Both of these ideas would be great to be implemented. Ultimately though, companions are so strong and mobs are so weak that even at the same level as the mobs, it's still so incredibly easy that its possible to have your companion solo them while you stand still, press no buttons and wear no gear. So, the level sync solution doesn't really help unless it were to limit your level below that of which the mobs were, which would piss off so many players it just wouldn't be worth it. As for the flashback mode.... again, it would be a cool feature, but I don't see it solving the difficulty problem. All that would do would be to limit your XP gain, which, besides being a handicap, still wouldn't solve the inherent challengeless nature of the mobs unless XP gain was so limited that you were underlevelled the mobs by several levels. Again, it could be possible, but I think the problem with tying difficulty to being underlevelled is that it forces the player to abstain from content that gives him XP (PvP, Flashpoints, Exploring.... really anything) just so that they can experience somewhat challenging leveling content. So while a flashback mode would be cool, I don't really see it fixing the main problem. Added them to Addendum in second post of thread.

No. It's much less that, and much more this: "I want an inherently challenging enemy that requires me to use all of my assets (INFLUENCE IS ONE OF THESE) to beat." It's not that I secretly want easy mode, and am just twirling my super villain mustache over here while I troll with a thread (that I've dedicated hours of my time to) that advocates for a way for me to avoid easy mode. It's that I want an inherently challenging enemy that I DON"T have to forsake entire game systems to just to make challenging. So I'll say once again.... I want an inherently challenging adversary whom I have to use all of my assets (Companion Influence included) to triumph over. Saying this somehow means I don't actually want challenge is somewhere between a strawman and a red herring. So, I don't want Companion Influence to give me an Easy Mode, rather, I want instead be a tool in my toolkit to give me a slight edge over a truly challenging adversary. Yes, it would be just as easy. In fact, it would be even easier, as it wouldn't require a big re balance of open world mob strength. And not only that, but I would be happy if it was implemented. It would make the game better in my eyes. But unfortunately, it does not solve a core issue here. And that core issue is the necessity of players to handicap themselves in order to make an artificial challenge. It demeans any challenge created and makes it, well, less meaningful, and therefore less engaging, satisfying, and fun. Well, it does make logical sense if it results in more entertained playerbase.... which I think it does. Players who want challenge have their entertainment more impaired by having to handicap themselves, then players who want it easy have their entertainment impaired by having to buff themselves. As for asking the majority to go through all of the work of going to a terminal just to survive..... don't make it a terminal. Make it something much more mobile, that can be toggled at any point, in which the game quite clearly displays in BRIGHT FLASHY COLORS how to turn on and off, so it is no trouble at all for easy moders to make the game the way they want it to be. As for "think of it as your opponents are getting stronger and not you getting weaker".... Trust me. I'm trying. I'm trying right now when I dismiss my companion, or limit what abilities he can use, or what gear I can use, or what XP I can get.... and let me tell you. It's hard. It's hard to think of it as my opponents getting stronger rather then me getting weaker, when I quite clearly know its the exact opposite of that. I'm painfully aware of what is really going on behind the scenes, and it is really quite difficult to do the mental jujitsu needed to somehow think of it the exact opposite of how it really is. So.... telling me to just think away my own psychology does not really solve anything. Yes, they are perceptual differences, but those perceptual differences are really, really important. What the player is perceiving and thinking and feeling is really important, in fact more important, then the way the numbers are reacting behind the screen and in the machine. What difference does it make, functionally? Not that much of one. But what difference does it make in the mind of the player? I'd argue a big one. And that's important. How much effort, really, is expended in toggling an item or setting? Those few seconds of "inconvenience" for the majority is far outweighed by the drastically more fulfilling, engaging, and therefore entertaining gameplay for a minority that would result in raising the innate level of challenge presented by the mobs, rather then forcing players to debuff themselves to get an artificial sense of challenge. As for the last sentence.... of course I/we are willing to put a little effort to find the challenge we seek. I'm doing that right now, by dismissing my companion, handicapping myself, and arguing for months on the forums. It's not that we don't want to put effort in.... that's just wrong. Its that we don't want to have to debuff ourselves. Debuff, handicap, lowering ourselves artificially in any way = a problem. Putting in effort = not a problem. All that said, I'll say again: I still like a debuff terminal, compared to what we have now. If that's all Bioware did, I would be very happy. But I still think my proposal creates overall more fulfilling and entertaining gameplay for many, many players.

Yes. And you're part of the expansion's target audience I suppose. Unfortunately, I am not in that audience, and the game, rather then appealing to you and me (through more conventional difficulty options), mostly excluded me. And that's why I say that the game is "ruined" for me. So yeah, of course there will be people who disagree with me, and who love the new expansion, like you. And I'm happy for them/you. Its just too bad that others were left in the dust, so to speak.

I'm not calling it "default" because it wouldn't be the default setting. (Again, for practical, ease of implementation purposes). As for why I call it "Easy".... well, because that's the whole point of the mode. It is to reduce the challenge. The point of the mode is to make the game easier, and "EASY MODE" communicates that much more then "Normal Mode" or any other name. As for whatever I "truly believe." Okay... I mean I can't prove to you that I'm not lying, and that I do actually believe any one play style isn't inherently better or worse then another. You just kind of have to take my word for it. All I can say is yes, I have been very open about which play style I personally prefer. And sometimes, when I'm expressing that preference, I may also express confusion, and sometimes even frustration, at people who have a differing play style, (frustration mainly coming from the fact that they are being catered to and I am being excluded) but that doesn't mean, deep down, I don't realize that their play style isn't inferior. It's just different. Its the same way someone can go on a rant about how they don't understand someone's opinion, but will turn around and defend their right to express that opinion: I will explain why I personally play the way I do, and why I don't understand why someone else plays in a way I find totally boring, but I will still defend the person's right to have the game cater to them.... especially if I'm then turning around and asking for their support to have the game cater to me as well. (EDIT: Or perhaps a more apt analogy would be person ranting about a religion they don't believe in, but then also acknowledges that people of that religion are entitled to their own beliefs, and that their own beliefs aren't inherently superior or inferior.) So, I don't get why people play a certain way. But I believe them when they say that's how they have fun (why wouldn't I?), and realize that it isn't "inferior" to my own preferences. Just different. And I'm hoping/asking others to do the same with me and my preferences. Woah.... really? You think "Easy Mode" is as biased and loaded in tone as "Tedious Mode" and "No Life" Mode? I didn't realize "easy" was as universally derogatory as "tedious" and "no life." If the word "easy" is really as inflammatory as you believe.... I am more then willing to change it to something else. "Normal Mode" is fine. Any other suggestions? I'm open to ideas. The Hard Mode being the default would take less effort because it would only be ONE rebalance of the entire open world setup. If Hard Mode was the optional toggle, it would have to somehow rebalance the entire open world setup for EVERY Hard Mode player, but not at all for all of the Easy Mode players. How would Bioware even do this? And even if they could, how would it NOT take more time and resources for the devs to implement? Well, I don't think I NEED to accept it would have to be a debuff. Is it more likely to involve a debuff? Yeah. Sure. But unless you have proof that never, under any possible circumstances, would Bioware ever implement something like my proposal, I don't see why I NEED to accept it. Would I be happy if Bioware implemented LA's level sync idea? Sure. I would. And I've made it perfectly clear time and time again that I'm in support of it, or something similar. Why should I stop, in addition to advocating for his proposal, advocate for a proposal I think would make the game even better, even if it is a little more ambitious/unrealistic?

Not that I wouldn't be in support of something like this coming into the game.... but how would this be less work for the devs? All my suggestion entails is tweaking the stats of mobs, plus adding an additional bolster terminal/item like already existing ones in the game, while your suggestion entails changing the nature of all mobs so that they summon level appropriate ones upon fighting. They seem roughly comparable in terms of work, and in fact, I would think mine would actually be easier/less work. Well, I really love the idea of giving players the option to gear companions again.... because this allows us to fine tune their stength AND opens up a new gameplay element, as opposed to forcing us to ignore one. Meanwhile, if this option wasn't toggled (so companions' strength was what it is now), Easy Moders wouldn't have to worry about gearing and could enjoy the easier gameplay. And, it gets around the problematic psychology I talked about in the OP (it should be about raising yourself up to fight an innate challenge, not lowering yourself down to make something challenge less artificially challenging) while we are handicapping our companions, we are subsequently building up their stats in order to beat the adversary. So, I like that idea. However, I don't like the idea of ignoring influence. I mean, its an option, which is just player choice, which I'll always support and is (almost) never a bad thing, as its optional to use, so I'm totally fine and even in support of it being implemented in the game. However, I don't think it solves the problem. It gets back to that aforementioned psychology, and why simple "Don't use X game mechanic" (Companions, Influence, Gear, one of your arms, etc. ) handicaps don't really make for compelling or fun gameplay, and makes key gameplay elements totally pointless. For instance, if Influence having to be disabled to make a modicum of challenge in the game, rather then it having to be utilized to triumph over an innately challenging adversary, then Influence as a game mechanic, including conversation affection, gifts, and most the entire end game in terms of building up your alliance, is totally worthless and to be ignored for people who want Hard Mode content. So, as player choice, its not a bad change, or change that would make the game worse, but I don't think it solves anything. And thanks.

Don't worry, I love responses like this! (As a note, anything I didn't directly respond to is stuff I just basically agreed with). Well, of course, the game wasn't easy to absolutely everyone and everybody. But I still thank we can confidently say SWTOR was a relatively easy game. For instance, a relatively hard game would have most players finding the content challenging.... say for instance Super Meat Boy. And as you stated, SWTOR was easy to a majority of players.("....as easy as the game was to a large majority of players...").... SWTOR was a relatively easy game. And I don't think, just because there are at least some people found it challenging, means we can't assess it as an Easy game. Because again, by that logic, we couldn't say Dark Souls is a hard game because some people find it easy, and we couldn't say Wii Play is easy because some people find it difficult. So no, I don't think saying "The game was easy" is a flawed argument. Not for the reasons you listed, at least. No argument here. I also consider myself a casual player, as I don't have that much time to play and when I do, I usually stick to solo contact. (As an anecdote, I also currently have the position of Guild master of a Casual guild, though its largely inactive). So yeah, I used the word casual there because that was what was frequently used in the argument, though I didn't really pay attention to how I was implicitly agreeing with that definition by not challenging it. I changed the language in the OP to reflect that ("casual player to those who want it easy"). All sounds good to me. I included some that in the OP response. That sounds great to me, but I think if they made it that way across the board, you'd still see a huge backlash on the forums. People really like being able to coast through combat without pressing buttons, and taking the ability away from them is going to result in more unhappy players then happy players, by my estimation. Well, yeah, player A alone doesn't justify dev time and resources to accommodate that specific player. But if there are several thousand Player A's, which comprise of the majority of the game's playerbase, then they justify changes made by the devs to accommodate them. However, this doesn't justify the exclusion of the several thousands Player B's, who constitute a large minority of the game's playerbase. The game needs to accommodate both of them simultaneously. So, while yes, someone saying "I want the game to be this way to allow me to fun" doesn't mean it should drop everything and change..... but if thousands of players, likely the majority of players are saying this, and it can be done without excluding the other players..... then it is important to pay attention to. "" You say it's "something we have to deal with." No. It's broken. It needs to be fixed. Period." I don't think this is right, really. Is it a problem? Yes. Is it a largely broken part of the game? Sure. Would/Should we fix it if we could? Absolutely. Unfortunately, we can't. At least not without alienating an absolutely huge portion of the playerbase. You say "it needs to be fixed. Period." But that kind of absolutist mentality ignores the context, and the consequences if this particular issue was given top priority. See, the only way to really fix the amount of totally unqualified/unskilled players is to force them to be skilled by the time they get to that point. And that means No Easy Mode. Only Hard Mode to force players to get skilled. And now you're fixing one part of the game only to ostracize a huge portion (likely the majority) of your playerbase. It simply isn't worth it. So yes, it is a huge problem, and broken part of the game. But I really can't see any possible solution that is worth the problems it raises. And the "It needs to be fixed, period, ignore all costs and consequences" mentality is a flawed one to have. Yeah, it doesn't fix the Group Finder issue. Unfortunately, I don't see a solution that does really and truly fix Group Finder.... not even yours. You don't need to convince me that this type of gameplay isn't really all that rewarding, exciting, engaging, or fun. I agree with you. But there are thousands of players who simply don't find combat fun. And I don't see why we should deny them just because we personally find their ideal gameplay unsatisfying. You said it yourself: What makes our opinion better or more important then theirs? "Reaching X level with a class. Completing X Chapter. Obtaining legendary status. They lose their meaning. Not only for the players obtaining them, but for the other players who achieved that stuff with effort." I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, this already the case. The current rate of XP gain, and the impossibility of dying in solo content combat even without pressing buttons or wearing gear, meaning it is just basically a No Combat Mode already that just takes more time, (not to mention the ability to instantly generate a level 60), already mean these achievements are already pretty meaningless. No Combat Mode doesn't really induce this any further then it is already induced. And also, I want to really disagree with the use of the word "entitled" here. Just like calling players who want Easy gameplay "stupid, braindead, children, etc. etc.".... calling these people entitled is just an attack on their character, and serves to further divide the community. Why would these people advocate for our hope of getting a Hard Mode (something that would take dev time and resources to cater to our specific playstyle) if we turn around and say "No, but you guys don't get yours. You're just entitled." As soon as you start throwing around words like entitled, the discussion can just devolve into namecalling, and you'lll be labeled as an "elitist" who thinks his play style is superior to others. Which is kind of what you're saying here. You can call them entitled, or say their tastes in play style is unsatisfying and not engaging.... but that doesn't mean their tastes shouldn't be catered to via an option. Especially if we're simultaneously asking for our play styles being catered to to be advocated for. Well, as I've said to other people's proposals..... I would love if this got implemented in the game. It is leagues better then what is in the game currently. And I will include it in my addendum of other people's suggestions in the second post of the thread. However, I don't like it as much as mine, because forcing the player to directly lower their own stats (assets) again goes against my anti-handicap psychology. It should be about raising yourself up to face an inherently challenging adversary, not lowering yourself down to make an inherently challengeless, kindergarten enemy artificially challenging. As you said yourself, Challenge =/= Handicap.

Great post! Thanks for taking the time to respond as you did! And you're right for the most part. While I believe companions are the main problem, the incredible rates of XP are certainly a problem. Luckily in this regard, Level Sync helped a little in this, as it put a cap on just how easy XP can make the game, however you're right in that the sync cap is too high, and isn't low enough to really solve the XP problem in any capacity. So what's the solution to this? Well, either lower XP gain, or lower the level sync cap. The problem with both of these is that, if done across the board, you're going to piss off all of the non-hard moders who do want to be incredibly over powered, and who do want to level up insanely fast. Not to mention that Level Sync is already hated by huge groups of players (myself not one of these), and making it even more restrictive is just going throw more fuel on that fire. But if you apply it only to hard moders, then you forcing hard moders to purposefully lower their own assets just to make the default, challengeless scenario artificially challenging (as opposed to raising the inherent level of challenge of the opposition, forcing them to use all of their assets to triumph), going against the psychology so crucial to my specific version of proposed difficulty options. So, no solution to this problem is perfect. I think though, within the context of my proposal, the best solution would be to just leave XP gain where it is, but lower the level sync ceiling across the board, to negate the bad effects of the XP gain. While this would not appeal to Easy Moders in the sense that it makes the game in a way harder (in that you are less able to outlevel content), they would still have the option of using the toggleable Easy Mode buff, which would make all content nearly impossible to lose at Level Sync's upper limit. And so at the end of the day, Hard Moders don't have to gimp their own XP gain but can still face a challenge, and Easy Moders don't have to worry about the Level Sync ceiling dropping because of the innate power of their Easy Mode buff. (Assuming I'm not misunderstanding you) Hopefully the "Combat is no fun no matter what" crowd will like my "No Combat Mode." Well, perhaps its possible to make the buff invisible. And even if it isn't, I really don't think it would severely limit its use at all, nor be a badge of shame. First, it seems that the majority of people like the current Easy Mode, and thus, the majority of players would be using it. It's impossible for it to be a "badge of shame" if 75% of all players are using it.... rather then Easy Mode being a badge of shame, Hard Mode would be more of a "badge of honor"... if you really want to look at it that way. And second, the people who would be shaming others..... those people have a name, and you called them by it. ******es. And you're never going to silence all the ******es in the game. There are always going to be "elitists" and "******es".... and its a very poor judgement to not implement a feature that would make the game better for the sake trying to prevent ******es from being ******es. And finally, about players not being able to find it..... this would be solved by the game explaining and showing players how to use it in OBNOXIOUS BRIGHT FLASHING COLORS.... so no one could possibly miss it. I disagree with the emboldened/colored premise. Are rewards and incentives a perfect, sure fire way to make better players? Of course not. Very far from it. But do they never, under any circumstances, lead to events taking place that do make better players? I would say no, that's wrong. Rewards and incentives can actually lead to better players. Your statements about how the game doesn't tell you outright all the intricacies of its combat system and how to play the best aren't wrong.... they're right. Players do have teach themselves, or seek out others to teach them. But you know how you get more players to teach themselves? Or seek out others to teach them? By providing them rewards and incentives to do so. If you offer no rewards or incentives for players to step outside their comfort zone and challenge themselves, they never will. But, if they are incentivized, they will step out of their comfort zone. And sure, some will fail, be frustrated, and go back to easy mode. But some will persevere, learn the hard way, or seek (and receive) help from others. And now you've created better players, and Group Finder and Group content will thank you for it. So, do rewards and incentives always make better players? No way. But do they sometimes make better players? Absolutely. So why not implement them in the game? I would love, love if this got implemented in the game. And while I do think it is overall weaker then mine (mainly because it would be harder for Bioware to implement), I fully endorse it, and will include it in the addendum of other people's suggestions in the second post of the thread when I make it (which will be soon, I promise.... been busy with IRL work, and the responses keep coming )

While those two things have something to do with it (XP and utility), I do really think it has to do with numbers. Changing your companion between healer, tank, and/or DPS is not a good difficulty switch, at least as it stands right now. I don't have a problem with, in fact I could fully endorse, having the difficulty switch being tied completely to what mode your companion is on. But it would need tweaking as it stands now. EDIT: Original post had question mark there. That was an unfortunate typo. Why? Because the companion's stats are out of so out whack, rather then changing from Easy, Medium, or Hard, your changing from Impossible to Lose (Heal), Impossible to Lose (Tank), or Only Rarely Possible to Lose (DPS). As it stands now, my Tank companion (which you stated as "normal difficulty"), can , and even at Rank 1 Influence, while I stand still, press no buttons, and wear no gear. Hardly a "Normal" level of challenge. The challenge is non existent. If I set my Companion to Heal, they could do the same (though it would take longer), and if I set them to DPS, they probably would require me to wear gear and press some buttons to win against the Heroic Boss, but would still have no difficulty soloing most Golds. So..... as it stands... no I don't think setting companions to their combat role functions as a difficulty setting any where near adequately. It could, if Bioware tweaked their stats, but as it stands now? It doesn't.

Oh trust me, the more options/difficulty modes, the merrier in my opinion! It's all just a matter of what is the most practical to implement, and what could Bioware feasibly do (and would it be worth it). And the more difficulty modes, the more time/resources it takes to implement, and the less practical it is.... So that's why I'm mainly focusing on just two (Easy and Hard), with an optional third (Story) in hopes to make my proposal looks as practical as possible. But yeah, I would be ecstatic if Bioware went with your suggestion, and implemented 4 (or more) difficulty modes.

I absolutely do. And many of them, I actively play or have actively played in the past. But I like SWTOR. I've put thousands of hours into it, hundreds of dollars, etc. And I want to continue to put more into it, and a difficulty mode feature would encourage me to do so tremendously. Other games are other games. That's not going to stop me from advocating for the devs to make SWTOR the best I think it can be. I'm not exactly sure what you mean here.... (just having trouble understanding you). Could you clarify or rephrase it?

No. That's not the reason at all. The reason is because it's much easier to create a toggle that only buffs he Easy Mode player, then it is to create a toggle that somehow buffs all NPC's in the zone but somehow only for the Hard Mode player, and not the Easy Mode players. Did you miss the part in the OP where I explained this? Also, if Bioware was able to somehow implement my proposal but have Easy Mode as the default mode, and Hard Mode as the toggleable option as I explained above, I would be incredibly impressed and satisfied. Put simply, Hard Mode is the default in my proposal not because I think I'm a "special snowflake" or somesuch nonsense, but rather for practical, ease of implementation reasons. In the perfect world, Easy Mode would be the default option, however that would require much more ingenuity, as well as dev time and resources. I thought I cleared that up sufficiently in the OP, but hopefully that additional explanation helps you see where I'm coming from. Again, I think you're ignoring my quite clearly stated intentions and reasoning, or just assuming I'm lying, and in fact just want more rewards because I've been "scamming people all along....?" Now challenge, to a certain extent, is its own reward for me, and that's why I always say (and did in the OP, in case you missed it) that I would be immensely happy if my proposal was implemented without the increased rewards. However, I still believe increased rewards makes it a better proposal after all. Why? Well, I'll quote the OP, and no, it's not because I'm scamming people and just want more credits....

The great thing about the recycling bin in my OP is that it allows me to just copy my response to this exact argument and paste it here for your reading pleasure. Now, if you have any specific critiques of my response, we can have a substantive discussion about it. Unfortunately, "lots of words" isn't really a rebuttal that allows me to respond in any meaningful way.

Thanks. And I hope it doesn't, but am not keeping my hopes up. You are right in that my idea of having increased XP probably isn't the greatest idea, in that XP (levelling up) makes the game inherently easier, so it's to players who want challenge, not only is it not a reward, but it actually can be a bad thing. So I'm going to remove that part from my OP. However, about increased rewards of other kinds (for instance credits) being unnecessary.... You're also right here. It is unnecessary, meaning not needed. It is, as I specified, and optional caveat that I'm more then willing to scrap. However, I still maintain that it is a good thing, and makes the proposal stronger overall, for the three big reasons I added into the OP (which I won't repeat in this post). One question I'd pose to you though, is why, if you don't think more challenging content should offer more rewards, why does already existing challenging content in the game offer more rewards then its easy counter part (for instance NiM Ops offering more then normal Ops, Hard Mode flashpoints offering more then normal, Ranked PvP offering more then normal, etc.). Are you against this, too? Do you think NiM Ops should offer the same rewards as normal Ops because the challenge should be its own reward? Trust me, I do think Easy Mode being the default is better, and if Bioware was able to do it, I'd fully support it. However within the context of my proposal, it would be much harder, and take up more development time and resources to make Easy the default (and have some sort of toggleable Hard Mode that makes all mobs stronger only to that player, while not to Easy Mode players). A debuff for Hard Mode players again goes against the psychology that's integral to my proposal (it's much more satisfying and entertaining to be about raising yourself up, not lowering yourself down). As for the No Combat Mode, yeah.... it is an optional thing.... its the least practical, and least important part of my proposal, and willing to scrap it. But I think it would be nice to have for those who'd want to utilize. And thanks.

Very substantive response that gives a thorough critique of my post. My arguments have been refuted. Yeah.... That's why I put it in quotes. You know, to connote a subjective, colorful, and/or highly debatable premise. I know its easy to have a total misread when you only read the title (and misread it at that), but no. It's not about level sync. If you ever end up reading the actual OP, I hope we can have a substantive discussion about the merits and faults of my proposal.

Thanks! Is Bioware capable actually implementing this? Well, I can't really say. However, if I had to guess, I'd say my proposals (with the possible exceptions of the increased rewards caveat, and the No Combat Mode) could be implemented within Bioware's means, because all it entails is tweaking mob and companion stats, and then offering a toggleable bolster item/terminal.... which is to say it's all stuff they've done before.... I don't understand why they couldn't do it now. As for why they haven't..... well that's a good question, and another one I can't answer. Maybe they don't think the time it would take to implement would be worth it, maybe they actually can't for some reason, maybe they see some huge problem with it that I'm missing, or maybe they just haven't thought of a practical way to implement a difficulty option yet. But I do believe (I could be wrong of course, as I don't know) they are actually capable of implementing my proposal, or at least other, simpler difficulty option proposals (like LordArtemis'). But will they? Well, as you pointed out, they haven't yet.... so, likely no.

Thanks for reading/responding. Although I feel like (maybe) I did cover that point of view.... namely with the third option I was advocating for: No Combat Mode. Now, this doesn't make combat "meaningful/engaging"...... but those are subjective terms that are different for each player and are going to be really hard to reach, especially if the complaints are that the combat is too same-y, with the game mechanics being stale.... as it would require some real innovation as to how to make combat refreshing and fun for veterans with the same game engine. And I don't really know how to do that. However, and back to my original point.... if the point of view is that easier combat isn't the solution, and harder combat isn't the solution, because the very nature of combat is tedious, and they want it over with as fast as possible.... then the No Combat Option seems to be the solution for these players. They can skip Combat entirely, and just get straight to the story! Let me know if I'm misinterpreting you, but I think we're in agreement about this third group of players, and my initial proposal covers them with the No Combat Option.

Fair enough. I recognize not every player is going to have the same experience as me, so that particular video isn't the end all be all "gotcha!" video it might seem like it's trying to be. However, that video was my genuine experience.... and the fact that companions can be that innately OP without any deliberate action on my part is still just as troublesome with or without the fact that it isn't that way for EVERY player. It's that way for ME, and it really demeans the whole solo experience for me. Well, as I said, I am more then willing to scrap that caveat if the rest got implemented, so we have a majority of my proposal as common ground. And yes, a challenge can be it's own reward for me. So if my proposal got implemented without this caveat, I would still be immensely satisfied. But I strongly disagree that asking for a (again very, very slight) increase in only basic rewards (xp/credits) nullifies my entire argument nor comes across as just me want a bigger e-***** then everyone else. There are several reasons I do still strongly believe this caveat is overall a good thing, and it's not just because I want to be richer. And these are: 1) Fairness to Hard Mode players. At the very smallest extent of this caveat's implementation, it would be solely for equality. You heard me right. Increasing the rewards one player gets actually makes it equal. How is this the case? Well, because killing mobs in Hard Mode content take more time and resources. And after all, what matters is amount of rewards vs. time. If Hard Mode and Easy Mode mobs dropped the same amount of rewards, it actually favors the Easy Mode players, as they are getting more rewards vs. time, while Hard Moders are getting less rewards vs. time. So, this actually would just balance the level of rewards of the two playerbases, and by arguing against this you are actually arguing for inequality, and for the game to favor a certain type of player based on their preference. So, that is the minimum implementation of this caveat in my eyes. So that it is equal. So hopefully we can agree at least on this point. That said, I'm now going to turn around and totally argue for why this shouldn't be the case.... and why the game should actually provide proportionally more rewards for Hard Moders. Hypocrisy FTW. 2) Cohesion of Design and Incentives Another reason this caveat should be implemented is that it already is implemented in almost all areas of the game. All harder content that is already in the game already give better rewards! Ranked PvP gives better rewards then normal PvP. Heroics give better rewards then solo content. Hard Mode Flashpoints give better rewards then Normal Flashpoints. NiM Ops give better rewards then normal Ops. Etc. and so forth. Why should Hard Mode solo content be any different? If you really think "challenge is truly its own reward".... why does Harder content already give better rewards in almost every aspect of the game? It's because it is important to provide incentives. It gives a sense of progression.... a goal to achieve, a higher height to reach. It gives the player the carrot on the end of the stick to keep them engaged and interested in playing the game more and achieving more in it. Speaking of incentives... 3) Incentives to Learn Class One of the biggest problems with my proposal is the fact that the allowance for Easy Mode and No Combat Mode mean that players won't know how to play their class at all, being able to coast along in their story never having to learn rotations or game mechanics. This is a problem, as these players will now be filling the Group Finder, and PvP, meaning that these modes will be filled with players who aren't skilled enough to complete the content, resulting in many frustrated players, wasted hours, and overall lack of satisfaction. However, if an incentive is given to play on Hard Mode, that can lessen (though not eliminate) the effects of this. If there is a real incentive to play on Hard Mode solo content, more and more players will push and strive for it, and learn their classes (after all, I don't want Hard Mode to really be all that Hard), and thus be much more capable in Group Finder and PvP. If there is no ingame incentive, many players will simply ignore it, when in fact if they engaged in it, it would open up new areas of content for them and make for a healthier community overall. Anyway, hoped that helped you understand where I'm coming from..... and that it's not just me wanting my preferred play style to be seen as the superior l33t master race.

Honestly, if the devs did this, I would be happy. Because it's at least something more then what we have currently. But ultimately I don't like it quite as much as my own suggestion, because it still has the unfortunate psychological effect of purposefully lowering yourself down to make innately challengeless enemies a challenge. Psychologically, it's more satisfying to have an innately challenging adversary, and having to raise yourself up to triumph over it, rather then having an innately challengeless adversary, and having to lower yourself down to give it an artificial sense of challenge. But again, on balance I'm in support of this idea, just not relative to my own. As a side note, if enough people post their own proposals, my hope is to add an addendum of sorts comprised of other people's proposed solutions, and yours will definitely be included.

1) How hard do you think the game currently is? By your definitions, (assuming we're talking about solo story/leveling content) even easier then "Very Easy." I would think it would be beyond 90% of the playerbase could do it without a problem, given that no input is required on part of the player to win. , so I see no reason why anyone could actually possibly die in solo story content, under really any circumstances other then by intentionally killing themselves. Nothing's impossible I suppose, but still I'd say 99% would be able to do it without a problem, so again, by your definitions, even easier then "Very Easy." 2) How hard should the game be? Again, using your definitions, I'd say, If I only had to pick one, then Normal. Enough challenge to interest those who want it, but nothing overwhelming to.... well.... overwhelm people who don't want it to be too difficult. But it doesn't have to be only one level of difficulty. I'm not going to rant about this here, but if you want to see what I'm talking about, go here. 3) How hard do you find it? See answer to Question 1. 4) How experienced are you at MMOs? SWTOR is my first main one. Been subscribed and playing (on and off) since launch. Since then I've tried a few others, ESO chief among these, but haven't played them nearly as much as SWTOR.

Something, just something regarding the current (non existant) difficulty level of solo story content. Even if it was just "We know some people view the game as too easy, but have no plans currently to act on it," .... that would be enough. I just want to feel they are listening to my incessant wailing about this topic.

Addendum: Other People's Proposals #1) Soul_of_Flames' Proposal (Level Sync Difficulty Adjuster) #2 LordArtemis' Proposal (Level Sync Difficulty Adjuster) #3) Quething's Proposal (Damage Done to and by Mobs Slider) #4) PorsaLindahl's Proposal (Difficulty Options in Instanced Areas) #5) Chessack's Proposals (Level Sync by Zone of Planet + Flashback Mode) #6) Dashtardly's Proposal ("Hard Mode" Specific Instances) more on the way....

My Solution to the "Game is Too Easy Crisis" Original Title: A Recycling Bin for "Game is Too Easy" Threads (And Why Player Choice is the Solution!" Yes, I realize I am likely going to forum hell for creating yet another thread about this topic. And also, yes, I know the word "crisis" is a bit of hyperbole. That's why I put it in quotes.... to connote something colorful/debatable/subjective. TL;DR Available at bottom of Part 4, in big green letters. Contents: -Part 1: The Intro, or Why I am Making this Thread --Part 2: Arguments in Defense of the Current (Easy) Level of Challenge ---Part 3: Arguments in Opposition of the Current (Easy) Level of Challenge ----Part 4: The Solution: More Player Choice Part 1: The Intro, or Why I'm Making This Thread Since 4.0 came out months ago, thread after thread has been made about the level of inherent challenge in solo content, and there seems to be no end in sight. I think it is safe to say it is at least one of the major controversial topics that has risen up from the changes of 4.0. As it is one my personal major criticisms with 4.0 (that the game has been made even easier... to the point of combat being pointless), I've spent a lot of time in these threads posting various responses to arguments from both sides, but of course these simple arguments get repeated over and over in every single thread made about this topic. I've now gathered quite a large recycling bin of stock responses I repost when these arguments get used. And since there seems to be no end in sight to these arguments getting used (and me subsequently responding to them), I think it's past time I consolidate all of my responses into one place, so I don't have to go digging through my own post history to find the thing I want to copy and paste. That one place is this thread. And while this is largely for my own purposes, I am posting it publicly to the forums in the hopes to get feedback/discussion on either the arguments themselves, my responses, and/or my proposed solution. (And yes, all arguments used are roughly word for word arguments I have seen be used on these forums) If you read nothing else, please read Part 4. Part 2: Arguments in Defense of the Current (Easy) Level of Challenge Argument: "The game was always easy!" Response: Argument: "The game is for people who like it Easy, they are the majority, people who want challenge are the minority, don't like it, then leave." Response: Argument: "It's the dev's game, they can do what they want with it! You don't like it? Leave!" Response: Argument: "This game is only about story! You shouldn't be playing for any other reason besides story, so why care about combat?" Response: Argument: "But there are already areas of the game that are challenging! Go play PvP or NiM Ops if you want challenge!" Response: Argument: "Last time they nerfed companions there was a huge backlash!" Response: now, the big one: Argument: "Dismiss your companion (or purposefully underlevel, unequip gear, or any other handicap), that fixes everything!" Response: Argument: "But I have more fun playing in the current (Easy) level of challenge!" Response: Part 3: Arguments in Opposition to the Current (Easy) Level of Challenge Argument: "This game is for braindead casuals/stupid people/toddlers/monkeys now!" or somesuch. Response: Argument: "People who don't want challenge just aren't skilled enough, and should learn to play!" Response: Argument: "The levelling content needs to be hard, so people learn how to play for the sake of Group Finder!" Response: Argument: "But I would have more fun playing in a higher level of challenge!" Response: Part 4: The Solution: More Player Choice So. Now we've arrived. The solution to this divisive issue. How can we create solo content that simultaneously appeals to multiple groups of players? Well, if you've seen really any of my posts over the last few months, or just have been paying attention to this thread at all so far, you likely know exactly what I'm going to say. The solution is game intended, endorsed, and manufactured player choice. We need the game to provide us with a conventional difficulty setting that doesn't force players to self-impose arbitrary limitations of what assets they can use to create an artificial sense of challenge in an inherently challenge-less situation. Give us an ability to fix, rather then just disable, the broken part of the game (in this case, companions, or our strength in general). Instead of forcing us to handicap ourselves so we are lowered down to the level of the kindergarten enemies to feel some artificial, self-imposed challenge, make it so we are forced to raise ourselves up, though good gear, good skills, and good utilization of all of our assets, to triumph over a powerful adversary in a compellingly close (and therefore exciting and fun) fight. So, in practical, specific terms, how should Bioware go about implementing this in the game? Well, there are a variety of options. None of them are perfect, as a perfect solution to this problem simply isn't possible. However, here is my best idea (I encourage you to offer edits to my proposal or your own original ones in the thread below). Anyway, here is my proposal: There should be TWO difficulty settings. If possible, an optional third could be added (as described below in "Mode #3"), though is relatively less important then the other two in my eyes. Mode #1: Hard Mode This is the mode intended for players who want challenging combat to be a core part of the solo leveling experience. In order to implement this mode. the current stats of mobs in the game would need to be raised (slightly), and the power of companions would need to be lowered (by a moderate extent). That's all that would need to be implemented. Relatively easy. Now you may ask: Wait, you're buffing all mobs in solo content? What about (the likely majority of) players who want it as easy as it is now? Well, read on.... Mode #2: Normal Mode (via toggleable buff, which is toggled ON by default) This is the mode intended for players who either aren't skilled enough or simply don't want to invest the time/focus the Hard Mode would require. How would this toggleable difficulty setting be implemented? A simple item or terminal or setting that applies a strong buff to your companion (taking them up to roughly the level they currently are now), making the mobs be much more easy relative to your strength. This would simply operate similar to already existing bolsters in the game, such as the GSI terminal or more aptly the 12xp buff. It is important to mention here that, since those who would use this buff are the majority, as well as new players who might not know how to turn it on or if it even was there, this buff will be applied by default, while those who want to participate in the Hard Mode would toggle this buff off (similar to how people could toggle the 12xp buff off via a White Acute Module). Optional Caveat: I personally believe this mode should, if possible, apply a (very slight, minor, small) debuff to the amount of very basic rewards (like credits, for isntance) killing mobs gives you. However it's worth noting I don't think it should be any less then what you currently get, rather, Hard Mode should get (ever so slightly) more (just like already existing Hard Mode content in the game). Why? Well, the reasoning is that playing on Hard Mode takes more time and resources to kill mobs, and thus should rewards proportionally more resources. This is not to say Hard Mode players deserve more rewards because they are the l33t master race, but rather to provide a (again, very very slight) gameplay incentive to try out Hard Mode, to encourage players to test themselves and learn their skills, as they will need them should they choose to participate in Endgame content or PvP. However I recognize this is potentially controversial, and am more then willing to scrap this caveat if it meant the rest of my proposal was implemented. Additional Arguments/Reasonings for this Caveat: (Optional) Mode #3: No Combat Mode (toggleable buff via terminal/item) This is an optional mode in my proposal, but I think an important one. There is a third section of the playerbase, and one that rarely gets mentioned in the "Game is too easy" threads. And that part of the playerbase finds combat boring and tedious, no matter what the level of difficulty is. They simply are here for the story, but unfortunately for them they have to sit through hours of mind numbing """"gameplay"""" as 2V-R8 or equivalent clears out mobs for them. If my solution is all about player choice and appealing to as many sections of the player base as possible, why should they be left out? Anyway, this mode is simple in concept, but likely difficult to implement. It would, like the easy mode toggleable buff, be an item or terminal that makes the Player either invisible to all mobs, not generate any threat or aggro any mobs, or simply eliminate all mobs from their own instanced areas. That way, they can get to the story as fast as possible. Of course, one downside to this is that they would be lacking for XP and loot, however that would not be an issue if Combat was not something they were participating in, or at the very least would be a price they'd have to pay for skipping combat. And that's it! A relatively simple solution that can appeal to (almost) every type of playerbase while excluding (almost) no one! You have fun, I have fun.... we all have fun! Win, win, win! TL;DR Institute more player choice: -Hard Mode -----> Increase mob strength and decrease companion strenght for people who want compelling, interesting combat to be a core component of the game --Normal Mode -------> Increases Companion strength (to make the game as easy as it is now). This is toggled on by default. For people who either aren't skilled enough or don't want to invest the time in combat Hard Mode requires, but don't want to abstain from combat entirely ---No Combat Mode ----------> Makes mobs not aggro. For people who think Story is the only point of SWTOR. They can skip combat all together, and get to the story as fast as possible. We NEED to band together to advocate for player choice. On one side, people need to stop the "dismiss your companion, that fixes everything" or "ONLY EASE MODE, NO COMPROMISE!" nonsense. On the other side, people need to stop the "ONLY HARD MODE, NO COMPROMISE" nonsense. We need to meet in the middle and create a solution that appeals to (almost) everyone. And the only (or at least best) way to do that is with game endorsed, intended, manufactured, player choice that doesn't involve the player having to arbitrarily handicap themselves just to create an artificial sense of challenge in an inherently challenge-less situation. I actually believe (call me naive) that this is a realistic proposal that could actually be implemented within Bioware's means. Will it though? Well.... no. Probably not. Anyway, let me know what, throughout this massive post, you disagree or agree with. If you have a better solution, let me know.... because there likely is one. I'm hoping to gather other proposals here as well, not just mine, and will edit OP with others.

Not this! Yes, Artemis.... it is really getting tiresome. This "dismiss your companion" is not, I repeat, not a good long term solution. A temporary way to cope with the utter lack of challenge, sure. But not a long term solution. I've been saying it for months. Why? Well, here's what my recycling bin says: To expand my sports analogy: I couldn't agree more. We NEED to band together to advocate for player choice. On one side, people need to stop the "dismiss your companion, that fixes everything" nonsense. On the other side, people need to stop the "ONLY HARD MODE, NO COMPROMISE" nonsense. We need to meet in the middle and create a solution that appeals to (almost) everyone. And the only (or at least best) way to do that is with game endorsed, intended, manufactured, player choice that doesn't involve the player having to arbitrarily handicap themselves just to create an artificial sense of challenge in an inherently challenge-less situation. But you're right.... it's probably too much to realistically ask of the community.

I "started fretting and jumped in myself to do damage?" You do know that unarmed punches do near 0 damage? And you see no problem with a Rank 1 Influence 2V-R8 being able to hand golds their asses? You know who are also golds? (spoiler) Basically every story boss in the game. You really think 2V-R8 at his default should be able to solo them while the player stands still? You think that's fulfilling and fun gameplay that compliments the story and leads to a cohesive, satisfying story? In any case, you inspired me to make a second video, which you can view .. In this one, I don't "start fretting".... I stand completely still, while my 2V-R8 solo's a Heroic boss (a champion). Do you defend this too? Do you think HEROIC BOSSES should be able to be handily defeated by a Rank 1 Influence protocol droid while the player stands still in his undies? Do you think that makes for compelling, rewarding, exciting, and fun gameplay that complements the story and leads to a cohesive and satisfying narrative? Does it inject excitement and tension into the gameplay? Does it give players a sense of achievement and victory when they overcome this adversary? To me, this is horrifyng. It's a joke. Why even have combat at all when it is no longer gameplay (you know, requiring the player to press buttons)? If you do defend it though.... honestly, that's perfectly fine. It just means you have different tastes then me. And I understand people have different tastes then mine. I'm able to accept players like it this way, and am happy they are enjoying themselves. I hope you extend me the same courtesy. What do I mean by that? Well, I hope you advocate for difficulty options. Bioware should implement more player choice. An easy mode (like it is now), a hard mode (for people like me), and a no combat mode (for people who want to get straight to the story and not have to participate in something they don't find fun). Win, win, win. You have fun, I have fun.... (almost) everyone has fun. Rather then only one group of players.

Vitiate. Yeah, they appear to be. Presumably Valkorion has been building Zakuul for centuries, and definitely has been building the Sith Empire for centuries, so yes, he has been operating in two different bodies across the entire galaxy at roughly the same time. How? I don't know.... something something force ...... power something something... That said they did make a point of how Vitiate/Valkorion was "distant " and "distracted" (for instance Senya said he grew distant recently)... so that implies Vitiate can only focus mostly on one Empire at a time.... but he definitely is operating two bodies simultaneously, because otherwise "distant" and "distracted" would be replaced with "comatose" and "lifeless" as he was in the other body on the other side of the galaxy. It's not two souls. Valkorion is just a name, body, and persona adopted by Vitiate for the Eternal Empire. Just like Vitiate possessed several bodies in the class stories and Ziost stories, Valkorion is just another host body for Vitiate as I understand it. But yeah it's a good question how Vitiate is able to be nearly omnipresent across the entire galaxy... able to operate two Empires on opposite ends of the galaxy in secret all while manipulating countless scores of force users, fighting duels with powerful force users with the galaxy at stake, performing world devouring rituals, possessing whole armies and waging war on a galactic scale, while simultaneously romancing a human woman, impregnating her, and then raising children. He's quite a complex fellow.... equal parts world devourer, galaxy conqueror, and family man. Well, the soul can be entirely incorporeal. Read here about the details of the power. That said, Vitiate's "true" physical body, his original, Sith pureblood body, is placed in safe keeping. Though I think it's probably just for sentimental (or somesuch) purposes.... I don't think Vitiate needs that body for any source of power or a source of his soul or anything. Good question. Ask Bioware. (The answer is likely because the power-crazed madman no longer suited the storyline Bioware wanted to put forth, so they just totally redesigned his character to fit their new goal.)