Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Conquest Feedback and Upcoming Changes

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Conquest Feedback and Upcoming Changes
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

azathothgr's Avatar


azathothgr
03.22.2018 , 04:35 PM | #101
Quote: Originally Posted by KendraP View Post
What do you mean? Points for attempting a boss?
If thats the case, i assume because. By definition, pvp involves having a losing team. Not being able to "win" against a boss is pure incompetence. And yes ill admit it, I'm incompetent at defeating NiM bosses as a dps because my dps isnt that amazing.
The cq reward could be for lasting some time with a boss, if it's important to pve-ers to have pve participation conquest objectives. Perhaps lasting until boss enrages? Something not spammable, and more time consuming than actually trying to kill the boss, maybe. After all, if you've lasted that long, you've practically done the op. I don't think something like this would compete and interfere with actually killing a boss and getting drops and cxp and stuff.

This is pure theory, not even a suggestion at this point, though, in the middle of all this fubar mess.

Ibokagain's Avatar


Ibokagain
03.22.2018 , 04:37 PM | #102
Quote: Originally Posted by AmiHale View Post
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.

Haooll's Avatar


Haooll
03.22.2018 , 04:39 PM | #103
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthSpuds View Post
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"

Lxndra's Avatar


Lxndra
03.22.2018 , 04:39 PM | #104
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.
"Class Balance doesn't matter! Nerf East! Buff West!"

BRKMSN's Avatar


BRKMSN
03.22.2018 , 04:40 PM | #105
Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post


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.

Exly's Avatar


Exly
03.22.2018 , 04:40 PM | #106
Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
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. Letís jump in.

The Conquest Revamp Ė 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 Ė 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 Ė 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 Ė 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, letís talk about the things we are hearing from you.

Changed / Missing Objectives
This feedback was most commonly expressed from PvPíers who saw a daily objective for winning a Warzone, but not one for participating. Our plan to combat the old systemís homogenization was to spread out all Objectives. This week may not have participation as an Objective, but it isnít 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 Arenít Good Enough
We are seeing concerns that the Large (and possibly Medium) Yield rewards simply arenít 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. Weíre also going to be swapping the yellow/blue to be consistent with the rest of the game. In addition, weíll 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 isnít 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.

Ibokagain's Avatar


Ibokagain
03.22.2018 , 04:42 PM | #107
Quote: Originally Posted by dryving View Post
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.

Tirozulu's Avatar


Tirozulu
03.22.2018 , 04:45 PM | #108
Even with these improvements you still have RUINED Conquest for medium to smaller guilds. My guild is operations based and we did the gf operation everyday just for ocnquest. Now its not even worth it you still won't come close doing everyday. before you could do it twice a week with some pvp and you hit your goal. YOU BROKE IT and LESS PEOPLE will be even doing conquest. I thought the goal was to increase participation?

MikeCobalt's Avatar


MikeCobalt
03.22.2018 , 04:46 PM | #109
Quote: Originally Posted by Exly View Post
Rubbish.
HAHahahaha, Funniest thing I've seen in a while, made my day.

ShadowCouncil's Avatar


ShadowCouncil
03.22.2018 , 04:52 PM | #110
Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
[LIST][*]Objectives and their points Ė 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.