Lol its another copy pasted conquest

Replies

  • Options
    Nauros wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Oh it's not copy pasted. If it was, I wouldn't be wasting energy on battles that were easy wins before. I guess too many people were on track to get Bob without buying the pass...

    I have to disagree ... I'm cruising through this one so far ... To me the battles seem much easier.

    It's still a horrible grind, but so far it's an easier grind

    So maybe it is copy pasted (as was expected) and RNG just **** on me...
    Probably it’s just too early is all. I thought this was harder at first, but then remembered that I currently have two Data Discs while last time around I spent most of the event roflstomping everything in my way with a bunch of DoTs and Thermal Detonators. When ~80% of a thing is easy, you tend to forget the 20% that was hard to get there.

    Or maybe RNG be doing you. I don’t know what you’re up against, so I can’t say one way or the other!
    It’s really a shame that CG is trying to get the community to all hate Conquest, isn’t it? Such promise…
    Dude this community hates this game and most of them just haven’t realized that they don’t even like Star Wars any more. Or at least that they don’t like anything created after 1995…
    Altzair wrote: »
    Unfortunately we know they won't tone it down. Basically you need to spend crystals on refreshes or buy the pass in order to get high crates where it was possible solely on the regular energy recharge over the course of the 2 weeks.
    Well it’s a good thing they broke up Squad Arena cartels and drastically improved the crystal gains for the 99%.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Options
    Phoenixeon wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Oh it's not copy pasted. If it was, I wouldn't be wasting energy on battles that were easy wins before. I guess too many people were on track to get Bob without buying the pass...

    I have to disagree ... I'm cruising through this one so far ... To me the battles seem much easier.

    It's still a horrible grind, but so far it's an easier grind

    Same here, feel its easier than previous 2.

    It's easier because you've been through it twice already. You're cruising because there are a dozen videos on how to complete each mini-boss and boss. That doesn't make it any better because you still have to overuse some of the same teams to complete certain feats.

    You can punch a boxer in the face a bunch of times and he'll be able to take it. Try punching your accountant in the face who was only in one fight in the 7th grade and lost to a 5th grader. You've been punched in the face 100 times by CG and now you're just used to it. So it seems "easier".
  • SemiGod
    3001 posts Member
    Options
    Scion of Jango just a copy pasted version of Jango smh my head my head
  • Ultra
    11510 posts Moderator
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Because after conquest 7-9 they claimed to have listened to our feedback and literally did almost nothing we asked for. So if their track record is any indication of “listening to feedback” I can’t wait to see how conquest 13-15 are going to be worse than this set.
    NicWester wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Is it? CG’s not good at giving indicators of such things. Lack of communication and all that.

    Have you read these fora? Who would want to communicate with these people?

    Well, I mean you do :)

    Also, maybe if CG didn’t routinely lie to us, refuse to address issues and problems, disregard positive feedback, etc, maybe the forums wouldn’t be as toxic as they are. You know, it is actually possible for them to control how bad things are on the forums by…idk, listening to their players feedback? Not pushing bugged out content and then refuse to fix it? Just saying
    I think you’re failing to distinguish between “listening to feedback” and “responding to requests”.

    Don’t get me wrong - I’m not a fan of the direction Conquest has taken, especially as someone that didn’t refresh energy once in Conquests 1-6 and got red crate each time.

    But there is a difference between listening to forumers and just implementing what they suggest / request. Just because they haven’t done the latter, doesn’t mean they didn’t do the former.

    The devs obviously didn’t want people like me or you getting max rewards without shelling out crystals, so it’s unlikely that any feedback or suggestions that would see this become possible again will be acted upon.

    But feedback saying “the feats are too grindy and repetitive” isn’t a request. It’s feedback they ignored since we still have “win x battles with this faction” or “get x kills with this toon”. The feats are insanely grindy and repetitive just like 7-9 so that was ignored.


    Honestly I don’t mind the crystal cost involved so long as the game mode was fun and interesting. The fact they lost all the fun with the first few conquests and turned it into what it is now is just insulting. If they put any kind of effort into it and listened to feedback and ideas they could totally get a crystal dump from players while providing something fun in return. People are only doing it now because they have to for some super awesome toon. What happens when people get burnt out from it?

    Idk, they can make conquest fun without hurting their bottom dollar but for whatever reason, they’re choosing to just let things go as is without taking any consideration into player burnout and frustration.

    They didn't ignore that feedback

    We used to have a lot more repetitive feats w.r.t x battles or toons

    They definitely reduced the number of repetition of feats, but they also granted the wish in a monkey's paw way (win with Boba and Fennec 40 times, but also win with Boba and Han 40 times)

    They doubled down on one or two toons and came up with scenarios where you can't use all 3 or so, increase the number of times you need to use the same toon for 40+ times instead of being able to progress several at once

    Not a fan of this approach. They are listening to feedback, and in some instances, double down on what they are doing, or granting it with some other caveat

    I do agree that player burnout is a serious concern, and the grindiness of conquest is too much, keep it grindy sure, but lower the amount of work needed
  • Options
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Phoenixeon wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Oh it's not copy pasted. If it was, I wouldn't be wasting energy on battles that were easy wins before. I guess too many people were on track to get Bob without buying the pass...

    I have to disagree ... I'm cruising through this one so far ... To me the battles seem much easier.

    It's still a horrible grind, but so far it's an easier grind

    Same here, feel its easier than previous 2.

    You're cruising because there are a dozen videos on how to complete each mini-boss and boss.

    This is what causes me to roll my eyes when people say Thermal Detonators and such are going to get removed next time because they were too powerful. No they won't. They'll be removed because they were the intended solution to the puzzle of THIS set of Conquests. And they're a solution that a handful of people came up with and did videos about, and then everyone else copied them and pretended like they were the ones that did the solving.

    It'll be the same with the next one. If the next one is Jedi-themed, there will be discs that interact with Jedi themes (foresight, assists, counterattacks, whatever) the same way these interact with Bounty Hunter and Smuggler themes (rewards for lots of debuffs) and a couple youtubers will figure it out, they'll be copied, and then before the second one starts people will say stuff like "Well you know they're going to nerf these into the ground soon, just like they did with thermals, UGH."
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Options
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Phoenixeon wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Oh it's not copy pasted. If it was, I wouldn't be wasting energy on battles that were easy wins before. I guess too many people were on track to get Bob without buying the pass...

    I have to disagree ... I'm cruising through this one so far ... To me the battles seem much easier.

    It's still a horrible grind, but so far it's an easier grind

    Same here, feel its easier than previous 2.

    It's easier because you've been through it twice already. You're cruising because there are a dozen videos on how to complete each mini-boss and boss. That doesn't make it any better because you still have to overuse some of the same teams to complete certain feats.

    You can punch a boxer in the face a bunch of times and he'll be able to take it. Try punching your accountant in the face who was only in one fight in the 7th grade and lost to a 5th grader. You've been punched in the face 100 times by CG and now you're just used to it. So it seems "easier".

    I never watch those vids at all,...
  • Options
    I did comfortably 3* against ITs in Hardquest, something I had trouble with on normal, which was a bit of a surprise.

    CG: Conquest 13 onwards: All data disks now drop from the Conquest Pass rewards track and Overprepared is increased to 1000%.

    I'll be moderately happy if they don't do anything crazy like that ^^
  • Options
    Ultra wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Because after conquest 7-9 they claimed to have listened to our feedback and literally did almost nothing we asked for. So if their track record is any indication of “listening to feedback” I can’t wait to see how conquest 13-15 are going to be worse than this set.
    NicWester wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Is it? CG’s not good at giving indicators of such things. Lack of communication and all that.

    Have you read these fora? Who would want to communicate with these people?

    Well, I mean you do :)

    Also, maybe if CG didn’t routinely lie to us, refuse to address issues and problems, disregard positive feedback, etc, maybe the forums wouldn’t be as toxic as they are. You know, it is actually possible for them to control how bad things are on the forums by…idk, listening to their players feedback? Not pushing bugged out content and then refuse to fix it? Just saying
    I think you’re failing to distinguish between “listening to feedback” and “responding to requests”.

    Don’t get me wrong - I’m not a fan of the direction Conquest has taken, especially as someone that didn’t refresh energy once in Conquests 1-6 and got red crate each time.

    But there is a difference between listening to forumers and just implementing what they suggest / request. Just because they haven’t done the latter, doesn’t mean they didn’t do the former.

    The devs obviously didn’t want people like me or you getting max rewards without shelling out crystals, so it’s unlikely that any feedback or suggestions that would see this become possible again will be acted upon.

    But feedback saying “the feats are too grindy and repetitive” isn’t a request. It’s feedback they ignored since we still have “win x battles with this faction” or “get x kills with this toon”. The feats are insanely grindy and repetitive just like 7-9 so that was ignored.


    Honestly I don’t mind the crystal cost involved so long as the game mode was fun and interesting. The fact they lost all the fun with the first few conquests and turned it into what it is now is just insulting. If they put any kind of effort into it and listened to feedback and ideas they could totally get a crystal dump from players while providing something fun in return. People are only doing it now because they have to for some super awesome toon. What happens when people get burnt out from it?

    Idk, they can make conquest fun without hurting their bottom dollar but for whatever reason, they’re choosing to just let things go as is without taking any consideration into player burnout and frustration.

    They didn't ignore that feedback

    We used to have a lot more repetitive feats w.r.t x battles or toons

    They definitely reduced the number of repetition of feats, but they also granted the wish in a monkey's paw way (win with Boba and Fennec 40 times, but also win with Boba and Han 40 times)

    They doubled down on one or two toons and came up with scenarios where you can't use all 3 or so, increase the number of times you need to use the same toon for 40+ times instead of being able to progress several at once

    Not a fan of this approach. They are listening to feedback, and in some instances, double down on what they are doing, or granting it with some other caveat

    I do agree that player burnout is a serious concern, and the grindiness of conquest is too much, keep it grindy sure, but lower the amount of work needed

    So then they aren’t really listening to the feedback about it being way too repetitive and grindy then, especially if they are just taking one away and replacing it with another.

    I find it funny though how they casually forgot to fix the bug where GAS teams have the steadfast retribution rather than the toned down one still.

    Bottom line though is that they need to legitimately listen to feedback for the next set and make some player friendly changes. Enough is enough already.
  • Options
    Rather just pay the $300 for the character then deal with conquest as it stands. I don't have 3 of the teams needed for certain feats anywhere close to reasonable levels (Bad batch, unactive, Sisters besides ventress are g11/12, and rebel fighters, few at r3-5) 6.6 mill account

    after the first 2 play throughs, this is assine. If I didn't have JMK and CAT - would not even be as far as I am
  • Options
    Quick question...isnt the CURRENT conquest HARDER than the one before?

    I see no way to check, battles seem the same in terms of toons...but i didnt register the buffs? I am getting the usual discs, but seems harder again...just me?

    BTW...the one before was easier than the previous one...i think they adjusted difficulty UPWARDS on the last iteraction...no?
  • Options
    Ghost666 wrote: »
    Quick question...isnt the CURRENT conquest HARDER than the one before?

    I see no way to check, battles seem the same in terms of toons...but i didnt register the buffs? I am getting the usual discs, but seems harder again...just me?

    BTW...the one before was easier than the previous one...i think they adjusted difficulty UPWARDS on the last iteraction...no?
    Seems the same to me. Once you get the correct disc setup (Amplify Agony, Caustic Emissions etc) most battles are over in a few turns, just like last time.
  • Options
    I've got better quality disckques this time so I'm finding it easier. It's a shame, but the level of enjoyment (for me) seems to be heavily dependent on disckque RNG more so than any other factor. If the conquest pass+ included one of each of the disckques or at least more than just one I would be much more inclined to buy it. As it is, I've no motivation to purchase it.
    F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
  • Options
    If con-pass+ offered a base-line disckque loadout to get the player going from the start of sector 1 and reduce the RNG factor significantly, it would be a slam dunk - they'd likely get my $30 every month. They wouldn't even have to be blues or purples - whites and greens would be fine. Just get me started and help me get a basic disckque combo going.
    F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
  • Options
    Conquest Pass+ does reduce RNG. You can switch your discs at will for no cost, meaning you don’t have to hope for the exact right combination in the exact right sequence.

    By board 3 I was drowning in Caustic Emissions and actively taking ones like protection or health gain so that I could have backup sets.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Options
    Ultra wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Because after conquest 7-9 they claimed to have listened to our feedback and literally did almost nothing we asked for. So if their track record is any indication of “listening to feedback” I can’t wait to see how conquest 13-15 are going to be worse than this set.
    NicWester wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Is it? CG’s not good at giving indicators of such things. Lack of communication and all that.

    Have you read these fora? Who would want to communicate with these people?

    Well, I mean you do :)

    Also, maybe if CG didn’t routinely lie to us, refuse to address issues and problems, disregard positive feedback, etc, maybe the forums wouldn’t be as toxic as they are. You know, it is actually possible for them to control how bad things are on the forums by…idk, listening to their players feedback? Not pushing bugged out content and then refuse to fix it? Just saying
    I think you’re failing to distinguish between “listening to feedback” and “responding to requests”.

    Don’t get me wrong - I’m not a fan of the direction Conquest has taken, especially as someone that didn’t refresh energy once in Conquests 1-6 and got red crate each time.

    But there is a difference between listening to forumers and just implementing what they suggest / request. Just because they haven’t done the latter, doesn’t mean they didn’t do the former.

    The devs obviously didn’t want people like me or you getting max rewards without shelling out crystals, so it’s unlikely that any feedback or suggestions that would see this become possible again will be acted upon.

    But feedback saying “the feats are too grindy and repetitive” isn’t a request. It’s feedback they ignored since we still have “win x battles with this faction” or “get x kills with this toon”. The feats are insanely grindy and repetitive just like 7-9 so that was ignored.


    Honestly I don’t mind the crystal cost involved so long as the game mode was fun and interesting. The fact they lost all the fun with the first few conquests and turned it into what it is now is just insulting. If they put any kind of effort into it and listened to feedback and ideas they could totally get a crystal dump from players while providing something fun in return. People are only doing it now because they have to for some super awesome toon. What happens when people get burnt out from it?

    Idk, they can make conquest fun without hurting their bottom dollar but for whatever reason, they’re choosing to just let things go as is without taking any consideration into player burnout and frustration.

    They didn't ignore that feedback

    We used to have a lot more repetitive feats w.r.t x battles or toons

    They definitely reduced the number of repetition of feats, but they also granted the wish in a monkey's paw way (win with Boba and Fennec 40 times, but also win with Boba and Han 40 times)

    They doubled down on one or two toons and came up with scenarios where you can't use all 3 or so, increase the number of times you need to use the same toon for 40+ times instead of being able to progress several at once

    Not a fan of this approach. They are listening to feedback, and in some instances, double down on what they are doing, or granting it with some other caveat

    I do agree that player burnout is a serious concern, and the grindiness of conquest is too much, keep it grindy sure, but lower the amount of work needed

    That... is exactly what ignoring the feedback means lol
  • TVF
    36610 posts Member
    Options
    mariogsh wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Because after conquest 7-9 they claimed to have listened to our feedback and literally did almost nothing we asked for. So if their track record is any indication of “listening to feedback” I can’t wait to see how conquest 13-15 are going to be worse than this set.
    NicWester wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    I feel like it should be news that once again, CG has successfully ignored all criticism of the current Conquest run.

    Surprising, no. But aggravating.

    How do you know? Current conquest feedback is taken into account in future sets of conquest

    Is it? CG’s not good at giving indicators of such things. Lack of communication and all that.

    Have you read these fora? Who would want to communicate with these people?

    Well, I mean you do :)

    Also, maybe if CG didn’t routinely lie to us, refuse to address issues and problems, disregard positive feedback, etc, maybe the forums wouldn’t be as toxic as they are. You know, it is actually possible for them to control how bad things are on the forums by…idk, listening to their players feedback? Not pushing bugged out content and then refuse to fix it? Just saying
    I think you’re failing to distinguish between “listening to feedback” and “responding to requests”.

    Don’t get me wrong - I’m not a fan of the direction Conquest has taken, especially as someone that didn’t refresh energy once in Conquests 1-6 and got red crate each time.

    But there is a difference between listening to forumers and just implementing what they suggest / request. Just because they haven’t done the latter, doesn’t mean they didn’t do the former.

    The devs obviously didn’t want people like me or you getting max rewards without shelling out crystals, so it’s unlikely that any feedback or suggestions that would see this become possible again will be acted upon.

    But feedback saying “the feats are too grindy and repetitive” isn’t a request. It’s feedback they ignored since we still have “win x battles with this faction” or “get x kills with this toon”. The feats are insanely grindy and repetitive just like 7-9 so that was ignored.


    Honestly I don’t mind the crystal cost involved so long as the game mode was fun and interesting. The fact they lost all the fun with the first few conquests and turned it into what it is now is just insulting. If they put any kind of effort into it and listened to feedback and ideas they could totally get a crystal dump from players while providing something fun in return. People are only doing it now because they have to for some super awesome toon. What happens when people get burnt out from it?

    Idk, they can make conquest fun without hurting their bottom dollar but for whatever reason, they’re choosing to just let things go as is without taking any consideration into player burnout and frustration.

    They didn't ignore that feedback

    We used to have a lot more repetitive feats w.r.t x battles or toons

    They definitely reduced the number of repetition of feats, but they also granted the wish in a monkey's paw way (win with Boba and Fennec 40 times, but also win with Boba and Han 40 times)

    They doubled down on one or two toons and came up with scenarios where you can't use all 3 or so, increase the number of times you need to use the same toon for 40+ times instead of being able to progress several at once

    Not a fan of this approach. They are listening to feedback, and in some instances, double down on what they are doing, or granting it with some other caveat

    I do agree that player burnout is a serious concern, and the grindiness of conquest is too much, keep it grindy sure, but lower the amount of work needed

    That... is exactly what ignoring the feedback means lol

    Most people understand "ignoring" means not even reading it, as opposed to just not acting on it.

    The rest are here.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Options
    Actually I think not reading it is not reading it while ignoring is reading it but choosing to not act.
  • Options
    Thorozar11 wrote: »
    Actually I think not reading it is not reading it while ignoring is reading it but choosing to not act.

    Well that isn't how words work but you do you I guess.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Options
    NicWester wrote: »
    Thorozar11 wrote: »
    Actually I think not reading it is not reading it while ignoring is reading it but choosing to not act.

    Well that isn't how words work but you do you I guess.

    Disagree. If I ran a stop sign because I didn't see it, I'm not ignoring it as it didn't exist in my awareness (ie not reading feedback)
    If I saw a stop sign and went through, I'd be ignoring it. (Reading feedback but not taking any action)
  • TVF
    36610 posts Member
    Options
    Yay more bad forum analogies lol.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Options
    TVF wrote: »
    Yay more bad forum analogies lol.

    Forum:Analogies :: Butt:Poop
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Options
    Yay more semantics.
  • Options
    Alright @TVF what's a good analogy for ignore?
  • Options
    Magruffin wrote: »
    Alright @TVF what's a good analogy for ignore?

    You post on the forum tagging him and asking a question. He never responds.
    Make Bronzium autoplay opening an option.
  • Options
    Magruffin wrote: »
    Alright TVF what's a good analogy for ignore?

    You don’t need an analogy for a basic concept. Analogies are used to make complicated things easier to understand. You’re just making up your own definition of “ignore” and insisting everyone agree to it.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Options
    When my wife speaks and I listen to her but don't respond, it doesn't mean I didn't listen. It also doesn't mean that I'm ignoring her - I could be thinking about what she said, which in itself is a response and by definition, not ignoring her as I'm taking action on the information (thinking about it). Nor does "listening" mean that I'm in any way compelled to do what she says.

    Now it may well mean that I'm sleeping on the couch for a while, but let's not confuse "listening" with "obeying".

    That's my "bad" analogy for the day.

    "bad"
    F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
  • Options
    “ to do nothing about or in response to (something or someone)” is one of the accepted descriptions/definitions of ignore.

    If that word upsets you then CG has disregarded our feedback by not making any kind of meaningful change to the grind and repetitiveness of feats. They have neglected to listen to our feedback and doubled down on how grindy and repetitive the feats of conquest are.

    I’m curious to see what changes they’ll make for the next 3 conquests but I doubt that it’ll be any better.
  • Options
    The beatings will continue until morale improves!
    Make Bronzium autoplay opening an option.
  • Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    “ to do nothing about or in response to (something or someone)” is one of the accepted descriptions/definitions of ignore.

    If that word upsets you then CG has disregarded our feedback by not making any kind of meaningful change to the grind and repetitiveness of feats. They have neglected to listen to our feedback and doubled down on how grindy and repetitive the feats of conquest are.

    I’m curious to see what changes they’ll make for the next 3 conquests but I doubt that it’ll be any better.

    Semantics aside, I agree - they have made very few changes that address the verbose and repeated complaints about conquest. As much as I would like to see them do things to improve the game mode and dial back the grind and frustration factors, I've been playing this game long enough to know that it's simply unreasonable to expect them to reverse course.

    I'm also curious about what the next conquest will look like. I don't have particularly high hopes that there will be much in the way of improvement - at least not according to what I think that means. But at least it will be something different from "win 4 battles a day with Bounty Hunters", "win 4 battles a day with Snugglers", "kill 50 enemies with these three factions you don't have geared"...
    F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
  • Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    “ to do nothing about or in response to (something or someone)” is one of the accepted descriptions/definitions of ignore.

    If that word upsets you then CG has disregarded our feedback by not making any kind of meaningful change to the grind and repetitiveness of feats. They have neglected to listen to our feedback and doubled down on how grindy and repetitive the feats of conquest are.

    I’m curious to see what changes they’ll make for the next 3 conquests but I doubt that it’ll be any better.

    Semantics aside, I agree - they have made very few changes that address the verbose and repeated complaints about conquest. As much as I would like to see them do things to improve the game mode and dial back the grind and frustration factors, I've been playing this game long enough to know that it's simply unreasonable to expect them to reverse course.

    I'm also curious about what the next conquest will look like. I don't have particularly high hopes that there will be much in the way of improvement - at least not according to what I think that means. But at least it will be something different from "win 4 battles a day with Bounty Hunters", "win 4 battles a day with Snugglers", "kill 50 enemies with these three factions you don't have geared"...

    And then just replace the factions as a copy paste lol.

    I mean they could definitely make things far less of a grind and repetitive while still pushing us to spend crystals. I mean I’m fine with the crystal costs associated but since C7 I haven’t gotten max rewards because I just don’t have the drive or desire so I toned back my crystal sink. I mean the generic 50 battles with full LS or 50 with full DS were totally fine because it allowed theory crafting and broader roster usage.

    If they made changes like that but it still cost like say 150 crystals a day, I’d be fine with it. Heck if it was fun I’d even be willing to buy the pass.
Sign In or Register to comment.