Conquest is great! I believe it's the best PvE game mode in the history of this game, so thank you. Now that the pleasantries are out of the way, let's talk about my one gripe. Conquest should not run only once a month as proposed originally. It's engaging, the data discs are a theory crafters dream, and a lot of players are maxing out rewards before the completion deadline already. My solution that I believe would benefit both the players and the developers would be to adjust the length of conquest to 7-10 days and run it twice a month. This would encourage players to spend resources in order to complete conquest (something the devs I'm sure would be excited to see) while also giving the players the rewards that come with conquest twice a month. It's a win-win. Thoughts?

Very bad idea to nerf conquest to force us to use crystals.

You can still have 2 a month if they last 15 days (except february, of course).On those 3 days you can test teams, data disk combinations... or you can rest, same as you would if you had to wait 3 days for the next conquest. Nerfing is bad.

Having a busy work and family schedule I am finding a two week time frame to be just about right. I would say that the majority of the players in my guild and in my previous guild are in the same boat as me.... this may be a small sample size but we are 300 mil gp and very competitive.. I I would say we are a good guide to compare across the game.To shorten it would put serious pressure on my limited free time in the evenings. The way it's set out now I can pop on everyday and use all my free energy whilst being able to do the odd refresh when I get a bit of extra time.... it's perfect.

I have to disagree on making it shorter. i think 14 days is perfect, and honestly while i think some players would be happy to get "rewards sooner" it will annoy many others that they cant get more rewards because they have less time to do the battles and get better chests. and better chests are a good thing since some have gear/items that the lower chests dont have (like the hard t6 chest has r8 aeromagnifier, but t5 and below dont) i'd rather be able to earn that then a few extra electrum conductors from getting 2 t5 chests a month, for example.also if they shorten it they would also need to be adjusting stamina refresh and energy gain time which just sounds annoying to get right for them.

"Itsa_me_Malario;c-2239657" wrote:Just no, I personally need to spend an hour everyday doing arena and fleet battles, another 20 to 30 when there is TW/TB. Solid 40+ for rancor, other events that run throughout the day, 40 mins for GAC, having to do 10 to 20 extra battles per day for conquest is going to be way too much. Leave it be as it isExactly this. Some people don't realize how time consuming this game already is - and it's only getting worse. My average screen time is 3 hours. That's insane even though I'm not actively playing the whole time. Sometimes it's just me waiting for another arena attempt or the game is on auto.

Duration of Conquest Should be Shorter

52 Replies

Cehmybro
5 years ago
"Nauros;c-2239637" wrote:
They will not double the rewards, and therefore it is pointless to shorten the duration.

I'm not so sure about that. One has to think that conquest, while a smashing success for most players, hasn't led to an immediate return on investment for the devs. If CG can get the average player to spend 200-300 on crystals to achieve greater rewards for every conquest, that might be a fair trade. If the player doesn't spend crystals on refreshes than they get a lower reward box and it kinda evens out over 2 conquests. Meanwhile, some elite players (and spenders) get the exclusive new units that are being introduced a lot faster. I'm sure there are things about this idea that some people on both sides won't agree with, but overall it's more beneficial to everyone than what we have currently.
dogwelder79
Seasoned Ace
5 years ago
Very bad idea to nerf conquest to force us to use crystals.
Cehmybro
5 years ago
"dogwelder79;c-2239639" wrote:
Very bad idea to nerf conquest to force us to use crystals.

No one is forced to use crystals. With 2 conquests a month the average player that doesn't spend crystals would make out the same or even better than if they had the extra time. Conquest could become even more engaging because every battle matters as opposed to what we have right now, which is an extra 3+ days where some are completely done with nothing to do.
dogwelder79
Seasoned Ace
5 years ago
You can still have 2 a month if they last 15 days (except february, of course).
On those 3 days you can test teams, data disk combinations... or you can rest, same as you would if you had to wait 3 days for the next conquest. Nerfing is bad.
Player_k5335qq9
5 years ago
Having a busy work and family schedule I am finding a two week time frame to be just about right. I would say that the majority of the players in my guild and in my previous guild are in the same boat as me.... this may be a small sample size but we are 300 mil gp and very competitive.. I I would say we are a good guide to compare across the game.
To shorten it would put serious pressure on my limited free time in the evenings. The way it's set out now I can pop on everyday and use all my free energy whilst being able to do the odd refresh when I get a bit of extra time.... it's perfect.
theXrono
Seasoned Ace
5 years ago
I have to disagree on making it shorter. i think 14 days is perfect, and honestly while i think some players would be happy to get "rewards sooner" it will annoy many others that they cant get more rewards because they have less time to do the battles and get better chests. and better chests are a good thing since some have gear/items that the lower chests dont have (like the hard t6 chest has r8 aeromagnifier, but t5 and below dont) i'd rather be able to earn that then a few extra electrum conductors from getting 2 t5 chests a month, for example.

also if they shorten it they would also need to be adjusting stamina refresh and energy gain time which just sounds annoying to get right for them.
Kialandi_01
5 years ago
"Itsa_me_Malario;c-2239657" wrote:
Just no, I personally need to spend an hour everyday doing arena and fleet battles, another 20 to 30 when there is TW/TB. Solid 40+ for rancor, other events that run throughout the day, 40 mins for GAC, having to do 10 to 20 extra battles per day for conquest is going to be way too much. Leave it be as it is

Exactly this. Some people don't realize how time consuming this game already is - and it's only getting worse. My average screen time is 3 hours. That's insane even though I'm not actively playing the whole time. Sometimes it's just me waiting for another arena attempt or the game is on auto.
KorAgaz
5 years ago
Definitely don't shortern the duration. Love how I can pace the battles, depending on RL commitments. It'd be even better to do away with energy (and, for example, let me play the mode more on weekends), but that's another story.

In any case, I firmly believe they will introduce a new "Challenge" tier soon (either that or they'll do a massive nerf on the data disks).

Conquest (for now) seems to be more tuned to the low-mid to high-mid range players (between 2-5M GP) and I love this. Not everything new has to be exclusive to the 9M krakens or the "end-game" crowd.
CT-Waxer7
5 years ago
The current timeframe is good because it allows the user to complete conquest free-to-play
Sewpot
5 years ago
Horrible idea. 2 weeks is perfect. People have jobs and RL so being able to play without needing to spend crystals is just fine.