Planetary Conquest is Dominated by LARGE Allied guilds

Common sense should tell you that in any competition, and conquest is a competition, that some will win and some will loose. Some will do well and some will not. Some will try their hardest and others barely try at all.

Any medium sized or larger guild can make the top ten and earn rewards. All it takes is some time, effort, and paying attention to the conquest missions. If a guild isn't in contention then it's their own choice by not putting anything into it. Will the top one or two spots be held by large or mega guilds regularly? Yes, but the whole rest of the top ten is up for grabs by any guild willing to put in the time & effort.

Everyone deserves a CHANCE to make top ten and get those rewards. But that's all they deserve, the opportunity, which already exists.

I earned around 150k week one, 250k week two, and am at around 300k right now in week three and I do NOT pvp, ever...just don't care for it(and GSF) as a personal preference. That's 4 non-active toons going for the personal bonus and 1 active toon. So no, it is NOT geared to pvp.

What you, and others, fail to understand is that most of us understand the nature of competition. We understand that the event is a competition and that the standard rules of competition apply.

Unfortunately, you also fail to understand that players will cease to compete if they are pushed out of the competition because of a built in bias towards certain competitors. In this case, mega-guilds.

Games can only support so many mega-guilds, and SWTOR is no exception. While their are a number of large guilds, there are only a few mega-guilds and it is these guilds that are seen at the top of the leader board every week.

The system needs to encourage all guilds to compete, but to also encourage winners to hold what they have. The current system lets mega guilds dominate every single week when a more competitive system would allow more guilds to compete over time. While mega-guilds would win the initial weeks, the large guilds would then be competitive in later weeks.

The current system is akin to a football league composed of 3 NFL teams, 6 College teams and 21 High School teams. The 3 NFL teams compete for the top 3 spots among themselves, the 6 College teams compete for the remaining spots and the High School teams beat each other up for the last spot in the top ten.

How long before the High Schoolers give up because they have to keep struggling but receive no return on their struggle because the system is unbalanced?

It is absolutely dominated by larger guilds you are right. I also believe something must be done. 2,524,000 points? cmon... I'm all for competition but if there is something that is exploitable in there get rid of it

And also to notes, I don't do conquests or any of that stuff for my guild. I am mainly role-play and that's it. But it's just ridiculous some of these points in a short amount of time. The larger guilds should have the most points but the numbers are just so high that something must be getting exploited. .

I don't see a feasible solution. One approach would be to add an active players/guild coefficient but it has a big con; Guilds would become reluctant to keep those who are active but not contributing much, in terms of conquest points. Then again, most guilds probably have players like that so it might have balanced out.

And what I mean by coefficient is that the guild with the most active players would get 1.0. So if this guild has 500 active players and another guild only has 400 players the smaller guild would get a score of (their conquest points) x (500/400). It would require that the system updates at all times or in a worst scenario used mondays, since they're not included in the conquest week anyway, to calculate the results.

Or simply have it revolve around the average score of players who gain more than 10K points.

What you, and others, fail to understand is that most of us understand the nature of competition. We understand that the event is a competition and that the standard rules of competition apply.

Unfortunately, you also fail to understand that players will cease to compete if they are pushed out of the competition because of a built in bias towards certain competitors. In this case, mega-guilds.

Games can only support so many mega-guilds, and SWTOR is no exception. While their are a number of large guilds, there are only a few mega-guilds and it is these guilds that are seen at the top of the leader board every week.

The system needs to encourage all guilds to compete, but to also encourage winners to hold what they have. The current system lets mega guilds dominate every single week when a more competitive system would allow more guilds to compete over time. While mega-guilds would win the initial weeks, the large guilds would then be competitive in later weeks.

The current system is akin to a football league composed of 3 NFL teams, 6 College teams and 21 High School teams. The 3 NFL teams compete for the top 3 spots among themselves, the 6 College teams compete for the remaining spots and the High School teams beat each other up for the last spot in the top ten.

How long before the High Schoolers give up because they have to keep struggling but receive no return on their struggle because the system is unbalanced?

Here's the problem, this solution would just switch it to small guilds having the advantage. No large guild will ever have all the members putting in the huge numbers A few people will. For example I know in my guild we had people put up over 200,000 conquest points. Given your system the big guilds could take their top 10 point getters & create a separate guild. There's no way a 500 person guild is going to get all 500 members to average 200,000 points. So you've effectively just changed from mega guilds dominating to micro guilds dominating. Which of course makes no sense for a guild of 10 people to conquer a planet from a guild of 500.

Furthermore doing this effectively puts less people on the leader board. If the top 10 list is full of 500 man guilds then there are 5,000 people who can say they were part of the leader board. If it's filled with 10 man guilds only 100 people can. Doing it this way allows more people to feel included.

Didnt say it was a good solution. Then again, I only thought about it for about 5 secs so there's probably room for tweaks.

How about only counting the score of the top XX players of each guild? That would give the smaller guilds a fair chance to compete because even if they don't have the same numbers as the big guilds they can atleast counter it with higher activity. 50 strikes me as a reasonable number, that will exlude the possibility that tiny guilds gain some form of advantage by only recruiting notorious point farmers.