now to make the new SH not count towards conquest?
There are chairs in game that we can actually sit on? Not emotes but actual chairs?
Click here and get a free 7 day subscription, a bundle pack for each character and a free transfer!
Rules & Information

Tsillah's Avatar


Tsillah
08.30.2017 , 07:26 AM | #130
Quote: Originally Posted by Jerqa View Post
There are chairs in game that we can actually sit on? Not emotes but actual chairs?
The Umbara Stronghold does, all the way in the front. Not kidding.
Galactic Command shall fall. May the Empire rise!

Gratuitous display of referral link: http://www.swtor.com/r/jMVTyB Use it for some goodies or don't use it.