Or they could let us enjoy the disks by not charging so much to swap them around. I would rather things be more difficult and let me use my tools.
The cost was higher in initial testing and was lowered due to feedback around this. They dont seem to have any plans to remove this, they want the choices of which ones to use to have some value and feel meaningful.
I'd say they accomplished this, but I'd also say that's a silly goal to have. As I said earlier, it would be more fun for the players, imo, if the content was harder and I had more tools at my disposal.
I may change my tune after trying hard mode. But for now, I feel like the most enjoyable aspect of Conquest is being gated without a compelling (imo) reason.
I feel like this is the reason for many things that exist in almost every game.
From some of the talk about this, they definitely accomplished the goal. Players are putting thoughtful actions when it comes to data discs, even at this point.
I dont suspect anyone would choose to have it this way over free, but I personally dont see the low cost as any deterrent from having fun in this game mode. I even moved a few around this time to help with feats, but I have not moved any since gaining max crate, which is effecting my ability to finish off "useless" feats.
I agree though it would be cool if they were moved for free.
I don’t get it. The choice of data disks is meaningful because it plays a role to decide if you’ll win the battle or not. So a bad choice of data disks make you lose energy. What the cost in conquest money changes is the urge to build a ‘standard set up’ that will be appropriate for a couple of teams and only use those teams, instead of changing them around to adapt your set to different teams, effectively motivate you to use the depth of your roster. Though the possibility to build several set ups instead of one would alleviate this.
I believe what you are saying is showing that the cost is driving you make "important choices", that each one you place has "more value" because of it.
Players are going to move them if they want to, and the cost is making that no trivial thing.
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
Or they could let us enjoy the disks by not charging so much to swap them around. I would rather things be more difficult and let me use my tools.
The cost was higher in initial testing and was lowered due to feedback around this. They dont seem to have any plans to remove this, they want the choices of which ones to use to have some value and feel meaningful.
I'd say they accomplished this, but I'd also say that's a silly goal to have. As I said earlier, it would be more fun for the players, imo, if the content was harder and I had more tools at my disposal.
I may change my tune after trying hard mode. But for now, I feel like the most enjoyable aspect of Conquest is being gated without a compelling (imo) reason.
I feel like this is the reason for many things that exist in almost every game.
From some of the talk about this, they definitely accomplished the goal. Players are putting thoughtful actions when it comes to data discs, even at this point.
I dont suspect anyone would choose to have it this way over free, but I personally dont see the low cost as any deterrent from having fun in this game mode. I even moved a few around this time to help with feats, but I have not moved any since gaining max crate, which is effecting my ability to finish off "useless" feats.
I agree though it would be cool if they were moved for free.
I don’t get it. The choice of data disks is meaningful because it plays a role to decide if you’ll win the battle or not. So a bad choice of data disks make you lose energy. What the cost in conquest money changes is the urge to build a ‘standard set up’ that will be appropriate for a couple of teams and only use those teams, instead of changing them around to adapt your set to different teams, effectively motivate you to use the depth of your roster. Though the possibility to build several set ups instead of one would alleviate this.
I believe what you are saying is showing that the cost is driving you make "important choices", that each one you place has "more value" because of it.
Players are going to move them if they want to, and the cost is making that no trivial thing.
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
I agree it would be more fun without the cost, but I also think hard mode will drive players to use them more too. A single setup may not be enough to get a player where they want to be.
Or they could let us enjoy the disks by not charging so much to swap them around. I would rather things be more difficult and let me use my tools.
The cost was higher in initial testing and was lowered due to feedback around this. They dont seem to have any plans to remove this, they want the choices of which ones to use to have some value and feel meaningful.
I'd say they accomplished this, but I'd also say that's a silly goal to have. As I said earlier, it would be more fun for the players, imo, if the content was harder and I had more tools at my disposal.
I may change my tune after trying hard mode. But for now, I feel like the most enjoyable aspect of Conquest is being gated without a compelling (imo) reason.
I feel like this is the reason for many things that exist in almost every game.
From some of the talk about this, they definitely accomplished the goal. Players are putting thoughtful actions when it comes to data discs, even at this point.
I dont suspect anyone would choose to have it this way over free, but I personally dont see the low cost as any deterrent from having fun in this game mode. I even moved a few around this time to help with feats, but I have not moved any since gaining max crate, which is effecting my ability to finish off "useless" feats.
I agree though it would be cool if they were moved for free.
I don’t get it. The choice of data disks is meaningful because it plays a role to decide if you’ll win the battle or not. So a bad choice of data disks make you lose energy. What the cost in conquest money changes is the urge to build a ‘standard set up’ that will be appropriate for a couple of teams and only use those teams, instead of changing them around to adapt your set to different teams, effectively motivate you to use the depth of your roster. Though the possibility to build several set ups instead of one would alleviate this.
I believe what you are saying is showing that the cost is driving you make "important choices", that each one you place has "more value" because of it.
Players are going to move them if they want to, and the cost is making that no trivial thing.
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
I agree it would be more fun without the cost, but I also think hard mode will drive players to use them more too. A single setup may not be enough to get a player where they want to be.
I agree with you. Hard mode will likely require different disks to complete for many. The cost ends up being a tax of the conquest currency to try different things. I suppose that does make choices “meaningful” however it doesn’t have to require a cost. It comes off as stingy, no matter how you boil it down.
Steadfast retribution is a very bad modifier, specially with GAS. In sector 2, I finally beat a first gas/clone team with a mix Empire/NS after 20-30 battles maybe. And now, I have to face again the exact same team just in the next node. So I’m stuck AGAIN without the second reward.
Where is the fun to die when you attack ? The point of a battle is hit hard not to kill yourself. I tried many teams, remods, disks and upgrade the more I could but I’m stuck a second with the same point.
I had to choose between Padme or geos for node 7, sector 2. I picked the first one cause it was easier for to beat them. Then, you have no choice but face 4 GR teams where 2 are the same GAS team.
I’m have 1.6 GP. Many players told me:
- don’t go for GR teams. But it’s too late once you won the first battle.
- Try Dark Revan/Malak team or a strong Padme team. Both are late player teams. Okay for later sectors but not the second one.
I also watched several YouTube videos with also the result.
I liked a lot this conquest mode at the beginning but not anymore. It’s just so frustrating to try and retry to fail over and over.
Dear developers, please stop using this modifier or for very late battles only.
Or they could let us enjoy the disks by not charging so much to swap them around. I would rather things be more difficult and let me use my tools.
The cost was higher in initial testing and was lowered due to feedback around this. They dont seem to have any plans to remove this, they want the choices of which ones to use to have some value and feel meaningful.
I'd say they accomplished this, but I'd also say that's a silly goal to have. As I said earlier, it would be more fun for the players, imo, if the content was harder and I had more tools at my disposal.
I may change my tune after trying hard mode. But for now, I feel like the most enjoyable aspect of Conquest is being gated without a compelling (imo) reason.
I feel like this is the reason for many things that exist in almost every game.
From some of the talk about this, they definitely accomplished the goal. Players are putting thoughtful actions when it comes to data discs, even at this point.
I dont suspect anyone would choose to have it this way over free, but I personally dont see the low cost as any deterrent from having fun in this game mode. I even moved a few around this time to help with feats, but I have not moved any since gaining max crate, which is effecting my ability to finish off "useless" feats.
I agree though it would be cool if they were moved for free.
I don’t get it. The choice of data disks is meaningful because it plays a role to decide if you’ll win the battle or not. So a bad choice of data disks make you lose energy. What the cost in conquest money changes is the urge to build a ‘standard set up’ that will be appropriate for a couple of teams and only use those teams, instead of changing them around to adapt your set to different teams, effectively motivate you to use the depth of your roster. Though the possibility to build several set ups instead of one would alleviate this.
I believe what you are saying is showing that the cost is driving you make "important choices", that each one you place has "more value" because of it.
Players are going to move them if they want to, and the cost is making that no trivial thing.
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
I agree it would be more fun without the cost, but I also think hard mode will drive players to use them more too. A single setup may not be enough to get a player where they want to be.
I agree with you. Hard mode will likely require different disks to complete for many. The cost ends up being a tax of the conquest currency to try different things. I suppose that does make choices “meaningful” however it doesn’t have to require a cost. It comes off as stingy, no matter how you boil it down.
At the cost of 5, you can not like it, but its doesnt come across as stingy, by any means.
Dont get me wrong I get it, we all want to have complete freedom, but really, this doesn't need to be something that leads to name calling or any sort of insults.
I didn’t get guarded assault while using my FO squad with only supreme leader Kylo as my attacker. Lost 2 characters, but supreme leader Kylo and didn’t get the feat. I figured can’t loose an attacker if there isn’t one, but supreme leader Kylo is an attacker and he didn’t die. No feat. Bummer.
Seems to be bugged, you need to not lose anybody to get the feat
I am still stuck on that. Is it lose an attacker or lose a character? Or is it don’t use an attacker? Because I’ve beat this node using my FO with no attackers other than supreme leader Kylo and lost fo stormtrooper the last time and didn’t get the achievo. It may very well cost me the red box by 3 points. 😡
I didn’t get guarded assault while using my FO squad with only supreme leader Kylo as my attacker. Lost 2 characters, but supreme leader Kylo and didn’t get the feat. I figured can’t loose an attacker if there isn’t one, but supreme leader Kylo is an attacker and he didn’t die. No feat. Bummer.
Seems to be bugged, you need to not lose anybody to get the feat
I am still stuck on that. Is it lose an attacker or lose a character? Or is it don’t use an attacker? Because I’ve beat this node using my FO with no attackers other than supreme leader Kylo and lost fo stormtrooper the last time and didn’t get the achievo. It may very well cost me the red box by 3 points. 😡
You can’t lose any character, need to complete the match with the full team alive
Or they could let us enjoy the disks by not charging so much to swap them around. I would rather things be more difficult and let me use my tools.
The cost was higher in initial testing and was lowered due to feedback around this. They dont seem to have any plans to remove this, they want the choices of which ones to use to have some value and feel meaningful.
I'd say they accomplished this, but I'd also say that's a silly goal to have. As I said earlier, it would be more fun for the players, imo, if the content was harder and I had more tools at my disposal.
I may change my tune after trying hard mode. But for now, I feel like the most enjoyable aspect of Conquest is being gated without a compelling (imo) reason.
I feel like this is the reason for many things that exist in almost every game.
From some of the talk about this, they definitely accomplished the goal. Players are putting thoughtful actions when it comes to data discs, even at this point.
I dont suspect anyone would choose to have it this way over free, but I personally dont see the low cost as any deterrent from having fun in this game mode. I even moved a few around this time to help with feats, but I have not moved any since gaining max crate, which is effecting my ability to finish off "useless" feats.
I agree though it would be cool if they were moved for free.
I don’t get it. The choice of data disks is meaningful because it plays a role to decide if you’ll win the battle or not. So a bad choice of data disks make you lose energy. What the cost in conquest money changes is the urge to build a ‘standard set up’ that will be appropriate for a couple of teams and only use those teams, instead of changing them around to adapt your set to different teams, effectively motivate you to use the depth of your roster. Though the possibility to build several set ups instead of one would alleviate this.
I believe what you are saying is showing that the cost is driving you make "important choices", that each one you place has "more value" because of it.
Players are going to move them if they want to, and the cost is making that no trivial thing.
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
I agree it would be more fun without the cost, but I also think hard mode will drive players to use them more too. A single setup may not be enough to get a player where they want to be.
I agree with you. Hard mode will likely require different disks to complete for many. The cost ends up being a tax of the conquest currency to try different things. I suppose that does make choices “meaningful” however it doesn’t have to require a cost. It comes off as stingy, no matter how you boil it down.
At the cost of 5, you can not like it, but its doesnt come across as stingy, by any means.
Dont get me wrong I get it, we all want to have complete freedom, but really, this doesn't need to be something that leads to name calling or any sort of insults.
With event feats, sector feats and boss feats I can easily see the 5 conquest currency turning into 75 (5 stun guns etc) in hard mode to complete some of the feats. As I find this decision ungenerous (especially for the exhibition), the term “stingy” applies.
Or they could let us enjoy the disks by not charging so much to swap them around. I would rather things be more difficult and let me use my tools.
The cost was higher in initial testing and was lowered due to feedback around this. They dont seem to have any plans to remove this, they want the choices of which ones to use to have some value and feel meaningful.
I'd say they accomplished this, but I'd also say that's a silly goal to have. As I said earlier, it would be more fun for the players, imo, if the content was harder and I had more tools at my disposal.
I may change my tune after trying hard mode. But for now, I feel like the most enjoyable aspect of Conquest is being gated without a compelling (imo) reason.
I feel like this is the reason for many things that exist in almost every game.
From some of the talk about this, they definitely accomplished the goal. Players are putting thoughtful actions when it comes to data discs, even at this point.
I dont suspect anyone would choose to have it this way over free, but I personally dont see the low cost as any deterrent from having fun in this game mode. I even moved a few around this time to help with feats, but I have not moved any since gaining max crate, which is effecting my ability to finish off "useless" feats.
I agree though it would be cool if they were moved for free.
I don’t get it. The choice of data disks is meaningful because it plays a role to decide if you’ll win the battle or not. So a bad choice of data disks make you lose energy. What the cost in conquest money changes is the urge to build a ‘standard set up’ that will be appropriate for a couple of teams and only use those teams, instead of changing them around to adapt your set to different teams, effectively motivate you to use the depth of your roster. Though the possibility to build several set ups instead of one would alleviate this.
I believe what you are saying is showing that the cost is driving you make "important choices", that each one you place has "more value" because of it.
Players are going to move them if they want to, and the cost is making that no trivial thing.
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
I agree it would be more fun without the cost, but I also think hard mode will drive players to use them more too. A single setup may not be enough to get a player where they want to be.
I agree with you. Hard mode will likely require different disks to complete for many. The cost ends up being a tax of the conquest currency to try different things. I suppose that does make choices “meaningful” however it doesn’t have to require a cost. It comes off as stingy, no matter how you boil it down.
At the cost of 5, you can not like it, but its doesnt come across as stingy, by any means.
Dont get me wrong I get it, we all want to have complete freedom, but really, this doesn't need to be something that leads to name calling or any sort of insults.
With event feats, sector feats and boss feats I can easily see the 5 conquest currency turning into 75 (5 stun guns etc) in hard mode to complete some of the feats. As I find this decision ungenerous (especially for the exhibition), the term “stingy” applies.
Furthermore, whether it's stingy or not is a matter of opinion, not fact. So while Kyno may disagree on the matter, I'd say it's hardly an outlier opinion to classify it as stingy.
I didn’t get guarded assault while using my FO squad with only supreme leader Kylo as my attacker. Lost 2 characters, but supreme leader Kylo and didn’t get the feat. I figured can’t loose an attacker if there isn’t one, but supreme leader Kylo is an attacker and he didn’t die. No feat. Bummer.
Seems to be bugged, you need to not lose anybody to get the feat
There are multiple bugged feats, it seems. Another one is the 10 straight critical hits feat. Apparently triggering any type of damage in between will reset the count. I had a disk that was applying debuffs at the start of my turn, plus a disk that did percent health damage when a debuff was applied. So it was virtually impossible to score 10 straight crit hits with that combo. I tried over and over again before I finally figured out what might be causing it to not register. As soon as I dropped those disks it worked fine.
Steadfast retribution is a very bad modifier, specially with GAS. In sector 2, I finally beat a first gas/clone team with a mix Empire/NS after 20-30 battles maybe. And now, I have to face again the exact same team just in the next node. So I’m stuck AGAIN without the second reward.
Where is the fun to die when you attack ? The point of a battle is hit hard not to kill yourself. I tried many teams, remods, disks and upgrade the more I could but I’m stuck a second with the same point.
I had to choose between Padme or geos for node 7, sector 2. I picked the first one cause it was easier for to beat them. Then, you have no choice but face 4 GR teams where 2 are the same GAS team.
I’m have 1.6 GP. Many players told me:
- don’t go for GR teams. But it’s too late once you won the first battle.
- Try Dark Revan/Malak team or a strong Padme team. Both are late player teams. Okay for later sectors but not the second one.
I also watched several YouTube videos with also the result.
I liked a lot this conquest mode at the beginning but not anymore. It’s just so frustrating to try and retry to fail over and over.
Dear developers, please stop using this modifier or for very late battles only.
I mean, you can see the next 3 nodes ahead of you so that leans toward you making the wrong strategy at some point. And at 1.6 million GP, you're well below the recommended power so it's not surprising that you'd struggle with the mode. The modifiers and team comps are meant to make you flex your roster, so you're just not at the point where you have a developed enough roster for it.
I wouldn't call Padme team a late game team though. It's rather easy to get everyone for it early on in the game. There's lots of early game seps to grab up to get her and her team is just Ahsoka, JKA, Barriss, GK. All easily obtainable. I wouldn't even call DRevs a late game team either; maybe mid-game but hardly late game. But on the subject of late game teams, Conquest is late game content. So if Padme team is out of reach for you, or Dralak is, maybe you're not ready for it yet.
I didn’t get guarded assault while using my FO squad with only supreme leader Kylo as my attacker. Lost 2 characters, but supreme leader Kylo and didn’t get the feat. I figured can’t loose an attacker if there isn’t one, but supreme leader Kylo is an attacker and he didn’t die. No feat. Bummer.
Seems to be bugged, you need to not lose anybody to get the feat
There are multiple bugged feats, it seems. Another one is the 10 straight critical hits feat. Apparently triggering any type of damage in between will reset the count. I had a disk that was applying debuffs at the start of my turn, plus a disk that did percent health damage when a debuff was applied. So it was virtually impossible to score 10 straight crit hits with that combo. I tried over and over again before I finally figured out what might be causing it to not register. As soon as I dropped those disks it worked fine.
I had a rant about that one a few pages back. I believe the proper wording of the feat would be, "Score at least 1 critical hit on 10 consecutive ally turns."
I got it by loading GMY up with CC mods and spamming his AOE until the other team was dead (JML never gets Crit Immunity on himself).
I didn’t get guarded assault while using my FO squad with only supreme leader Kylo as my attacker. Lost 2 characters, but supreme leader Kylo and didn’t get the feat. I figured can’t loose an attacker if there isn’t one, but supreme leader Kylo is an attacker and he didn’t die. No feat. Bummer.
Seems to be bugged, you need to not lose anybody to get the feat
There are multiple bugged feats, it seems. Another one is the 10 straight critical hits feat. Apparently triggering any type of damage in between will reset the count. I had a disk that was applying debuffs at the start of my turn, plus a disk that did percent health damage when a debuff was applied. So it was virtually impossible to score 10 straight crit hits with that combo. I tried over and over again before I finally figured out what might be causing it to not register. As soon as I dropped those disks it worked fine.
Thx for explanation on it - couldnt do this feat either and didnt know what's up...
I didn’t get guarded assault while using my FO squad with only supreme leader Kylo as my attacker. Lost 2 characters, but supreme leader Kylo and didn’t get the feat. I figured can’t loose an attacker if there isn’t one, but supreme leader Kylo is an attacker and he didn’t die. No feat. Bummer.
Seems to be bugged, you need to not lose anybody to get the feat
There are multiple bugged feats, it seems. Another one is the 10 straight critical hits feat. Apparently triggering any type of damage in between will reset the count. I had a disk that was applying debuffs at the start of my turn, plus a disk that did percent health damage when a debuff was applied. So it was virtually impossible to score 10 straight crit hits with that combo. I tried over and over again before I finally figured out what might be causing it to not register. As soon as I dropped those disks it worked fine.
I had a rant about that one a few pages back. I believe the proper wording of the feat would be, "Score at least 1 critical hit on 10 consecutive ally turns."
I got it by loading GMY up with CC mods and spamming his AOE until the other team was dead (JML never gets Crit Immunity on himself).
This is what I did, but initially was getting something like 25 crits in a row on JML. I couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. But once I stopped inflicting plague at the start of every turn it worked.
@CG_Doja_Fett sorry for the tag..... But if I could give one bit of feedback, I'd say it would be super amazing cool if, the energy refreshed at 6 minute intervals, AND once you have gotten all stars in a sector you had the option of to toggle off all effects of stamina data disks and global modifiers for the sector.
Since it's 100% there is no advantage, but it would finally with the extra energy give us that semi sandbox mode we have been asking for since well since ever.
I dont go back and replay battles because ultimately there is no benefit each battle is unique cause of the modifiers, so I learn nothing from replay. If they were stock though it would be fun to experiment.
@CG_Doja_Fett sorry for the tag..... But if I could give one bit of feedback, I'd say it would be super amazing cool if, the energy refreshed at 6 minute intervals, AND once you have gotten all stars in a sector you had the option of to toggle off all effects of stamina data disks and global modifiers for the sector.
Since it's 100% there is no advantage, but it would finally with the extra energy give us that semi sandbox mode we have been asking for since well since ever.
I dont go back and replay battles because ultimately there is no benefit each battle is unique cause of the modifiers, so I learn nothing from replay. If they were stock though it would be fun to experiment.
This could also be implemented during the off-time between Conquests when we get to the planned shedule - just leave there a version with no energy, stamina, modifiers or rewards. Minimal work and we would get a pseudo-sandbox to play in at least half the time.
I don't know what hard mode is going to look like, but can you reconsider the 4 mil GP requirement to enter? We've got people well under 3 mil GP who are maxing out normal and have GLs that can surely get them to at least the first crate on hard mode. A GP gate preventing someone from advacing on is quite frustrating.
I do think the hard mode requirement should be lifted since we already have another requirement for hard mode (clearing Sector 5 Normal boss node)
I think at that stage, players are well aware of how capable they are at tackling hard mode or if they'd rather repeat normal mode again at their GP
Pretty sure the GP requirements are for apk purposes.
You may very well be right. Also, pretty sure decent coders could have worked around that cheat by now.
I don't know what hard mode is going to look like, but can you reconsider the 4 mil GP requirement to enter? We've got people well under 3 mil GP who are maxing out normal and have GLs that can surely get them to at least the first crate on hard mode. A GP gate preventing someone from advacing on is quite frustrating.
I do think the hard mode requirement should be lifted since we already have another requirement for hard mode (clearing Sector 5 Normal boss node)
I think at that stage, players are well aware of how capable they are at tackling hard mode or if they'd rather repeat normal mode again at their GP
Pretty sure the GP requirements are for apk purposes.
Well they can just APK at 4 mil GP
There are players that cheat at high or moderately high GP in PvE only events (TB / Events / AB) etc
And this measure just harms players but CG has more awareness and data on this so I’ll leave it to their best judgement
I don't know what hard mode is going to look like, but can you reconsider the 4 mil GP requirement to enter? We've got people well under 3 mil GP who are maxing out normal and have GLs that can surely get them to at least the first crate on hard mode. A GP gate preventing someone from advacing on is quite frustrating.
I do think the hard mode requirement should be lifted since we already have another requirement for hard mode (clearing Sector 5 Normal boss node)
I think at that stage, players are well aware of how capable they are at tackling hard mode or if they'd rather repeat normal mode again at their GP
Pretty sure the GP requirements are for apk purposes.
You are probably right. Just another example of how CG either refusing to or failing to fix the apk problem is hurting the player base.
So the plan is to relaunch GC without fixing any bugs, or implementing any of the feedback given by the player base.
This is the exhibition, they stated at the start it would be back to back for the first two so they can collect more data quickly, then make any changes they needed to after that
I would completely remove modifiers from Conquest. Remember, we have a mode with modifiers and it is called Galactic Challenge. But why use the same concept in different mode? I would rather play with my datadisks and try different strategies - i don´t want to bother with sometimes insane modifiers like Galactic Republic. It would be more fun to complete feasts that way and not so grindy.
Also, i would completely remove GL from normal mode - even if there will be some easy mode later. GL are highly end game material and only the best should compete with them. I have quite high GP (nearly 3,7 mil), several relic teams and coudn´t beat the 4th sector boss, because i simply don´t have a good counter or another GL - and some of my guildmates with even higher GP had the same problem.
I really don´t think, that a new exciting mode like this should be only for long-term players, this is also a chance to bring new fans to the game. And they don´t want to watch it on YouTube, they want to try it for themselfs and feel good when they manage to win.
I would completely remove modifiers from Conquest. Remember, we have a mode with modifiers and it is called Galactic Challenge. But why use the same concept in different mode? I would rather play with my datadisks and try different strategies - i don´t want to bother with sometimes insane modifiers like Galactic Republic. It would be more fun to complete feasts that way and not so grindy.
Also, i would completely remove GL from normal mode - even if there will be some easy mode later. GL are highly end game material and only the best should compete with them. I have quite high GP (nearly 3,7 mil), several relic teams and coudn´t beat the 4th sector boss, because i simply don´t have a good counter or another GL - and some of my guildmates with even higher GP had the same problem.
I really don´t think, that a new exciting mode like this should be only for long-term players, this is also a chance to bring new fans to the game. And they don´t want to watch it on YouTube, they want to try it for themselfs and feel good when they manage to win.
There are people with a million GP less than you that are able to max the rewards.
I would completely remove modifiers from Conquest. Remember, we have a mode with modifiers and it is called Galactic Challenge. But why use the same concept in different mode? I would rather play with my datadisks and try different strategies - i don´t want to bother with sometimes insane modifiers like Galactic Republic. It would be more fun to complete feasts that way and not so grindy.
Also, i would completely remove GL from normal mode - even if there will be some easy mode later. GL are highly end game material and only the best should compete with them. I have quite high GP (nearly 3,7 mil), several relic teams and coudn´t beat the 4th sector boss, because i simply don´t have a good counter or another GL - and some of my guildmates with even higher GP had the same problem.
I really don´t think, that a new exciting mode like this should be only for long-term players, this is also a chance to bring new fans to the game. And they don´t want to watch it on YouTube, they want to try it for themselfs and feel good when they manage to win.
Data disks and consumables are the way to go when you face a wall. And GLs are walls indeed
How does one decide if they should try hard mode? In hindsight I should've removed all data disks and tried the last few nodes to see how my teams would go, but I forgot to.
I'm over 5M but have no GL, and my top teams (GAS, GR, DR, Empire etc) are only ~120k worth, so no massive arena team to carry me.
The rewards for sector 1 in hard look better than completing normal mode (more Razor Crest shards anyway) so perhaps I only need to use my best team a few times a day to get through, IF I can get through, sector 1. Could do this if I had a GL to brute force it.
Anyone have any thoughts?
Would be a frustrating epic waste if I try hard but cannot even get to the first box!!
I would completely remove modifiers from Conquest. Remember, we have a mode with modifiers and it is called Galactic Challenge. But why use the same concept in different mode? I would rather play with my datadisks and try different strategies - i don´t want to bother with sometimes insane modifiers like Galactic Republic. It would be more fun to complete feasts that way and not so grindy.
Also, i would completely remove GL from normal mode - even if there will be some easy mode later. GL are highly end game material and only the best should compete with them. I have quite high GP (nearly 3,7 mil), several relic teams and coudn´t beat the 4th sector boss, because i simply don´t have a good counter or another GL - and some of my guildmates with even higher GP had the same problem.
I really don´t think, that a new exciting mode like this should be only for long-term players, this is also a chance to bring new fans to the game. And they don´t want to watch it on YouTube, they want to try it for themselfs and feel good when they manage to win.
3.7 mil isn't even half of the maximum GP you can have unlocking every toon and ship and maxing them out so....not actually all that high of a GP. 3.7 mil gp and you don't have Geonosians? Or Imperial Troopers? Both roast GLEE. GG-droids can roast him too, as can CLS. Not to mention Darth Revan.
Replies
I see your point. It’s true, the cost drives me to make ‘important choices’ regarding data disks allocation. Mission accomplish. However, it doesn’t mean that removing this cost will render data disk allocation meaningless, as a bad set up could cost me the fight, costing energy.
The problem imo is the ‘fun cost’ of this extra layer of ‘meaningful choice’. It gives an incentive to not use different data disks set ups, giving fights less variety, so less fun.
I agree it would be more fun without the cost, but I also think hard mode will drive players to use them more too. A single setup may not be enough to get a player where they want to be.
I agree with you. Hard mode will likely require different disks to complete for many. The cost ends up being a tax of the conquest currency to try different things. I suppose that does make choices “meaningful” however it doesn’t have to require a cost. It comes off as stingy, no matter how you boil it down.
Where is the fun to die when you attack ? The point of a battle is hit hard not to kill yourself. I tried many teams, remods, disks and upgrade the more I could but I’m stuck a second with the same point.
I had to choose between Padme or geos for node 7, sector 2. I picked the first one cause it was easier for to beat them. Then, you have no choice but face 4 GR teams where 2 are the same GAS team.
I’m have 1.6 GP. Many players told me:
- don’t go for GR teams. But it’s too late once you won the first battle.
- Try Dark Revan/Malak team or a strong Padme team. Both are late player teams. Okay for later sectors but not the second one.
I also watched several YouTube videos with also the result.
I liked a lot this conquest mode at the beginning but not anymore. It’s just so frustrating to try and retry to fail over and over.
Dear developers, please stop using this modifier or for very late battles only.
At the cost of 5, you can not like it, but its doesnt come across as stingy, by any means.
Dont get me wrong I get it, we all want to have complete freedom, but really, this doesn't need to be something that leads to name calling or any sort of insults.
I am still stuck on that. Is it lose an attacker or lose a character? Or is it don’t use an attacker? Because I’ve beat this node using my FO with no attackers other than supreme leader Kylo and lost fo stormtrooper the last time and didn’t get the achievo. It may very well cost me the red box by 3 points. 😡
You can’t lose any character, need to complete the match with the full team alive
With event feats, sector feats and boss feats I can easily see the 5 conquest currency turning into 75 (5 stun guns etc) in hard mode to complete some of the feats. As I find this decision ungenerous (especially for the exhibition), the term “stingy” applies.
Furthermore, whether it's stingy or not is a matter of opinion, not fact. So while Kyno may disagree on the matter, I'd say it's hardly an outlier opinion to classify it as stingy.
There are multiple bugged feats, it seems. Another one is the 10 straight critical hits feat. Apparently triggering any type of damage in between will reset the count. I had a disk that was applying debuffs at the start of my turn, plus a disk that did percent health damage when a debuff was applied. So it was virtually impossible to score 10 straight crit hits with that combo. I tried over and over again before I finally figured out what might be causing it to not register. As soon as I dropped those disks it worked fine.
I mean, you can see the next 3 nodes ahead of you so that leans toward you making the wrong strategy at some point. And at 1.6 million GP, you're well below the recommended power so it's not surprising that you'd struggle with the mode. The modifiers and team comps are meant to make you flex your roster, so you're just not at the point where you have a developed enough roster for it.
I wouldn't call Padme team a late game team though. It's rather easy to get everyone for it early on in the game. There's lots of early game seps to grab up to get her and her team is just Ahsoka, JKA, Barriss, GK. All easily obtainable. I wouldn't even call DRevs a late game team either; maybe mid-game but hardly late game. But on the subject of late game teams, Conquest is late game content. So if Padme team is out of reach for you, or Dralak is, maybe you're not ready for it yet.
I had a rant about that one a few pages back. I believe the proper wording of the feat would be, "Score at least 1 critical hit on 10 consecutive ally turns."
I got it by loading GMY up with CC mods and spamming his AOE until the other team was dead (JML never gets Crit Immunity on himself).
Thx for explanation on it - couldnt do this feat either and didnt know what's up...
This is what I did, but initially was getting something like 25 crits in a row on JML. I couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. But once I stopped inflicting plague at the start of every turn it worked.
I wonder how many years will pass until CG implements counter for GC/Conquest feats...
Since it's 100% there is no advantage, but it would finally with the extra energy give us that semi sandbox mode we have been asking for since well since ever.
I dont go back and replay battles because ultimately there is no benefit each battle is unique cause of the modifiers, so I learn nothing from replay. If they were stock though it would be fun to experiment.
This could also be implemented during the off-time between Conquests when we get to the planned shedule - just leave there a version with no energy, stamina, modifiers or rewards. Minimal work and we would get a pseudo-sandbox to play in at least half the time.
You may very well be right. Also, pretty sure decent coders could have worked around that cheat by now.
Well they can just APK at 4 mil GP
There are players that cheat at high or moderately high GP in PvE only events (TB / Events / AB) etc
And this measure just harms players but CG has more awareness and data on this so I’ll leave it to their best judgement
You are probably right. Just another example of how CG either refusing to or failing to fix the apk problem is hurting the player base.
This is the exhibition, they stated at the start it would be back to back for the first two so they can collect more data quickly, then make any changes they needed to after that
I would completely remove modifiers from Conquest. Remember, we have a mode with modifiers and it is called Galactic Challenge. But why use the same concept in different mode? I would rather play with my datadisks and try different strategies - i don´t want to bother with sometimes insane modifiers like Galactic Republic. It would be more fun to complete feasts that way and not so grindy.
Also, i would completely remove GL from normal mode - even if there will be some easy mode later. GL are highly end game material and only the best should compete with them. I have quite high GP (nearly 3,7 mil), several relic teams and coudn´t beat the 4th sector boss, because i simply don´t have a good counter or another GL - and some of my guildmates with even higher GP had the same problem.
I really don´t think, that a new exciting mode like this should be only for long-term players, this is also a chance to bring new fans to the game. And they don´t want to watch it on YouTube, they want to try it for themselfs and feel good when they manage to win.
Uh, what? Everyone starts the new event with full energy.
There are people with a million GP less than you that are able to max the rewards.
The event is fine with GLs.
Data disks and consumables are the way to go when you face a wall. And GLs are walls indeed
I'm over 5M but have no GL, and my top teams (GAS, GR, DR, Empire etc) are only ~120k worth, so no massive arena team to carry me.
The rewards for sector 1 in hard look better than completing normal mode (more Razor Crest shards anyway) so perhaps I only need to use my best team a few times a day to get through, IF I can get through, sector 1. Could do this if I had a GL to brute force it.
Anyone have any thoughts?
Would be a frustrating epic waste if I try hard but cannot even get to the first box!!
3.7 mil isn't even half of the maximum GP you can have unlocking every toon and ship and maxing them out so....not actually all that high of a GP. 3.7 mil gp and you don't have Geonosians? Or Imperial Troopers? Both roast GLEE. GG-droids can roast him too, as can CLS. Not to mention Darth Revan.