Recent Discussions
Enfys Nest not taking damage...
Enfys Nest in a conquest fight did not take any damage, kept healing and was the last of the other side... i wiped out every other member of that team. this one just stood there and wouldnt die.... why? why cant they just make the game less maddening instead of flat out stressful... i must of had at least 30 straight turns and nothing...
The game is totally broken and a waste of time.
I'm actually upset now that I've spent so much money on this useless game it just crashes all the time and is stacked with players going flight mode on their phones and cheating . If you look at the players in and around Kyber in GAC there are so many that simply cannot be there yet they are. Reporting does absolutely nothing and besides all the cheating - this game is totally unstable and crashes constantly. I'm staring now at my frozen battle in conquest for the third time, wasting my time and energy. I'm very close to saying fk it and if i hadn't spend so much money on your crap game i would stop right now. I've seen post of people complaining and i have complained about the crashes and yet they not fixed. Crashing when claiming the free data card should be an easy fix. Sadly that's been going on for months now. Crashing in GAC and conquest....just unacceptable .
LSBs for all (for a period of time before limiting to Lower GP)
As a collector of all characters, the LSBs offer upgrades to some of the characters that are not required for GLs. Understandably, the LSBs will be made permanently available for lower GP players, is it possible to open them up to everyone for purchase over the first weekend or something?
Character Idea: Cin Drallig
Unit Name: Cin Drallig Relic: Lightsaber Affiliation: Light Side, Attacker Tags: Leader, Galactic Republic, Jedi, Jedi Vanguard As the Battlemaster and Head of Security at the Jedi Temple, Cin Drallig is befitting to lead a Jedi Vanguard squad. Also, he'll be another character with a Summon mechanic; in his case, Summoning a Jedi Temple Guard. He's an Attacker due to his proficiency in Lightsaber Combat, him often being regarded as the Jedi Orders' finest duellist, and he was portrayed by Prequel Trilogy Stunt Coordinator Nick Gillard. Unfortunately for Drallig, his proficiency wasn't enough to best Lord Vader during Order 66.
Relic Delta – The Solution to a problem that doesn’t exist
As a guild leader of a top 100 guild, here are my thoughts regarding this Relic Delta situation. Please articulate to the players “What is the problem you are trying to solve”? I work with large projects in industry and I realize there are Sunk Costs that cannot be recovered. However, Is this strategy to “fix” the perceived problem a success if a large section of the player base disappears? I have asked my player base which is a combination of whales, dolphins, and basic monthly spenders ranging from 12M GP – 15M GP what they think about this, and it is literally 100% negative. The players don’t understand why this Relic Delta is needed as it seems you are rolling out a change to a problem that doesn’t exist. The primary frustration is that this change nullifies the years of Modding and Strategic Relic upgrades and years of roster effort and pretty much eliminates creative play (which is the most enjoyable part of the game). I doubt a developer may understand that sentiment, but it is VERY important to the players. These are players that love the game and most are sick over this. I already have messages from players stating they will retire from the game if this rolls out. The best suggestions that came in from my guild were: Simply increase the mastery of Relic 9 from 10 to 15. Increment certain stats on the current higher Relics. Roll out a new Relic 10. Whales will spend on that, leaving the rest of the player base to continue their progression as-is. I personally think that any of those, and many others in the forums, are easy fixes to the problem without introducing MANY MANY more issues to the game that would come from this Relic Delta strategy, and hopefully leave the player base intact. At this point you have a choice to make. Continue ahead with this flawed approach that the overwhelming majority of the player base does not even want - and risk a substantial percentage of players dropping out of the game. OR Cease and Desist all work on this change (unfortunately eat the costs already spent) and work on a different approach to solving your perceived issue.Alternative to Relic 10?
A small suggestion as a compromise to Relic Delta. Instead of relic 10 and beyond, create a secondary relic icon which contains the future levels of progression and only apply Relic Delta to the secondary relics. These relics can only be unlocked after reaching relic 9. It's pretty much the same as relic 10+, other than it's clearer to the player that these relics have a different mechanic compared to the previous relics. i.e. Relic Delta. The game as we know it, won't change. Whilst allowing CG to have, what they define to be, a vertically scalable progression system. I don't think there needs to be a sweeping wide system change, just to add another level of progression. I still don't think relic delta is a good solution. I don't actually think there is a problem. But if we must have it, then please keep these changes only to the new progression system. There are far too many issues if you implement it in a backwards compatible way and many players will feel their current efforts in this game become greatly devalued.A constructive response to the Design Fireside Chat
Here's my response to the Design Fireside Chat. Yes, it's a book. TL;DR: Relic Delta has many of the same problems as other options, but it comes with enormous downsides. It's very much possible to scalably increase the value of higher relic investments without massively devaluing lower ones. First, I want to say thank your for that Design Fireside Chat post. It was refreshing to see you explain your thinking and reasons openly. It was thoughtful and mostly well-reasoned. But I see things differently in some places, particularly the objections to why we can't adjust relic level increases either across the board or going forward. Those are scalable options that achieve your goals without devaluing lower ones into the ground. Generally speaking in game design, buffs > nerfs. My responses are in red. I've include only those sections/paragraphs that I had direct responses to. "Why Relic Delta?" Additionally, both Droid Brains and higher level Signal Data will be added as outputs from the Scavenger, giving players an alternate means of acquiring those materials. This won't really help. I'm a mid-level player (6.3m gp), and having Zinbiddles, Impulse Detectors, and Gyrda Keypads available from the Scavenger is already next to useless for me because the exchange is so bad. Yes, I could use it to push a single character to r7–9, but that's at the opportunity cost of getting many characters to r0. The Problem: Scalability The core problem is that Relics don't have a scalable system component promoting and rewarding investment. True, but that's how you designed it. In theory, it could be more scalable if you design it that way. There are two operational reasons to invest - the stats given on each individual level and content entry requirements - but at some point the stats have diminishing returns, and requirements can’t update as players’ rosters evolve. Players invest in unlock/entry requirements for content they want to engage, but the higher the relic level, the scarcer its materials and the less likely players are to invest those resources. We've heard from the community that players don't think R9 is worth investing outside of requirements, GLs, and the occasional tank. R9 still loses to R5 just like R8 does. R9 doesn't make battles in early phases of TB meaningfully faster. R9 doesn't make Assault Battle challenge tiers or Proving Grounds or other events much easier. It comes up short in both PvE and PvP content, both solo and group content. Challenging PvE content is on you guys to make. As for PvP, relics already confer a significant stats advantage. At rough relic parity, many teams struggle against a strong defensive team. Picking a well-suited counter can occasionally let you punch up. But if you have the relic advantage, you have much more leeway and can brute force a win. R9 isn't supposed to guarantee you a win every time. But it means your opponents needs to work much harder to budget the right counter teams, and you can get by with less-optimal counters. If players don't think R9 is worth investment, that means that you didn't hit the right spot of cost vs. benefit. And the costs of R9 are huge, and frankly too steep—which is on you. I'm not opposed to buffing R9 (and R10, etc.), but we can do that in a way that doesn't massively devalue investments players have made below R9. You could say "just make the stats on R9 bigger", and we'll address that possible approach in just a bit, but the short response to that is a series of questions: What does that mean for R10? What does the impact on R10 mean for R11? Higher relic levels in the future? How will this be sustainable for multiple future levels of progression? How does an increase in stats on R9 help players below R9? We have to look at the long-term future of Relics, not just the levels that players currently own. It means that each successive level could get stronger, making them increasingly harder to beat with lower levels, which I think is your aim with Relic Delta. But this way, we're not nerfing lower relics into the ground at the same time. In the end, the problem is far bigger than "protect higher relic investment", which is as much as we revealed to the testers initially. Yes, that is part of the problem, but it's not the whole problem. We need to facilitate all players having a systemic and scalable game-wide reason to pursue upward progression. The Options: Possible Solutions We've seen some suggestions from the community on other ways to solve this core problem (albeit without knowing what the problem was). Now that the problem is revealed, let's take a look at why these other options weren't chosen. Do nothing Example: The game stays at R9. Result: Players eventually have enough resources to take the entire roster to R9. There is no new level of progression, no new challenging content that players can strive to overcome. As players don't have upward progression to pursue (in a primarily vertical progression game), there is no longer a reason to engage with the core gameplay loop of Play > Get Rewards > Invest > Get Stronger > Play. Rewards don't matter and there is nowhere to invest. The core of the game ceases to function and the player experience is ruined. I see the problem, but I also don't see how Relic Delta addresses this at all. If anything, by creating an arms race to make players rush up relic levels, you're only hastening this problem. The solution is making new challenging content that the very top players can strive to overcome, without crushing and devaluing the investments of the vast majority of players. Change relic stats on existing relic levels Example: R9 is updated to add an additional 50 Mastery and 100 Speed. Result: The value that players receive from their prior investment and upcoming investment goals changes. Relic Delta making high-relics suddenly hit like gods and low-relics hardly able to make a scratch is a change in value, yes. Some characters probably come out "winners", but many would certainly be "losers". Different characters are impacted to differing degrees, which results in a fractured solution rather than a solidified one. Yes, that's always how progression has worked. Do you not think that Relic Delta will impact some characters more than others? Punching up, % health effects are going to be hugely more useful than direct damage dealers—instant defeats even more so. Punching down, damage dealers are going to be insane and sometimes one-shot whole teams (QGJ-bomb with Anakin doing +200%?). Many R9s will solo entire lower teams. The meta still shifts, potentially drastically, especially if Mastery constituent stats are touched. You don't think the meta will shift drastically after -50%/+200% damage changes? I'd wager Relic Delta will shift the meta far, far more than slightly adjusted masteries. Relic levels beyond R9 aren't directly supported, and this doesn't address the core problem of scalability. It does. You could change relic stat and/or mastery increases to scale however you like instead of the relatively flat increases we see now. Whatever scaling you choose could continue into R10 and beyond. Introduce R10 Example: Add R10 by itself. Result: R10 exists with no new content to support it. With R9 being difficult to acquire, many wouldn't have any R10 characters. The top end would invest as much as necessary for any new requirements and also updating GL teams, and then R10 would be in the exact same state as R9. It plays into and exacerbates the existing problem rather than solving it. Make new content? Players have been asking for years for new content. And PvP is the ever-scaling push toward upgrading. Players will always want an edge in stats—you just need to find the sweet spot of cost vs. benefit to make it seem worth the investment. Right now, the costs of going up relic levels scales exponentially, but the benefits don't. As mentioned above, tweaking either of those isn't impossible. The Chosen Solution: Relic Delta A level delta system is used so broadly because it is incredibly scalable. While players are leveling and working toward max progression, the delta "sticks with them" and applies equally to their experience regardless of where they're at in the progression curve. If progression levels are increased, the system accounts for that by automatically applying equally as players work toward the new cap, without requiring bandwidth from developers to balance and maintain bespoke bonuses. There's nothing wrong with easy. But in this case, the easy path carries so many negative side effects that it's coming across as lazy. I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem prohibitively difficult to put the relic level stat/mastery increases in a spreadsheet, decide on some linear or exponential % increase per level, and then expand that out to R levels in the future. What am I missing? For all players at all relic levels: It speeds up and/or simplifies older content. Or if you're low- to mid-level it makes older content much slower and more frustrating. Lower relics will get crushed. In ABs and Conquest, you can sometimes find the right strategy to punch-up. That feels good and rewards a combination of both gear and strategy. Now, the gear check will be far more decisive than strategy. It protects newer content and investments made to engage with that content. It relic-gates it and devalues any lower investments. It supports a distinction in power level in PvP. It will incentivize tall, skinny rosters, which the game has tried to move away from. In GAC, a player with a handful of r9s is going to stomp all over a player with any number of r0–r5s. This will result in bad matchmaking, just a different kind. It rewards those who have "made the climb". It punishes and discourages players who haven't yet. It promises that “your investment of time and resources will be rewarded.” It hands them almost automatic wins and strips out the strategy and fun. We chose for Relic Delta to only apply to damage because we wanted the stats on the relic levels themselves to still matter. None of the other stats matter if you're already dead. Individual relic levels should still be able to express varied stats based on what the meta needs at the time that relic level is introduced. We’ve heard the concern around Relic Delta eliminating strategy (mods, counters, theorycrafting), but we aren’t seeing a complete elimination of strategy during either internal testing or the current playtest. It doesn't have to be "a complete elimination" to severely harm the game. The game walks a careful balance between gear vs. strategy. Relic Delta will tip that balance overwhelmingly to gear and make strategy much less impactful. We fully intend for strategy to continue to be a central aspect of both PvP and PvE content. Not with those numbers you've released. Yes, Relic Delta eliminates some cases (e.g. G12 Malicos beating R8 Rey), but it also introduces some strategy around which characters to invest in and by how much based on your usage of them and their place in the larger meta. It creates cases of r9 Malicos destroying R5 GL teams. (Up above, you said that a drawback of changing relic stat levels would be that some characters are "winners" and some "losers." It's the same with Relic Delta.) ___________________________________________ Look, we can achieve all of your goals without destroying the value of lower relics. I'll just give you my preferred solution: Adjust the scaling of stat and/or mastery increases per relic level. Option 1: Recalibrate the increases for all relic levels. (Credit to SharnJilraedan for the basic idea and some numbers.) Right now, we have these mastery increases: 5/5/5/5/5/10/10/15/10. Which is weird. Of course R9 doesn't seem like it's worth it. We get a total of 5/10/15/20/25/35/45/60/70. This could be something like 5/5/10/10/15/15/20/20/25, which bumps it up to 5/10/20/30/45/60/80/100/125. Or maybe something like 5/5/6/6/8/10/13/17/22, which gives us 5/10/16/22/30/40/53/70/92. (Or pick what ever kind of scaling works best; I'm not great at math.) Everyone's investments' values are going up—so everybody's happy. The high investments become worth more relative to the lower ones, which I think is what you want. We're not nerfing low relics into the ground. It's a lot more moderate than -50%/+200%. This is scalable into R10 and beyond. Pick whatever linear or exponential function meets your need. Or just wing it but make sure the newer relic levels are bigger jumps (not smaller, like current R8 to R9). Option 2: Make R10 and beyond big jumps in mastery and/or stats Leave current relic levels alone but make sure that R9 to R10 is a significant jump (maybe +20 mastery and/or a similar amount in stats). Do similarly for R11, etc. We get to leave current investments and the current meta as they are. R9 becomes far more appealing as a gate to R10 and beyond. We haven't nerfed low relics into the ground, but they will increasingly have a harder time against R10 and beyond. This is scalable. Just ensure that successive R levels have big enough increases to seem worth it. Devs, other forum members, please let me know what I'm getting wrong here. What am I not seeing? What are the reasons these options wouldn't work?JMMW conquest sector 1
Has anyone else had an issue with JMMW not applying doubt as he should ? full R7 Jedi vanguard team with zetas and omis. When I started the conquest worked first two battles then stopped. I haven’t changed anything since then, am I missing something with mechanics or data disks. Appreciate any help.Longtime player needs a guild—help!
Hi….been with the game about 8 years now. As far as I can tell, I’m the last active member of my guild and I’m not an officer. I have a fairly extensive stable of characters. I log in everyday to play. Is there a place I can look to see if any guilds are recruiting? Thanks JonathanRelic Delta, making it more digestible:
My first reaction to Relic Delta was revolt and disgust…like most players I don’t have everything at relic 9 (honestly no fun if we had infinite resources). I often look at my account and think, ‘at what relic lvl should my Traya/Savage squad be to counter R9 Queen & Boys? Can my Starkiller afford to stay at R7?’ It’s a big part of the game…finding the right balance for the resources we currently own. After spending time to read and digest CG’s recent post, I see that Relic Delta is going to happen. While I believe there are better solutions, our present challenge is how to make Relic Delta tolerable. Here are some suggestions: Relic Delta Immunity - CG commented extensively on “scalability” and “investment”…but relic investment is only half the story. Arguably Galactic Legends and Conquest Units require just as much time, energy, planing and resources to acquire. They too are a significant investment. I propose GLs and Conquest should all have a Relic Delta Immunity built in. A Relic 5 SLKR should defeat relic 9 Jawas any day. Vote on Delta Amount -I propose that we, the players, vote on the Delta amount. Give us 3-4 options. Soft Landing - if ‘no’ to point 2, please start off by making the Delta less noticeable (ie 5% damage in/out per relic difference). Combat-wise the game feels balanced at the moment, no need to make a change right now (no comment on matchmaking). Keep the impact small. Later, if needed, we can revisit the Delta. Role Distinction- in general, tanks and supports are not expected to hit hard…their role is to tank and support. A 60% increase in attack will feel less meaningful. Perhaps it makes sense for the Delta to be based on Roles. Tanks get a bit more tankier, attackers hit harder, support in the middle. (Key phrase is “a bit”).Idea: Sabacc and Pazaak
What about having in-game Sabacc and Pazaak to play anytime whilst waiting for the next event, match or shipments to refresh as well as a way to spend the excess credits, tokens and gear? Sabacc and Pazaak are two well-known games in the Star Wars universe with fans having fun times playing them in Outlaws and the Knights of the Old Republic games. It would really help pass the time whilst waiting for events to activate or the shop to refresh. Also, I and many other players have too many credits, ship building material tokens and gear that it feels meaningless having them when there's very few options to spend them. Perhaps you could bet certain gear to win other gear that you really need or play for characters or ship shards. You could have either the main menu cantina patrons like Garudda, M'ak Nar or Shar to play against, or perhaps even any of the playable Star Wars characters like Lando, Han, Canderous etc with each having their own special abilities. You can maybe also have matches against other players. There is of course the concern that this could constitute as gambling, but as long as you're not spending or winning real-world money and it's played as safe as in Outlaws and Kotor then it should be okay.Tinfoil hat: Are they trying to kill the game?
What if someone up above—maybe related to the imminent acquisition of EA, maybe not—told CG that they need to wind down the game. So CG comes up with something so absurd, so obviously terrible, that players quit en masse. And then as the game shrivels up, they can shutter the game and blame it on declining player numbers. Yes, that sounds ridiculous and far-fetched. It's also the only logical explanation I can think of for CG's determination to go through with relic delta. We've told them this is a terrible idea that will suck the fun out of the game and cause huge numbers of players to quit. The content creators they included in their staged "playtest" have said this. And yet they're still determined to do this. According to CG's own numbers—which I don't really buy—only 3.1% of GAC battles involved a punch-up in average relic levels. Why would CG completely destroy the entire game's balance to fix a "problem" that, according to them, only happens 3.1% of the time? Make it make sense.My “solution” for Relic Delta
My “solution” for Relic Delta After reading through CG’s long explanation of why Relic Delta would supposedly be the solution to the central problem, it got me thinking. At first, I rejected the idea of Relic Delta outright, but then I started to consider that maybe it could have a place in the game… just not within the current system. In my view, the developers are looking for answers in the wrong place: instead of focusing on growing and sustaining the player base, they’re trying to protect and encourage a smaller subgroup within the game. But is it possible to do this in a way that benefits everyone? I think yes! My suggestion would be the following: The game should be split into two parts: F2P part – built on the current system, essentially unchanged, just expanding with future content. This part of the game would serve as a “training mode,” where we’d still develop our characters and enjoy all the possibilities the game offers. P2P (Pay-to-Play) part – based on the teams you’ve built in the F2P system, this would be a registration-based competitive mode with real monetary (or even other tangible) prizes, similar to online poker tournaments. This could include, for example: entry-based tournaments (including a symbolic fee or a ticket earned in F2P events) 1v1 / 2v2 / 4v4 GAC / mini TW 1v1 / 2v2 / 4v4 challenge GAC / mini TW against a chosen opponent (because who wouldn’t want to face off against their own guildmates?) Each tournament could be divided into 3 (or more) limited categories (e.g. Relic 5 / Relic 7 / Relic 9) with different entry fees. Lower-level characters would remain at their tier, while those above the cap (e.g. in an R5 bracket, R5+ characters) would be scaled back to that level. In this entry-based system, Relic Delta could be introduced as an incentive for players to keep upgrading, so they could compete for more valuable prizes—completely voluntarily! The P2P system could then serve to maintain the game, fund new content, and motivate players as well.
Forum being weird?
So normally when you go onto a post and click "More replies", it just loads the new ones underneath. The last few days, it's been flashing a white screen with "Can't find the community" on it for a split second, reloads the entire page so I start at the top and have to scroll all the way back down. Every time. A minor inconvenience only, but an annoying one. Anyone else seeing this?
