[MEGA] Road Ahead: October 2021

"zatho;c-2311342" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2311326" wrote:

Then I'm not sure why you jumped on that conversation, we were not talking about how gridny it is, and nothing I was saying was, "look it's less grindy".

Actually this was our conversation. And while you tried to distract by playing with the words and taking them literally, DarkHelmet1138 got my point.
You know, Kyno, most people here (including me) are not native English speaker, so it is sometimes rude and impolite to take the wording literally instead of taking the cause of complaint seriously.
I said the new compilation of feats requires more battles. You replied it actually takes less battles. However you totally neglected the fact that conquest is not only about feats but also about advancing through the sectors, and with current factions required for feats and ceasing stamina during battles, it is not possible (compared to previous conquests) to get a lot of feats done and simultaneosly work on global feats. At least not with an average roster, which was why I said it would be roster dependent. So in total you require even more battles to clear the map AND get the feats done.
I really lost the fun in conquest by the fact that they actively prevent doing multiple feats at once, because this was what made that mode interesting. They proved this intention already last time where they changed some feats, preventing to complete them in the same sector simultaneosly.
Additionally, they sold us a new hard path, but in fact they just removed some lines between nodes. Where we could choose different paths and end with two nodes of data disks to choose from, now we lose either the choice over the enemies or the choice over the data disk/scavenger node at the path's end. So they took us something away and sold it as a new feature. This is very dishonest from CG, close to a lie in the face.

I'm sorry that I cannot interpret all things the way a player means, i can only go by what is said, and yes reading what someone literally said, is the proper way to discuss a topic. Unless they try to make an analogy, or some other context clues that lead somewhere else.

The person I responded to said they didnt follow on an element they said, when in fact they did. I clarified this, that is all. This was then taken down a different path, and was not what I was talking about in my post.

The path it was taken down was in some way to say that they didnt make a change they said they did. I pointed out that they did in a way do that, by addressing the battle count.

I 100% agree that they did not address the repeated battles. They never said they did either. I am now just pointing out that there is another element to the grindyness that was addressed. That is all.