I got red chest on hard mode last time and will get it this time.
Got 4 milion GP and 0 GL.
Everything is just a joke and stupid easy. The hardest feats are the once where you have to apply enouth debuffs since everything die so fast. Or do people just pick bad discs?
This time around I picked up 3x caustic emission, critical debuff, Thermal Exhaust, Ability Exhaust and weak point.
Since the discs apply 10 debuffs each turn and Ability Exhaust apply ability block every 10 debuff all enemies are permanently ability blocked. And with weak point giving 4 % offence for every debuff and the enemies having like 55 debuff each turn from the discs that gives over 200 % increased offence for every attack, Yoda is hiting for 3 milion after a few attacks.
Sure its abit grindy, but definatly not hard.
My gear11 Nest is basically soloing fights in sector 5 to get smuggler feat, when gear 11 charthers can solo relic 7 teams I dont really feel like hard is the right word for the fights.
In conquest 7 and 8, I haven’t had the option for even 1 weak point. Just because you get lucky with discs doesn’t mean your experience represents everyone.
I did, however, get Deadly catalyst this time, so I went from only winning with key teams to being able to win with almost any team.
So either get lucky with discs or have a deep, heavily geared roster.
I got red chest on hard mode last time and will get it this time.
Got 4 milion GP and 0 GL.
Everything is just a joke and stupid easy. The hardest feats are the once where you have to apply enouth debuffs since everything die so fast. Or do people just pick bad discs?
This time around I picked up 3x caustic emission, critical debuff, Thermal Exhaust, Ability Exhaust and weak point.
Since the discs apply 10 debuffs each turn and Ability Exhaust apply ability block every 10 debuff all enemies are permanently ability blocked. And with weak point giving 4 % offence for every debuff and the enemies having like 55 debuff each turn from the discs that gives over 200 % increased offence for every attack, Yoda is hiting for 3 milion after a few attacks.
Sure its abit grindy, but definatly not hard.
My gear11 Nest is basically soloing fights in sector 5 to get smuggler feat, when gear 11 charthers can solo relic 7 teams I dont really feel like hard is the right word for the fights.
Most of the complaints I've seen are about the time/grind sink and demand for crystals despite no increase in rewards. Sure, some folks are complaining that it is "hard", but they may just be frustrated or got really bad disks.
Hey, I decided to throw in my 2 cents on a somewhat sidenote:
The "problem" with old conquest was (not quoting, paraphrasing) that people rushed through the content in few days then never touched it again, maybe they hunted down a few achievments. And for more intense engagement they are doing these changes.
Now I am going to talk about personal experiences, which is not strongly conclusive, but maybe others can join / oppose me:
Twice now back to back, i sat down, did the math, decided that a single refresh a day should be safe enough right from the start, rushed through the conquest to optimize my discs in 5 days, and now I am repeating the same battles to hunt down a few, oh pardon a crapton of achievments. At this point, if I dont get hit by a bus, I am going to hit the red crate on day 13 which means I spent 50 crystals extra.
Okay, it cost me more, significantly more, approximately 500 crystals more.... but in the end i dont feel that my strategy or behaviour changed in its essence.
So was... THIS the desired outcome? Or am I playing it like this as a minority? So I understand everything that Kyno said about not being able to reply to everything that the players say, but could we get a reflection from them on the things that they said? Is that a thing? Is the goal achieved, are they happy? Bc if they are happy, maybe we could talk about making us happy.
They may post a bit of insight if they make changes to Conquest 10. They have spoken about this game mode having "seasons", but I don't think the increases to feats, energy cost and others will be things that change that often.
They dont often share any reflections in this way, or at least not right away. They will tend to let them marinade for a bit and offer some insight to changes made and how they used previous things to help them build X or Y.
I would say you are not likely the minority. There are many hard stops that players are not going to overcome and therefore have a similar math and plan to you.
I have slightly different strategy from the OG one, and I still follow it, as I dont see a path for me to get anything past the second best crate. I also dont always have the time over a 2 week period to push for it and miss, which would just be a waste.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
Hey, I decided to throw in my 2 cents on a somewhat sidenote:
The "problem" with old conquest was (not quoting, paraphrasing) that people rushed through the content in few days then never touched it again, maybe they hunted down a few achievments. And for more intense engagement they are doing these changes.
Now I am going to talk about personal experiences, which is not strongly conclusive, but maybe others can join / oppose me:
Twice now back to back, i sat down, did the math, decided that a single refresh a day should be safe enough right from the start, rushed through the conquest to optimize my discs in 5 days, and now I am repeating the same battles to hunt down a few, oh pardon a crapton of achievments. At this point, if I dont get hit by a bus, I am going to hit the red crate on day 13 which means I spent 50 crystals extra.
Okay, it cost me more, significantly more, approximately 500 crystals more.... but in the end i dont feel that my strategy or behaviour changed in its essence.
So was... THIS the desired outcome? Or am I playing it like this as a minority? So I understand everything that Kyno said about not being able to reply to everything that the players say, but could we get a reflection from them on the things that they said? Is that a thing? Is the goal achieved, are they happy? Bc if they are happy, maybe we could talk about making us happy.
Dude, "engagement" was obviously just corporate speak for "you guys can't get these premium characters for free." You spent 500 more crystals. That is what they wanted.
How dare you?! (In G.T. voice)
Kyno told us they cared and listened! They would never lie in our face. If it is zero tolerancy against the cheaters, then zero tolerance it is!
If the problem is the low engagement, then that's exactly the problem!
If it is a self-inflicted deathmark due to passive abilities, then it is not the locked-unlocked debuff difference!
Hey, I decided to throw in my 2 cents on a somewhat sidenote:
The "problem" with old conquest was (not quoting, paraphrasing) that people rushed through the content in few days then never touched it again, maybe they hunted down a few achievments. And for more intense engagement they are doing these changes.
Now I am going to talk about personal experiences, which is not strongly conclusive, but maybe others can join / oppose me:
Twice now back to back, i sat down, did the math, decided that a single refresh a day should be safe enough right from the start, rushed through the conquest to optimize my discs in 5 days, and now I am repeating the same battles to hunt down a few, oh pardon a crapton of achievments. At this point, if I dont get hit by a bus, I am going to hit the red crate on day 13 which means I spent 50 crystals extra.
Okay, it cost me more, significantly more, approximately 500 crystals more.... but in the end i dont feel that my strategy or behaviour changed in its essence.
So was... THIS the desired outcome? Or am I playing it like this as a minority? So I understand everything that Kyno said about not being able to reply to everything that the players say, but could we get a reflection from them on the things that they said? Is that a thing? Is the goal achieved, are they happy? Bc if they are happy, maybe we could talk about making us happy.
Dude, "engagement" was obviously just corporate speak for "you guys can't get these premium characters for free." You spent 500 more crystals. That is what they wanted.
How dare you?! (In G.T. voice)
Kyno told us they cared and listened! They would never lie in our face. If it is zero tolerancy against the cheaters, then zero tolerance it is!
If the problem is the low engagement, then that's exactly the problem!
If it is a self-inflicted deathmark due to passive abilities, then it is not the locked-unlocked debuff difference!
Dont try to twist their intentions!
What lie?
There are many ways players engage the game, spending resources is one of them, is it not?
There is an assumption about what engagement means, I'm sure on their end it means more than just time.
I spent a ton of crystals on the last conquest just to see how far I could get even though I knew I was maxed at box 6. This time it’s so unfun I honestly don’t even care
I spent a ton of crystals on the last conquest just to see how far I could get even though I knew I was maxed at box 6. This time it’s so unfun I honestly don’t even care
And that’s the major problem. It’s not fun, too repetitive, repetitive, repetitive, repetitive ….
I don’t care about the stamina, and the cost (crystals). It’s just normal to have to spend to get endgame stuff.
What about reducing by half the number of times you have to repeat a feat, and add more sector? What do you think about that one? You keep the need to spend (more sector) but it’s less repetitive.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
This is exactly why I think that Doja (or whoever it is that isn't giving him approval to say something on this matter) should be called out. Was it intentional? Was it a mistake? Who knows, I can't read minds. If they don't say anything then people are obviously going to speculate, and the longer they take to acknowledge this issue the more it seems like they're just trying to sweep it under the rug.
If it was unintentional, just own it. It's not like this is ruining some perfect track record that the QA department has had to date. I fail to see how this would be any different than any other bug that they've acknowledged. And if it was intentional, they should also just own it. But then that would expose the disingenuity of their excuses on why positive changes aren't coming to Conquest until Conquest 10, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to hear nothing from them.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
To be perfectly honest I don't think that the feat switches are that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things considering how grindy Conquest already is. But it's the fact that they DID make those switches that I find to be unacceptable, considering what they say about making the changes that most players have been asking for. Unless it was an unintentional change (which again, who the hell can know if that's the case without hearing anything from CG), this just shows that they're able to change their plan mid-Conquest, no matter how small those changes were. If they can do this, they could've just as easily moved a few feats around to make completion even slightly easier. But they didn't, which says a lot more about them than any empty statements about how they're "listening to our feedback" ever will.
I spent a ton of crystals on the last conquest just to see how far I could get even though I knew I was maxed at box 6. This time it’s so unfun I honestly don’t even care
And that’s the major problem. It’s not fun, too repetitive, repetitive, repetitive, repetitive ….
I don’t care about the stamina, and the cost (crystals). It’s just normal to have to spend to get endgame stuff.
What about reducing by half the number of times you have to repeat a feat, and add more sector? What do you think about that one? You keep the need to spend (more sector) but it’s less repetitive.
Now pair that with a freaking meter so we can see how much turn meter, defense up etc we’ve gotten. It’s already counted. Just add a box.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
This is exactly why I think that Doja (or whoever it is that isn't giving him approval to say something on this matter) should be called out. Was it intentional? Was it a mistake? Who knows, I can't read minds. If they don't say anything then people are obviously going to speculate, and the longer they take to acknowledge this issue the more it seems like they're just trying to sweep it under the rug.
If it was unintentional, just own it. It's not like this is ruining some perfect track record that the QA department has had to date. I fail to see how this would be any different than any other bug that they've acknowledged. And if it was intentional, they should also just own it. But then that would expose the disingenuity of their excuses on why positive changes aren't coming to Conquest until Conquest 10, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to hear nothing from them.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
I agree they should make a statement about it. I disagree that it would matter if they said it was unintentional, as the speculation would be they are just lying. But either way I agree they should state changes always.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
To be perfectly honest I don't think that the feat switches are that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things considering how grindy Conquest already is. But it's the fact that they DID make those switches that I find to be unacceptable, considering what they say about making the changes that most players have been asking for. Unless it was an unintentional change (which again, who the hell can know if that's the case without hearing anything from CG), this just shows that they're able to change their plan mid-Conquest, no matter how small those changes were. If they can do this, they could've just as easily moved a few feats around to make completion even slightly easier. But they didn't, which says a lot more about them than any empty statements about how they're "listening to our feedback" ever will.
I usual try to avoid things like "x is unacceptable" when dealing with first world problems, but I agree they should not have made changes.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan and not making changes to make it easier, because that was the stated plan. Just like new character releases, they should be too quick to react without a fair amount of data/evidence. All too often we see an initial reaction that seems to be incorrect after things play out for a bit longer. They stated a plan, and it seems reasonable to follow it.
Players will always take issue with things and I'm sure a lot of things feel empty, as the development timeline is never as fast as players would like. But they do listen and they do work on changes based on feedback.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
This is exactly why I think that Doja (or whoever it is that isn't giving him approval to say something on this matter) should be called out. Was it intentional? Was it a mistake? Who knows, I can't read minds. If they don't say anything then people are obviously going to speculate, and the longer they take to acknowledge this issue the more it seems like they're just trying to sweep it under the rug.
If it was unintentional, just own it. It's not like this is ruining some perfect track record that the QA department has had to date. I fail to see how this would be any different than any other bug that they've acknowledged. And if it was intentional, they should also just own it. But then that would expose the disingenuity of their excuses on why positive changes aren't coming to Conquest until Conquest 10, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to hear nothing from them.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
I agree they should make a statement about it. I disagree that it would matter if they said it was unintentional, as the speculation would be they are just lying. But either way I agree they should state changes always.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
To be perfectly honest I don't think that the feat switches are that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things considering how grindy Conquest already is. But it's the fact that they DID make those switches that I find to be unacceptable, considering what they say about making the changes that most players have been asking for. Unless it was an unintentional change (which again, who the hell can know if that's the case without hearing anything from CG), this just shows that they're able to change their plan mid-Conquest, no matter how small those changes were. If they can do this, they could've just as easily moved a few feats around to make completion even slightly easier. But they didn't, which says a lot more about them than any empty statements about how they're "listening to our feedback" ever will.
I usual try to avoid things like "x is unacceptable" when dealing with first world problems, but I agree they should not have made changes.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan and not making changes to make it easier, because that was the stated plan. Just like new character releases, they should be too quick to react without a fair amount of data/evidence. All too often we see an initial reaction that seems to be incorrect after things play out for a bit longer. They stated a plan, and it seems reasonable to follow it.
Players will always take issue with things and I'm sure a lot of things feel empty, as the development timeline is never as fast as players would like. But they do listen and they do work on changes based on feedback.
I can't agree that it wouldn't matter if they said it was unintentional, if it genuinely was unintentional. If they come out and say that, and then the feats are back to their original spots for Conquest 9, then I'm ok with that outcome and I'm sure a lot of others would be too. If they come out and say that, but then keep the feats as they are now for Conquest 9, then speculation that they're just lying would be completely valid. Sure there's always going to be people who think they're lying no matter what, but that shouldn't be an excuse for them to stay silent. I'm glad we can at least be on the same page that they should make a statement on this.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan either. My point is that they've already failed to do that, so to say that they're currently just sticking to the plan is simply wrong at this point unless their plan was always to switch these feats around for some reason. They've already made changes. We can argue about how little impact those changes had, but they apparently felt the need to take this action so I'd love to ask them that question too. Why make the feat switch if it has so little impact on the bigger picture? Is the extra grind that was added really worth it? And for them to make those changes, then turn around and talk about not wanting to make changes during a Conquest series? That's just disingenuous, because now it seems like that caveat only applies to changes that players actually want to see. Again, if this was an unintentional change (and even if it was intentional), then I think they should just come out and say it. It's the fact that they haven't said anything that is driving me to the assumption that this isn't a mistake, because acknowledging a bug shouldn't be this hard when they do it all the time.
Yeah no reason to choose normal over hard if you have the GP
I disagree. I have many accounts, and I am much more entertained with conquest using my 4.5m No GL account on normal mode than I am on my 7m+ 4GL account on hard node.
And even back when the changes to conquest where originally posted, when it was stated that they noticed people where going through the conquest quick and then going back to finish up feats… I was like “yea, was it not designed that way?”. And guess what, that is still EXACTLY how the majority are handling the conquest 8. For example, I finished the conquest on my main account in 5 days….guess what I been doing since?
It’s obvious they don’t do any testing but it’s ironic they make changes to makes events more difficult from one conquest to another. They apparently seem to read player feedback but do the exact opposite of what players want/request. Not to mention all the subtle changes to break events that were working(geo separatist might). Are they intentionally trying to frustrate the players?
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
This is exactly why I think that Doja (or whoever it is that isn't giving him approval to say something on this matter) should be called out. Was it intentional? Was it a mistake? Who knows, I can't read minds. If they don't say anything then people are obviously going to speculate, and the longer they take to acknowledge this issue the more it seems like they're just trying to sweep it under the rug.
If it was unintentional, just own it. It's not like this is ruining some perfect track record that the QA department has had to date. I fail to see how this would be any different than any other bug that they've acknowledged. And if it was intentional, they should also just own it. But then that would expose the disingenuity of their excuses on why positive changes aren't coming to Conquest until Conquest 10, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to hear nothing from them.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
I agree they should make a statement about it. I disagree that it would matter if they said it was unintentional, as the speculation would be they are just lying. But either way I agree they should state changes always.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
To be perfectly honest I don't think that the feat switches are that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things considering how grindy Conquest already is. But it's the fact that they DID make those switches that I find to be unacceptable, considering what they say about making the changes that most players have been asking for. Unless it was an unintentional change (which again, who the hell can know if that's the case without hearing anything from CG), this just shows that they're able to change their plan mid-Conquest, no matter how small those changes were. If they can do this, they could've just as easily moved a few feats around to make completion even slightly easier. But they didn't, which says a lot more about them than any empty statements about how they're "listening to our feedback" ever will.
I usual try to avoid things like "x is unacceptable" when dealing with first world problems, but I agree they should not have made changes.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan and not making changes to make it easier, because that was the stated plan. Just like new character releases, they should be too quick to react without a fair amount of data/evidence. All too often we see an initial reaction that seems to be incorrect after things play out for a bit longer. They stated a plan, and it seems reasonable to follow it.
Players will always take issue with things and I'm sure a lot of things feel empty, as the development timeline is never as fast as players would like. But they do listen and they do work on changes based on feedback.
Except the changes made to conquest were not based on feedback.
They actually didn’t stick to the plan if that plan was to not make changes. They went against it by making conquest more of a grind between S7 and S8. That’s not right and proves they can make changes to make conquest better for the players.
They have plenty of our feedback Kyno and a whole bunch of it is falling on deaf ears beyond Crumb and Doja.
There is an assumption about what engagement means, I'm sure on their end it means more than just time.
Come on, man. Any normal reader would use the context surrounding their use of the word "engagement" and come to the conclusion that they mean time playing the game (or rather are pretending that's what they mean).
And of course "on their end it means more than just time." Five minutes after their post, the forums were in an uproar over their disingenuous language trying to sugar coat what was obviously a cash grab/tax/cost increase/whatever that they wanted to add to Conquest.
It isn't hard, at least not any noticeably harder than any other previous Conquest. And frankly I doubt many people here have even said that it is hard as in it being difficult. Almost every complaint points at the overwhelming amount of tasks needed to complete feats, and how many times you need to repeat the same battles over and over again.
I really enjoyed the pacing of the previous iterations, where you made good progress on feats while playing through the sectors normally, and then you could go back and finish them up later, including the more specific feats. Now it's a major slog, where almost no feat is completed naturally, and you need to complete them all by going back and refreshing energy with hundreds of crystals.
I’ve got news for you. Programming doesn’t just move itself from one location to another.
When working with multiple programmers on the same project, there are way this can happen when someone moves/does something that was not planned, and it all gets merged together.
No one is saying it moved itself, but that it could be unintended.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
This is exactly why I think that Doja (or whoever it is that isn't giving him approval to say something on this matter) should be called out. Was it intentional? Was it a mistake? Who knows, I can't read minds. If they don't say anything then people are obviously going to speculate, and the longer they take to acknowledge this issue the more it seems like they're just trying to sweep it under the rug.
If it was unintentional, just own it. It's not like this is ruining some perfect track record that the QA department has had to date. I fail to see how this would be any different than any other bug that they've acknowledged. And if it was intentional, they should also just own it. But then that would expose the disingenuity of their excuses on why positive changes aren't coming to Conquest until Conquest 10, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to hear nothing from them.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
I agree they should make a statement about it. I disagree that it would matter if they said it was unintentional, as the speculation would be they are just lying. But either way I agree they should state changes always.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
I lost hope for any positive change for the rest of this conquest season but I still expect maul shards as compensationS (delays, feats bugged).
They are not likely to make changes within the Conquest set. So any changes that may come will be in Con 10.
There is no discussion of compensation at this time, but maybe they are just not talking about it.
This is pretty simple. CG says no changes are coming until conquest 10 but they just made changes during this conquest. Please please please please please have someone explain the reasoning behind that (apparent) hypocrisy.
This is the root of peoples frustration - changes without communication. This could easily be put to bed with any official communication about their intentions (as mentioned like 10000 times throughout these threads). This is not hard which is what is infuriating players. The simplicity of the solution points to apathy on CG's part and apathy is not a great way to tell a community you value their feedback and want to retain them as consumers.
I agree that they should communicate better and have all changes announced.
I dont think that this is some magic bullet that will alleviate all frustration, and internal processes with communication dont necessarily mean apathy. The people making these changes are not the ones communicating.
(Side note)
Doja has gone through great lengths to expand the communication he is able to do to help engage the community more, unfortunately this is also used as a negative against them when they take on communication but to not touch on more hot button topics. This type of action, which has to be approved by higher ups, is not a sign of apathy, I personally feel it is quite the opposite.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
To be perfectly honest I don't think that the feat switches are that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things considering how grindy Conquest already is. But it's the fact that they DID make those switches that I find to be unacceptable, considering what they say about making the changes that most players have been asking for. Unless it was an unintentional change (which again, who the hell can know if that's the case without hearing anything from CG), this just shows that they're able to change their plan mid-Conquest, no matter how small those changes were. If they can do this, they could've just as easily moved a few feats around to make completion even slightly easier. But they didn't, which says a lot more about them than any empty statements about how they're "listening to our feedback" ever will.
I usual try to avoid things like "x is unacceptable" when dealing with first world problems, but I agree they should not have made changes.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan and not making changes to make it easier, because that was the stated plan. Just like new character releases, they should be too quick to react without a fair amount of data/evidence. All too often we see an initial reaction that seems to be incorrect after things play out for a bit longer. They stated a plan, and it seems reasonable to follow it.
Players will always take issue with things and I'm sure a lot of things feel empty, as the development timeline is never as fast as players would like. But they do listen and they do work on changes based on feedback.
Except the changes made to conquest were not based on feedback.
They actually didn’t stick to the plan if that plan was to not make changes. They went against it by making conquest more of a grind between S7 and S8. That’s not right and proves they can make changes to make conquest better for the players.
They have plenty of our feedback Kyno and a whole bunch of it is falling on deaf ears beyond Crumb and Doja.
If it's not intended, yes they did not stick to the plan.
Again, they stated they were not going to make changes, our feedback will be used for the next set. They were never going to make changes within the set, as they stated. Its not about the amount of our feedback. No one said they can't.
There is an assumption about what engagement means, I'm sure on their end it means more than just time.
Come on, man. Any normal reader would use the context surrounding their use of the word "engagement" and come to the conclusion that they mean time playing the game (or rather are pretending that's what they mean).
And of course "on their end it means more than just time." Five minutes after their post, the forums were in an uproar over their disingenuous language trying to sugar coat what was obviously a cash grab/tax/cost increase/whatever that they wanted to add to Conquest.
I dont think we should go back into the context conversation.
Replies
In conquest 7 and 8, I haven’t had the option for even 1 weak point. Just because you get lucky with discs doesn’t mean your experience represents everyone.
I did, however, get Deadly catalyst this time, so I went from only winning with key teams to being able to win with almost any team.
So either get lucky with discs or have a deep, heavily geared roster.
Most of the complaints I've seen are about the time/grind sink and demand for crystals despite no increase in rewards. Sure, some folks are complaining that it is "hard", but they may just be frustrated or got really bad disks.
They may post a bit of insight if they make changes to Conquest 10. They have spoken about this game mode having "seasons", but I don't think the increases to feats, energy cost and others will be things that change that often.
They dont often share any reflections in this way, or at least not right away. They will tend to let them marinade for a bit and offer some insight to changes made and how they used previous things to help them build X or Y.
I would say you are not likely the minority. There are many hard stops that players are not going to overcome and therefore have a similar math and plan to you.
I have slightly different strategy from the OG one, and I still follow it, as I dont see a path for me to get anything past the second best crate. I also dont always have the time over a 2 week period to push for it and miss, which would just be a waste.
Kyno - you keep dodging, and rather artfully if I may say so, the fact people keep pointing out that CG *was* able to make changes between Conquest 7 and 8. Except they did it to make the grind worse. They could have opted to look at a way to swap the feats around to ever so slightly alleviate the grind, but they went in the opposite direction.
Given that the crux of a lot of your statements revolve around CG not being able to do anything until Conquest 10, would you care to share your thoughts on the C8 changes?
1 - I am not entirely sure this was a choice, vs a mistake. The ones that moved only slightly upset the balance, you can still do many feats in a normal sequence. If they were going out of their way to do this, it doesnt seem like an effective way to do that.
2 - no one said they were not able to. They stated they were not planning to, as they would run them in sets of 3.
I have never said they can't, or even that they wouldnt. Just that the stated plan was to run them in sets of 3 without changes. Yes they made minor changes. I would love to dog up the math on effective cost of this change. My guess is it was not really that much in the overall battle count (and crystal cost), but I could be wrong.
I am just sharing the information that has been stated and explained to us as "the plan" for the way Conquest will run. So while we are providing feedback, and they are listening, we are not likely to see changes based on that within a set, that doesn't seem to be part of the plan at this time.
How dare you?! (In G.T. voice)
Kyno told us they cared and listened! They would never lie in our face. If it is zero tolerancy against the cheaters, then zero tolerance it is!
If the problem is the low engagement, then that's exactly the problem!
If it is a self-inflicted deathmark due to passive abilities, then it is not the locked-unlocked debuff difference!
Dont try to twist their intentions!
What lie?
There are many ways players engage the game, spending resources is one of them, is it not?
There is an assumption about what engagement means, I'm sure on their end it means more than just time.
And that’s the major problem. It’s not fun, too repetitive, repetitive, repetitive, repetitive ….
I don’t care about the stamina, and the cost (crystals). It’s just normal to have to spend to get endgame stuff.
What about reducing by half the number of times you have to repeat a feat, and add more sector? What do you think about that one? You keep the need to spend (more sector) but it’s less repetitive.
This is exactly why I think that Doja (or whoever it is that isn't giving him approval to say something on this matter) should be called out. Was it intentional? Was it a mistake? Who knows, I can't read minds. If they don't say anything then people are obviously going to speculate, and the longer they take to acknowledge this issue the more it seems like they're just trying to sweep it under the rug.
If it was unintentional, just own it. It's not like this is ruining some perfect track record that the QA department has had to date. I fail to see how this would be any different than any other bug that they've acknowledged. And if it was intentional, they should also just own it. But then that would expose the disingenuity of their excuses on why positive changes aren't coming to Conquest until Conquest 10, which is why I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to hear nothing from them.
To be perfectly honest I don't think that the feat switches are that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things considering how grindy Conquest already is. But it's the fact that they DID make those switches that I find to be unacceptable, considering what they say about making the changes that most players have been asking for. Unless it was an unintentional change (which again, who the hell can know if that's the case without hearing anything from CG), this just shows that they're able to change their plan mid-Conquest, no matter how small those changes were. If they can do this, they could've just as easily moved a few feats around to make completion even slightly easier. But they didn't, which says a lot more about them than any empty statements about how they're "listening to our feedback" ever will.
Now pair that with a freaking meter so we can see how much turn meter, defense up etc we’ve gotten. It’s already counted. Just add a box.
I agree they should make a statement about it. I disagree that it would matter if they said it was unintentional, as the speculation would be they are just lying. But either way I agree they should state changes always.
I usual try to avoid things like "x is unacceptable" when dealing with first world problems, but I agree they should not have made changes.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan and not making changes to make it easier, because that was the stated plan. Just like new character releases, they should be too quick to react without a fair amount of data/evidence. All too often we see an initial reaction that seems to be incorrect after things play out for a bit longer. They stated a plan, and it seems reasonable to follow it.
Players will always take issue with things and I'm sure a lot of things feel empty, as the development timeline is never as fast as players would like. But they do listen and they do work on changes based on feedback.
I can't agree that it wouldn't matter if they said it was unintentional, if it genuinely was unintentional. If they come out and say that, and then the feats are back to their original spots for Conquest 9, then I'm ok with that outcome and I'm sure a lot of others would be too. If they come out and say that, but then keep the feats as they are now for Conquest 9, then speculation that they're just lying would be completely valid. Sure there's always going to be people who think they're lying no matter what, but that shouldn't be an excuse for them to stay silent. I'm glad we can at least be on the same page that they should make a statement on this.
I have no issue with them sticking to the plan either. My point is that they've already failed to do that, so to say that they're currently just sticking to the plan is simply wrong at this point unless their plan was always to switch these feats around for some reason. They've already made changes. We can argue about how little impact those changes had, but they apparently felt the need to take this action so I'd love to ask them that question too. Why make the feat switch if it has so little impact on the bigger picture? Is the extra grind that was added really worth it? And for them to make those changes, then turn around and talk about not wanting to make changes during a Conquest series? That's just disingenuous, because now it seems like that caveat only applies to changes that players actually want to see. Again, if this was an unintentional change (and even if it was intentional), then I think they should just come out and say it. It's the fact that they haven't said anything that is driving me to the assumption that this isn't a mistake, because acknowledging a bug shouldn't be this hard when they do it all the time.
I disagree. I have many accounts, and I am much more entertained with conquest using my 4.5m No GL account on normal mode than I am on my 7m+ 4GL account on hard node.
Except the changes made to conquest were not based on feedback.
They actually didn’t stick to the plan if that plan was to not make changes. They went against it by making conquest more of a grind between S7 and S8. That’s not right and proves they can make changes to make conquest better for the players.
They have plenty of our feedback Kyno and a whole bunch of it is falling on deaf ears beyond Crumb and Doja.
Come on, man. Any normal reader would use the context surrounding their use of the word "engagement" and come to the conclusion that they mean time playing the game (or rather are pretending that's what they mean).
And of course "on their end it means more than just time." Five minutes after their post, the forums were in an uproar over their disingenuous language trying to sugar coat what was obviously a cash grab/tax/cost increase/whatever that they wanted to add to Conquest.
It isn't hard, at least not any noticeably harder than any other previous Conquest. And frankly I doubt many people here have even said that it is hard as in it being difficult. Almost every complaint points at the overwhelming amount of tasks needed to complete feats, and how many times you need to repeat the same battles over and over again.
I really enjoyed the pacing of the previous iterations, where you made good progress on feats while playing through the sectors normally, and then you could go back and finish them up later, including the more specific feats. Now it's a major slog, where almost no feat is completed naturally, and you need to complete them all by going back and refreshing energy with hundreds of crystals.
When working with multiple programmers on the same project, there are way this can happen when someone moves/does something that was not planned, and it all gets merged together.
No one is saying it moved itself, but that it could be unintended.
If it's not intended, yes they did not stick to the plan.
Again, they stated they were not going to make changes, our feedback will be used for the next set. They were never going to make changes within the set, as they stated. Its not about the amount of our feedback. No one said they can't.
No. The first Conquest were very fun, I think players really liked this edition.
I dont think we should go back into the context conversation.