This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
Now who is using situational stuff? LV? Ok one toon that few have vs surviving the initial onslaught with loads of teams that you can now 3 star vs 2 or 1 without.
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
I also won 3* with LV without using VA-AA during the VA-AA era. The challenge i face in in conquests is doing feats comfortably, not winning with a strong team. Survivability with weaker teams will help me achieve that. To each his own i guess.
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
Now who is using situational stuff? LV? Ok one toon that few have vs surviving the initial onslaught with loads of teams that you can now 3 star vs 2 or 1 without.
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
I also won 3* with LV without using VA-AA during the VA-AA era. The challenge i face in in conquests is doing feats comfortably, not winning with a strong team. Survivability with weaker teams will help me achieve that. To each his own i guess.
Except the argument was about strength.
Semantics then. We don’t have the same understanding of what strength mean in this context. Moving on ?
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
I also won 3* with LV without using VA-AA during the VA-AA era. The challenge i face in in conquests is doing feats comfortably, not winning with a strong team. Survivability with weaker teams will help me achieve that. To each his own i guess.
Except the argument was about strength.
Semantics then. We don’t have the same understanding of what strength mean in this context. Moving on ?
Not semantics, exact quotation. If you’re going to quote me, then I expect you to understand what was actually said previously before issuing a reply. Otherwise, there’s really no point now, is there?
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
Now who is using situational stuff? LV? Ok one toon that few have vs surviving the initial onslaught with loads of teams that you can now 3 star vs 2 or 1 without.
So situational that you couldn’t have possibly done the “win with one move” feat without LV, right? https://youtu.be/EdJFcluon5A
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
I also won 3* with LV without using VA-AA during the VA-AA era. The challenge i face in in conquests is doing feats comfortably, not winning with a strong team. Survivability with weaker teams will help me achieve that. To each his own i guess.
Except the argument was about strength.
Semantics then. We don’t have the same understanding of what strength mean in this context. Moving on ?
Not semantics, exact quotation. If you’re going to quote me, then I expect you to understand what was actually said previously before issuing a reply. Otherwise, there’s really no point now, is there?
We’re doing this, really ? Ok.
You said that Entrenched was ‘weaker’. What do you mean ?
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
I also won 3* with LV without using VA-AA during the VA-AA era. The challenge i face in in conquests is doing feats comfortably, not winning with a strong team. Survivability with weaker teams will help me achieve that. To each his own i guess.
Except the argument was about strength.
Semantics then. We don’t have the same understanding of what strength mean in this context. Moving on ?
Not semantics, exact quotation. If you’re going to quote me, then I expect you to understand what was actually said previously before issuing a reply. Otherwise, there’s really no point now, is there?
We’re doing this, really ? Ok.
You said that Entrenched was ‘weaker’. What do you mean ?
Yes, let’s.
Weaker = can’t do what VA-AA was able to, such as win with one move, beat a S5 boss without letting them take a turn, let G8 Inq get wins.
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
I also won 3* with LV without using VA-AA during the VA-AA era. The challenge i face in in conquests is doing feats comfortably, not winning with a strong team. Survivability with weaker teams will help me achieve that. To each his own i guess.
Except the argument was about strength.
Semantics then. We don’t have the same understanding of what strength mean in this context. Moving on ?
Not semantics, exact quotation. If you’re going to quote me, then I expect you to understand what was actually said previously before issuing a reply. Otherwise, there’s really no point now, is there?
We’re doing this, really ? Ok.
You said that Entrenched was ‘weaker’. What do you mean ?
Yes, let’s.
Weaker = can’t do what VA-AA was able to, such as win with one move, beat a S5 boss without letting them take a turn, let G8 Inq get wins.
By your very specific definition of ‘weaker’, you’re right, Entrenched can’t do this, then is weaker.
But you can’t in good faith ask this: ‘ Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs” (which is what i was responding), when you limited so much the scope of what ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ means, so finding other reasons is near impossible.
I wouldn't say I'm demotivated, but I haven't really started working on Inquisitors yet, so I am finding the insistence on even more Inquisitor feats a bit boring. I'm far from GI, so his ship isn't going to make a difference to me anytime soon.
However, I am finishing off Malgus and buying G12 gear with tokens, plus I'm getting some Datacon materials out of it, so that is keeping me somewhat engaged still.
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
Now who is using situational stuff? LV? Ok one toon that few have vs surviving the initial onslaught with loads of teams that you can now 3 star vs 2 or 1 without.
Lol you don’t have LV? 🤣
There's lots of folks out there without LV, both because of the resources required and the fact that he's generally not worth said resources when you can get less expensive GLs that perform better in more areas of the game.
This Conquest is demotivating because the disks suck compared to past offerings.
Disagree.
I stopped using the VA/AA combo a while ago anyway, I'll happily take the return of Entrenched instead.
Entrenched is much weaker than VA-AA.
“Weak” is situational.
Entrenched gives out Protection-up buff. And it stacks. Equip three Entrenched discs, that’s 30% extra TM for your imps, enough to outrun some teams even in sector 4 and 5.
A niche interaction with a one-off faction is the best counterargument you can come up with? 🤣
That's only one reason for why it's good.
Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs”.
“Surviving the initial onslaught when opponents go first because of crazy high speed so you can get 3* with a lot of different teams, which is the real difficulty of a fight in Conquest”
That’s nowhere near as strong lol. VA-AA lets me win with one LV AOE that I can go first in 99% of encounters. Asking to survive IT or GI, while not going first with just a handful of Entrenched disks, is a fool’s errand.
Now who is using situational stuff? LV? Ok one toon that few have vs surviving the initial onslaught with loads of teams that you can now 3 star vs 2 or 1 without.
So situational that you couldn’t have possibly done the “win with one move” feat without LV, right? https://youtu.be/EdJFcluon5A
The lack of AA is making a lot of battles in this one a huge slog. I have to stack up my team with defensive disks or protection/health recovery disks. And then just slowly slug it out. A lot of battles are taking 3-4 minutes and I even timed out once or twice. I've got enough of that noise with the current LV datacron meta. I don't need it in conquest.
The lack of AA is making a lot of battles in this one a huge slog. I have to stack up my team with defensive disks or protection/health recovery disks. And then just slowly slug it out. A lot of battles are taking 3-4 minutes and I even timed out once or twice. I've got enough of that noise with the current LV datacron meta. I don't need it in conquest.
Never was, Conquest is a game mode that should be removed asap along with datacrons.
Its nothing more than a crystal sink that involves a gigantic time sink thats forced upon you if by any chance you wish to play gac like a normal person.
End result, the game sucks because of 2 things and conquest is 1 of those 2.
Pleasure chatting with you. I'm gonna go enjoy some more conquest now, with my extremely useful one blue and two green entrenched discs.
Wow, TVF quitting an argument? World’s first right here. 🤣
“Quitting” is not the same as “deciding not to carry on arguing with someone who isn’t using sound logic”.
Amplify Agony disks took away much of the need for some players to think about how to use their roster creatively. Just send in LV, AoE and win.
I’m surprised the devs left those disks in conquest for so long tbh. The current disk set makes players think and use their roster properly. Maybe that’s why you don’t like them?
Pleasure chatting with you. I'm gonna go enjoy some more conquest now, with my extremely useful one blue and two green entrenched discs.
Wow, TVF quitting an argument? World’s first right here. 🤣
“Quitting” is not the same as “deciding not to carry on arguing with someone who isn’t using sound logic”.
Amplify Agony disks took away much of the need for some players to think about how to use their roster creatively. Just send in LV, AoE and win.
I’m surprised the devs left those disks in conquest for so long tbh. The current disk set makes players think and use their roster properly. Maybe that’s why you don’t like them?
It doesnt make you think at all, you still have stacking za send in dash 1 aoe and everyone dies. Its still dumb. The issue comes when you have no communication upfront about the removal of a disk so you start buying disks prepping for your usual set of disks and than the core piece doesnt come which you realize when 2 sectors are done for.
Than other issues come mainly the fact that most of the time matches are much slower meaning you have to spend even more time with a game mode that most people doesnt like or care for which is a big turn off especially when the conquest reward is a ship nobody wanted for a faction nobody cares about but you still have to play it because of datacrons.
Conquest is not hard in any way, the issue is time spent, crystal cost, the forced nature of it that ties back to the game mode most people actually care about and bad communication about all of that.
Never was, Conquest is a game mode that should be removed asap along with datacrons.
Its nothing more than a crystal sink that involves a gigantic time sink thats forced upon you if by any chance you wish to play gac like a normal person.
End result, the game sucks because of 2 things and conquest is 1 of those 2.
Hard disagree on removing conquest. It was bad for a while - it's much better now and I find it to be some of the most fun I have in this game, as do some others that I know. GAC and TW just aren't my favorites - that leaves PVE content and there was a big hole there for a long time. Conquest fills that void nicely.
Datacrons can diaf though - can't argue that.
F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
Never was, Conquest is a game mode that should be removed asap along with datacrons.
Its nothing more than a crystal sink that involves a gigantic time sink thats forced upon you if by any chance you wish to play gac like a normal person.
End result, the game sucks because of 2 things and conquest is 1 of those 2.
I would rather play conquest and get a powerful character or ship for under 7k crystals than to buy them at release for around 23k. Getting characters and ships for a third of the crystals plus all the other stuff we get in conquest is nice.
Game sucks because of datacrons and GA imo.
Why wasn't Cobb Vanth shards a reward for the Krayt Dragon raid? Why wasn't Endor Gear Luke shards a reward for the Speeder Bike raid?
I'm sure you have data to prove most people dislike conquest.
Lets not argue with the numbers of players that play the game or the amount of times people quit the game due to the time required for the game in general since conquest got released. Sure some can feel conquest have no impact until you actually have to merge a guild because player quit faster than you can replace them due to guess what, time needed for the game.
Never was, Conquest is a game mode that should be removed asap along with datacrons.
Its nothing more than a crystal sink that involves a gigantic time sink thats forced upon you if by any chance you wish to play gac like a normal person.
End result, the game sucks because of 2 things and conquest is 1 of those 2.
Hard disagree on removing conquest. It was bad for a while - it's much better now and I find it to be some of the most fun I have in this game, as do some others that I know. GAC and TW just aren't my favorites - that leaves PVE content and there was a big hole there for a long time. Conquest fills that void nicely.
Datacrons can diaf though - can't argue that.
You said it yourself, you dont really like gac and tw you prefer pve and thats good for you. Subjectively speaking im the other way around.
I'm sure you have data to prove most people dislike conquest.
Do you have that setup as a keyboard shortcut?
I'm sure that you also have data to prove that most people love conquest.
I could go on with a pointless argument, but instead I'll offer some constructive criticism of conquest and tell you why it's easy for me to pretty much skip this conquest.
1, the rewards, trying to force more inquisitor garbage down our throats, for my roster there's plenty of things ahead of trashquisitors that I prefer to gear up (and on a personal note, the way CG has rolled them out just makes me hate them more).
2, the repetitiveness, aside from changing the bosses and mini-bosses, you always fight the same teams with the same modifiers, Padme with steadfast retribution, phoenix with the odds and overprepared. Try swapping the modifiers around, even include the "don't kill the leader" ones from boss battles.
Replies
Now who is using situational stuff? LV? Ok one toon that few have vs surviving the initial onslaught with loads of teams that you can now 3 star vs 2 or 1 without.
Explain.
Except the argument was about strength.
Lol you don’t have LV? 🤣
Semantics then. We don’t have the same understanding of what strength mean in this context. Moving on ?
Not semantics, exact quotation. If you’re going to quote me, then I expect you to understand what was actually said previously before issuing a reply. Otherwise, there’s really no point now, is there?
So situational that you couldn’t have possibly done the “win with one move” feat without LV, right?
Why are you so dead-set on letting your S5 boss take turns, with or without LV?
We’re doing this, really ? Ok.
You said that Entrenched was ‘weaker’. What do you mean ?
Yes, let’s.
Weaker = can’t do what VA-AA was able to, such as win with one move, beat a S5 boss without letting them take a turn, let G8 Inq get wins.
By your very specific definition of ‘weaker’, you’re right, Entrenched can’t do this, then is weaker.
But you can’t in good faith ask this: ‘ Let me know when those other reasons are as strong or as universal as “use AOE abilities”, “scaling damage to max health”, or “triggering abilities with free debuffs” (which is what i was responding), when you limited so much the scope of what ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ means, so finding other reasons is near impossible.
However, I am finishing off Malgus and buying G12 gear with tokens, plus I'm getting some Datacon materials out of it, so that is keeping me somewhat engaged still.
There's lots of folks out there without LV, both because of the resources required and the fact that he's generally not worth said resources when you can get less expensive GLs that perform better in more areas of the game.
Have you considered not using such a situational argument? You only provided 2 examples, so clearly it's only situational and so doesn't count.
This is a character collecting & resource management game. Getting this ship to 7* and the other top rewards should be your motivation.
You should try ‘ruthless’ stuff.
Its nothing more than a crystal sink that involves a gigantic time sink thats forced upon you if by any chance you wish to play gac like a normal person.
End result, the game sucks because of 2 things and conquest is 1 of those 2.
Amplify Agony disks took away much of the need for some players to think about how to use their roster creatively. Just send in LV, AoE and win.
I’m surprised the devs left those disks in conquest for so long tbh. The current disk set makes players think and use their roster properly. Maybe that’s why you don’t like them?
It doesnt make you think at all, you still have stacking za send in dash 1 aoe and everyone dies. Its still dumb. The issue comes when you have no communication upfront about the removal of a disk so you start buying disks prepping for your usual set of disks and than the core piece doesnt come which you realize when 2 sectors are done for.
Than other issues come mainly the fact that most of the time matches are much slower meaning you have to spend even more time with a game mode that most people doesnt like or care for which is a big turn off especially when the conquest reward is a ship nobody wanted for a faction nobody cares about but you still have to play it because of datacrons.
Conquest is not hard in any way, the issue is time spent, crystal cost, the forced nature of it that ties back to the game mode most people actually care about and bad communication about all of that.
Hard disagree on removing conquest. It was bad for a while - it's much better now and I find it to be some of the most fun I have in this game, as do some others that I know. GAC and TW just aren't my favorites - that leaves PVE content and there was a big hole there for a long time. Conquest fills that void nicely.
Datacrons can diaf though - can't argue that.
I would rather play conquest and get a powerful character or ship for under 7k crystals than to buy them at release for around 23k. Getting characters and ships for a third of the crystals plus all the other stuff we get in conquest is nice.
Game sucks because of datacrons and GA imo.
Conquest is my favorite thing in this game.
Lets not argue with the numbers of players that play the game or the amount of times people quit the game due to the time required for the game in general since conquest got released. Sure some can feel conquest have no impact until you actually have to merge a guild because player quit faster than you can replace them due to guess what, time needed for the game.
You said it yourself, you dont really like gac and tw you prefer pve and thats good for you. Subjectively speaking im the other way around.
Do you have that setup as a keyboard shortcut?
I'm sure that you also have data to prove that most people love conquest.
I could go on with a pointless argument, but instead I'll offer some constructive criticism of conquest and tell you why it's easy for me to pretty much skip this conquest.
1, the rewards, trying to force more inquisitor garbage down our throats, for my roster there's plenty of things ahead of trashquisitors that I prefer to gear up (and on a personal note, the way CG has rolled them out just makes me hate them more).
2, the repetitiveness, aside from changing the bosses and mini-bosses, you always fight the same teams with the same modifiers, Padme with steadfast retribution, phoenix with the odds and overprepared. Try swapping the modifiers around, even include the "don't kill the leader" ones from boss battles.