A very reasonable and logical solution that doesn’t negatively affect anyone else. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

 

I agree, definitely a better solution than the one first proposed

Again. 'I can't imagine', is an idiom,

In this case you can't claim that. Why not? Because the following part makes it very literal. I can't imagine people doing x behaviour" can only really be interpreted as you saying that you do not expect such behaviour. Why else even say it if it doesn't meant that? I has no meaning if it's an "idiom". It's all very confusing to be honest but I just don't buy the "idiom defence" here. So I guess will have to agree to disagree here.

 

I do find it interesting however that you apparently took "my lack of imagination" that literal

 

AgainAs for people getting kicked from a guild for ridiculous reasons, why would that have any thing to do with this.

Because, when you get kicked, for example, on the last day of conquest for said ridiculous reasons, you don't get the guild rewards for your efforts. So you would be at a disadvantage as an individual. This is also the case now. However, I'm indicating that when these changes were to be made, it's more likely that this question would pop up more regularly. That's all.

This would fit well into the "Play Your Way" theme

It would, if "Play Your Way" actually meant "play whatever content you want, it's all the same to us."

 

The obvious flaw in that is that PYW doen't mean that. It's clear from the new augments ("y'all aren't playing as much ranked PvP as we want, so we'll make the new augments impossible to get unless more of you do") that PYW means "use the kind of gear you want to optimise your character for what you do."

In this case you can't claim that. Why not? Because the following part makes it very literal. I can't imagine people doing x behaviour" can only really be interpreted as you saying that you do not expect such behaviour. Why else even say it if it doesn't meant that? I has no meaning if it's an "idiom". It's all very confusing to be honest but I just don't buy the "idiom defence" here. So I guess will have to agree to disagree here.

 

I

 

Actually you can, and I just don't have the patience to explain it to you. You are going to believe what you like, you are going to pick little parts of the post, so they can say what you believe, etc. So we'll just end up in circles, so I'll let you say/think what you like, and just go on with other posts. I doubt they'll do anything, so any arguments are probably wasted anyway. /shrug

I see there have been several threads about the Conquest issues and at the risk of repeating myself:

 

Regarding the scheme to farm Conquest points from newly acquired members and kicking them afterwards, I think the idea to deduct the Conquest points from the guild ledger is a very good idea. The mechanism to prevent sabotage and blackmailing from the other side should be to only deduct the points from the guild ledger if the member is kicked from the guild and not if the member left the guild him/herself.

 

This way the guild cannot farm Conquest points from unsuspecting members anymore and decoy members from another guild cannot take them hostage.

 

Good idea. I'd be willing to support that. It does mean the the GM would simply wait until the conquest window has closed and the tally finalized for the week to kick out the farmed members, but at least it would prevent the hostage-taking.

Edited January 10, 2021 by xordevoreaux

If you have spent any time in the game, or here in the forums, you'd know the answer to that... but just in case, let me spell it out

 

They F**K it up when the mess with it, your ideas won't get implemented the way YOU think it should, they'll do it their way, and we will all curse it. Not that your ideas are any good any way... but that's a different post.

 

You don't want to discuss improvements, then that is your prerogative, but don't think that as you post a lot, it somehow makes your opinion fact and will stop others from doing so.

 

I am giving them some credit after the last update to the conquest system, where they did listen to our feedback.

To me, at least, it's a question of ROI (return on investment). Will the expenditure of time and resources by Bioware result in a net gain for the player base? I can't answer that question accurately from where I'm sitting, but I strongly suspect the answer is no.

 

This was actually put forth by someone who did only play 1 character, I didn't really clarify but did not intend for it to come across as my own idea.

 

I just like it as it wont negativity impact any existing player base to give something to the guys who do play a limited number of characters, though you are absolutely right about the ROI, only BW would know how many stick to a few characters and how much work implementing this would be. I just wanted to put it out there as the original idea was buried in posts from the last conquest point rebalance.

I see there have been several threads about the Conquest issues and at the risk of repeating myself:

 

Regarding the scheme to farm Conquest points from newly acquired members and kicking them afterwards, I think the idea to deduct the Conquest points from the guild ledger is a very good idea. The mechanism to prevent sabotage and blackmailing from the other side should be to only deduct the points from the guild ledger if the member is kicked from the guild and not if the member left the guild him/herself.

 

This way the guild cannot farm Conquest points from unsuspecting members anymore and decoy members from another guild cannot take them hostage.

 

I had not seen this suggested before, but it seems like an excellent idea!

I'm just tired of the conquest system being built around being in a large conquest guild ALL THE TIME, and this new "grace period" thing doubles down on that. You can't contribute to conquest for a certain period after you join a new guild-- so this ends the era of joining the big guilds when they're taking a planet you need for Galaxy Conqueror... soo... that's it. No more Galaxy Conqueror unless you leave your toons in these big guilds (and stay active to avoid getting kicked) and hope the planet you want comes up soon, and that the guild you're in goes for it.

 

Not to mention, many small guilds rely on being able to make a new character and add it to the guild, or add one of your few member's alts in. So quite frankly, even if they do want to introduce a grace period to screw over (or whatever the logic is) new members, it should only apply to new legacies -- you should be exempt if you already have characters in that guild.

 

But hey. Instead of pointless buffs to big guilds like this, could we maybe, just for a minute, consider what I've been saying since the servers merged:

Introduce guild membership tiers. Tier 1 guilds, say 50 people or fewer, are the only guilds that can declare for small yield planets. They CAN choose to declare for medium or large yield, but Tier 2 or 3 guilds can't declare for small yield planets.

Tier 2 guilds can only declare for medium or large (say a cap of like 200 members, or something)

Tier 3 guilds can only declare of large yield (no membership cap)

-- the cap should apply to legacies, not characters--

 

And then just freely rotate through which planets come up for small, medium, and large yield, so throughout the year each planet shows up at least once in each category. And just, IDK, maybe give smaller guilds a chance to actually conquer a planet once in a while?

 

I say this already HAVING Galaxy Conqueror, but I've run a small guild for five years now, and it's just frustrating that once upon a time we were motivated to get into conquest races with other guilds our size-- I remember staying up all night spamming Battle for Ilum, crafting, or warzoning to fight one particular guild for control of, of all planets, Quesh lol But now there's no point. You hit personal conquest accidentally by doing one daily and consuming a rep item, one person can hit guild conquest in an hour running GSF, but the giant guilds can do that, too, so by the time you've put up 60k points for your guild, they've put up 5 mil for theirs. There's no point. Get your rewards and move on. And I thought the point of devs was to inspire people to actually play their content.

Tier restrictions by legacy is a bad idea.

 

Pulling back on the bombast a bit...

Introduce guild membership tiers. Tier 1 guilds, say 50 people or fewer, are the only guilds that can declare for small yield planets. They CAN choose to declare for medium or large yield, but Tier 2 or 3 guilds can't declare for small yield planets.

Tier 2 guilds can only declare for medium or large (say a cap of like 200 members, or something)

Tier 3 guilds can only declare of large yield (no membership cap)

-- the cap should apply to legacies, not characters--

 

Your suggestion would motivate guild leaders barely over the tier restriction to toss overboard legacies that have been inactive in as little as the last conquest week.

 

Why?

 

Because guilds that would be bordering two tiers, with just a few legacies above a given tier cap to qualify for a lower tier, will have to compete with all the other tier-restricted guilds in a tier where they're not positioned very well to complete. They're outgunned.

 

It's like being matched up against a wrestler in a weight category that you really can't compete in because you're 6 ounces overweight for the lighter-weight category:

 

 

 

 

So there you are, 195 pounds 6 ounces, so instead of competing against wrestlers weighing no less than 13 pounds than you, you're now competing against a guy pushing 220. That puts you just a few ounces shy of being 25 pounds lighter than your contender, and on a high school wrestler, that's almost all muscle. Good luck on that match.

 

How does that translate?

 

There might be 50 legacies with few alts in a casual guild, and over the course of a month, all of those members log in.

 

But any given week of conquest, perhaps at maximum, only 20 players of those legacies even bother log in, and they're the guild's heavy lifters (only lifters) for conquest.

 

That guild leader ordinarily wouldn't cull those inactive legacies, for they are, after all, in a casual guild, not some hyper-militant guild that deguilds people after a week of inactivity, and he knows in any 30-span time, they all log in anyway.

 

But, like the wrestler at the bottom of a heavier-weight category, that guild leader is faced with the prospect of not being able to run the tier that they want for a given week.

 

Tier restrictions will therefore motivate guild leaders to jettison even recently inactive legacies to squeeze down into the tier the guild wants to compete in.

 

For a guild that's 3 legacies over the tier restriction, it's bye-bye birdie for 3, maybe 4 legacies, even if the most inactive legacy is just a week old, or the guild is faced with heavier competition on the next tier.

Edited January 18, 2021 by xordevoreaux

I say this already HAVING Galaxy Conqueror, but I've run a small guild for five years now, and it's just frustrating that once upon a time we were motivated to get into conquest races with other guilds our size

 

At this point, I honestly think it would be best just to remove the guild vs guild aspect and work it into a system where each planet has different tiers of reward which can be achieved, the highest level giving the titles.

 

Now what the tiers would be and how many points they would require, that would be a discussion all of its own, but I think opening things up to the wider player base would be beneficial, it would certainly add a whole new level to conquest for guilds who could never beat the big conquest guilds as things stand now.

Tionese you are botting and your guild does it too. Your arguing is not relative with this person context. Please but please stop lying and cheating. your family friendly guild is a bots sanctuary

 

I am? I guess you are THE SUPREME LEADER that knows and sees all.

Oh btw, regarding this title you give yourself and the way you talk:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_titles_used_by_dictators

"Most commonly the title is a form of "leader" or "guide", such as "Supreme Leader". See dictatorship."

 

Yes, my "arguing" is directed at you, the GM of a Spam Ninja invite guild, and everyone can see that in the screenshot that was posted.

Then you have the audacity continue to whine about crafting and insisting that the devs WILL listen to you?

Why is that?

 

You broke the Rules of Conduct so many times, I don't even know where to start:

 

1. " Post, transmit, promote, or distribute Content that is illegal or promote or encourage any illegal activity including hacking, cracking or distribution of counterfeit software. (See also "Mod, Hack and Cheat Prohibitions" below)."

 

You posted a detailed description of how to use an illegal macro bot for your whole guild to read and use. (Screenshots of messages can be sent. Provided by ex officers in your guild).

 

2. Harass, threaten, embarrass, or do anything to another player that is unwanted. This includes posting insulting, offensive, or abusive comments about players, repeatedly sending unwanted messages,

 

Screenshots can be provided as well as voice files that were recorded during officer meetings.

 

3. “Trolling,” which we define as posts or threads that knowingly lead to overly strong, negative, and emotional responses for mere shock value, is not allowed on the Service. Accounts created with the sole intent to “troll” will be immediately and permanently suspended. Constant personal attacks are also considered trolling. (See also “Forum Guidelines” below.)

 

You have been doing this since you started your guild with the help of your buddy K***

 

4. "Improperly use in-game support or complaint buttons or make false reports to Service staff members, including the SWTOR CS."

 

Self explanatory.

You make assumptions, and then proceed to call that assumption a fact.

 

5. "Exploit any bug in the Service to gain unfair advantage in the game and/or communicate the existence of any such bug (either directly or through the public posting) to any other user of the Service."

 

Again, screenshots and voice recordings can be provided as proof that you continue to provide your guild with information regarding "bugs" during meetings. You usually use the excuse that because another guild is using it and you are the good guy, its okay to discuss these bugs and check them out so that you can show them to the devs. Really hilarious, but /shrug.

 

6." Do anything that interferes with the ability of other Service users to enjoy playing Star Wars: The Old Republic and using the Service in accordance with its rules, or that materially increases the expense or difficulty of EA in maintaining the Service for the enjoyment of all its users."

 

You are certainly taking away the enjoyment of the game for me and thousands of others with your actions. Again, proof can be provided.

 

7."Disrupt the flow of chat with vulgar language, abusiveness, hitting the return key repeatedly or inputting large images so the screen goes by too fast to read, use of excessive shouting [all caps] in an attempt to disturb other users, “spamming” or flooding [posting repetitive text]."

 

How long have you whined about changing Conquest so YOU can win?

 

8. "Harassment consists of misuse and/or abuse of game mechanics and verbal harassment with the intention of distressing and offending other players"

 

How many messages and harassments have you and your guildies sent to the #1 guild's GM now? How about all the spitting and nasty comments? Again, screenshots and proof can be provided.

Publicly stating here that I am botting??? Seriously?

 

9." Do not hijack topics. Posting comments within a thread which severely disrupts the original conversation is prohibited."

 

Why do you insist to whine about crafting in other threads when the thread is about guilds like yours that should be actioned for using and abusing new players?

 

I need more popcorn before I continue.

You need to stop with the personal attacks. Afaik Trixxie isn't even in one of the big guilds, let alone a macro user.

 

 

She has the same picture as the one he was attacking, don't think he even bothered looking at the name.

 

 

What I don't understand is, there are several people attacking others, trolling, and worse. Yet not one mod has stepped in. Yet myself and others have said far less, and been stomped on. It's monday, surely someone is there now....

Edited January 18, 2021 by DarkTergon

She has the same picture as the one he was attacking, don't think he even bothered looking at the name.

 

 

What I don't understand is, there are several people attacking others, trolling, and worse. Yet not one mod has stepped in. Yet myself and others have said far less, and been stomped on. It's monday, surely someone is there now....

 

Monday is a holiday in the US (Martin Luther King Jr. Day). I'm guessing there will be a bunch of deleted posts and forum bans on Tuesday. In retrospect, probably the Conquest changes should have been announced at the beginning of the week rather than the end of the week, since there are obviously a lot of hard feelings about Conquest issues at the moment.

Edited January 18, 2021 by Hudlar

This topic derailed pretty badly, but truth is the conquest guild top 10 looks pretty fishy last few months. I would appreciate if devs would look into it if it's all legitimate grind farm or there are guilds using exploits and bots.

This topic derailed pretty badly, but truth is the conquest guild top 10 looks pretty fishy last few months. I would appreciate if devs would look into it if it's all legitimate grind farm or there are guilds using exploits and bots.

More likely it's the same junk people are railing about on other threads, all the "ninja invite" junk.

More likely it's the same junk people are railing about on other threads, all the "ninja invite" junk.

 

Pretty much !! This time it seems to be centered around "guild issues" for the most part.

 

UGH !! We finally get CQ where it is at least functional and worth while ... then again with the "let's overhaul it" for anyone of a number of reasons.

 

Why not simply address those who are abusing the system instead of messing things up for everyone else ?

 

Good grief !!!

 

Always something !!

Pretty much !! This time it seems to be centered around "guild issues" for the most part.

 

UGH !! We finally get CQ where it is at least functional and worth while ... then again with the "let's overhaul it" for anyone of a number of reasons.

 

Why not simply address those who are abusing the system instead of messing things up for everyone else ?

 

Good grief !!!

 

Always something !!

 

Exactly this ^^

 

Surely bioware have the Tools and data to see who is doing the wrong thing. They should just sanction those players or guilds if it’s systemic in a particular guild. Then prevent said guild leaders from ever holding officer or leader rank again.

 

We don’t need more changes to conquest that punish the majority doing the right thing to round up a few bad apples.

Edited January 19, 2021 by TrixxieTriss

Exactly this ^^

 

Surely bioware have the Tools and data to see who is doing the wrong thing. They should just sanction those players or guilds if it’s systemic in a particular guild. Then prevent said guild leaders from ever holding officer or leader rank again.

 

We don’t need more changes to conquest that punish the majority doing the right thing to round up a few bad apples.

 

Agreed !!

 

As for an appropriate step to "discourage" such abusive and obviously subversive activity which is tantamount to a manipulative exploit with such undermining repercussions, I am quite certain that those who have been delegated the authority can and will find an equally appropriate solution to this matter.

Agreed !!

 

As for an appropriate step to "discourage" such abusive and obviously subversive activity which is tantamount to a manipulative exploit with such undermining repercussions, I am quite certain that those who have been delegated the authority can and will find an equally appropriate solution to this matter.

 

I think with the new 'cooldown' it might halt it a little. Not sure what they can do about multiple guilds taking all the top spots, to prevent other guilds from getting the titles. /shrug.

I think with the new 'cooldown' it might halt it a little. Not sure what they can do about multiple guilds taking all the top spots, to prevent other guilds from getting the titles. /shrug.

 

Guilds and their participation, goals, influence, strength, achievements, and overall impact on the game can only be determined by the development team.

** There is and always will be some benefit to being a part of a guild.

** Guilds have the potential of increasing certain of those benefits to "team" or group participation.

** Larger guilds often posses the greater resources for materials when done correctly.

 

That said: guilds CAN also be the source of a lot of negativity as well. As this discussion is not for the expressed purpose of defining what is or is NOT a good guild ... I think it best to forgo that part of the discussion. That is better suited for another thread ... another time perhaps.

 

However, it can and should be pointed out that conduct, participation and rewards for guilds should be equitable for all concerned, regardless of size.

 

There is nothing wrong with a mega guild ... nor a smaller one of only 5 or 6 members. That is all a matter of personal choice and preference. Each of them are no doubt as different as the personalities that run and define the goals and objectives of those groups. That is the freedom of expression they all enjoy.

 

Perhaps it's not the CQ that needs to be overhauled, but rather other aspects of the game such as how smaller guilds are reviewed and looked upon?

 

Again .. I defer to those who continue to develop this game.

 

(It should be noted that I personally am not a member of any guild. Those reasons are very personal)

 

Thank You

 

(oh .. and my apologies for the wall of text so early this AM)

I think with the new 'cooldown' it might halt it a little. Not sure what they can do about multiple guilds taking all the top spots, to prevent other guilds from getting the titles. /shrug.

 

As other people have mentioned, they have to decouple the planets from the invasion choices. I don't know how that could be done while maintaining the original purpose of the "conqueror" titles.

As other people have mentioned, they have to decouple the planets from the invasion choices. I don't know how that could be done while maintaining the original purpose of the "conqueror" titles.

 

there's been a few things thrown around.

1. The top ten get the title. That would probably stop the mega guilds (&friends) from hogging the title,

2. Having more planets to conquer

 

It won't help small guilds get titles, but it's a start to evening things out a bit.

As other people have mentioned, they have to decouple the planets from the invasion choices. I don't know how that could be done while maintaining the original purpose of the "conqueror" titles.

 

Personally I don't really bother with titles, which I am sure influences my opinion here; but I think we should just move away from the original purpose in favour of something which is more accessible by the wider player base, i.e. different tiers to hit on each planet.

 

There was an idea which went a bit further than this, which was to require your guild to hit the highest tier for a given planet, but then weigh the republic vs imperial overall points for the planet, and award the titles to the guild's on the winning side which hit the max tier.

 

I liked this as it kept some competition as well as made the system available to everyone, and actually made a bit more sense IMO as far as a combined faction conquering planets as opposed to single guilds.

Nope, and Nope. I used to not get involved or dabble in conjecture, but I now 100% know the Crafting Inventor Conquest objective is rife with abuse. I'll have a post on it later, but suffice to say a certain someone had the courage to step forward and show me exactly how it's being exploited for massive conquest gains, in that people with 15 members online can literally hold off 60+ people actively in rampage, world boss runs, or other activities like gsf ect with just a few using a particular program. They even sent me a video of them doing it to demonstrate. If any developer would like it, message me too.

 

Conquest gained from crafting needs to be Capped per legacy. No more than Half whatever the large yield conquest goal is. It truly is ridiculous the numbers you can output with it in concert with others, something a normal human would struggle to replicate. I'm an officer in one of the largest conquest guilds on impside, and we just barely beat a guild that literally had 15 members on throughout the entire night we were running conquest in one last push. Bogus.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Voriik