Customer Service have always been pretty conscientious with my tickets and I've probably made 50-100 tickets. Sometimes the responses are boilerplate. Most of the time they're boilerplate but not always and overall their response time has been reasonable. I've never had to ask for a character restoration though. I've never had remorse after deleting a character.

I love this idea a lot. I think each person has different items and gear they hope to obtain based on various interests for ingame activity. I think being able to exchange common crystals for glowing crystals and glowing crystals for radiant crystals, and radiant crystals for glowing or common crystals would be a very nice addition to the game. It shouldn't unbalance anything and would prevent people from buying stacks of stuff they don't want or need and help give a more personalized game experience/enjoyment.

"Sitting through".... This is the reason why EA needs to get rid of the PVP requirement to get Pierce/Republic Droid companions. Because sitting through Warzones just waiting for them to end is essentially what a lot of people are doing.

I think it's an interesting and unpleasant fact of human nature that a thread like this gets started because one person wants an answer to a question that may help others with the same problem, only to have the original poster show up again, say he found a solution and thread can be deleted, but yet not share with everyone else what his or her solution was. Didn't even occur to him/her.

I thought it was notable on playthrough that Vailyn and Senya were the only two characters that had those forehead things. For me it was a tell, a clue that they were blood-related.

I was a guild master in a Korean grinder MMO for some years and one of my guildies, unbeknownst to me, had for two years been playing one-handed. I did not know. I think somehow I should have but I didn't know and he didn't tell me until it became relevant. His disability became relevant when developers patched in a change that made autoattacking enemies in range stop functioning reliably. I had wondered why he always favored autoattack classes versus the skill-spamming button mashing classes in that game. Now I know why. I think it's impressive that you play and I think it's terrible that your enjoyment of the game may be gone due to a difficulty in keeping up with game difficulty. At the same time however I do not think it is reasonable for the game to tailor NPC difficulty or raid difficulty to cater to the relatively low in number one-handed gamer crowd, at the expense of making the game too easy for many in their two-handed gamer crowd. Don't you? Perhaps a level difficulty slider for PVE could be done? With likely changes in reward level for completing PVE tasks.

The PVErs may literally need to get their PVP-earned companion for their faction in order to recruit future companions. That hasn't been set in stone yet probably but as of now your alliance captains should theoretically only give out one companion quest at a time, leaving you to dispose of that quest one way or another before moving on to the next recruitment attempt (or bloody slaughter of an unworthy supplicant if you deem that the best option). It would be best if EA just listened to the PVEers and gave them what they want. Making them PVP brings them no joy and their lackadaisical efforts in WZs actually spreads their anger and displeasure to others.

I suppose the Late Joiner medal does give some incentive not to leave but how much incentive can it really give to someone who was thinking about quitting anyway? One medal is easily busted out by popping a single heal after recklessness or hitting taunt in a crowd and not dying for about 5 or 10 seconds, hitting a good attack spell, lots of things. I guess by the same stroke a single medal to further reward those who weren't going to quit anyway isn't really that helpful either. Maybe what they need to do is use not only the carrot but also the stick. Like they do with leavers in ranked.

Steelseries Rival is a pretty good mouse too. I've been working mine hard for half a year and it seems none the worse for wear. That's in contrast to two Deathadders I ran through in less than a year each, both of which started to loosen up after only a couple months.

I think these two links are your fastest way to find out if servers are up at any given time: http://www.swtor.com/server-status

I very much liked the idea of 5 matches (but only with wins counting for quest credit) instead of 20. Unfortunately when I proposed that, one guy came and explained that five wins could result in an infinite number of warzones for some of the least PVP-y people and a handful of others came out and totally agreed with him. I don't understand how developers put up with all the bickering without growing to hate their audience.

Dude, best thing to do is just look at the required materials he's asking for, write them down, run to a GTN terminal and buy whatever you need based on what's selling cheapest. On my server I believe it was stacks of anodyne cell extracts I had to give him, about five or six full stacks of x99 items. This was easily the fastest and most painless way to get Lokin. I spent a day running around the tunnels and just got sick of it. This was much faster and, to me at least, cheaper. Oh, I see what you're saying now. Yeah, even after that he sends you back to the tunnels for a supereasy brief quest. Yes, that was annoying to me too.

lol. good point. PVEers and PVPers do not mix well. Different basic personality types who look for different things in the game to give them enjoyment and whose hates are similarly dissimilar. On further reflection I think EA should scrap the notion of trying to promote PVP to PVEers and just remove the Pierce/MK-whatever PVP requirement they added in. It mixes oil with water and neither the oil nor the water is happy with the mixture.

Yeah, what the first guy said: what community? A server is an assortment of people of different ages, races, cultures, and beliefs who don't all play the same way and probably aren't all attracted to the same in-game features. There is no true commonality, only one thing they share in common and that too is false because they each will view the game differently, with some changes making others happy, and others making some people quit. The closest thing they share on a server apart from a desire to run around as pretend force users is geographic closeness to the server, which gives them low ping, which lets them not have an unplayable experience. Neither of these things is the basis for any sort of community in a meaningful sense. In general video game players are harsh, quick to judge, disproportionately self-assured, and rude.

I'm forty-two years old, friend, and I'm still working on this necklace strung together out of dead jedi teeth.

Yes, but you only have that as your unpraiseworthy goal because EA has not properly incentivized your spirited participation in warzones. They incentivized you showing up. If you were a naturally competitive person or a naturally aggressive person or a sociopath, you would not require trinkets and medals and gear as rewards for PVP. Defeating my enemies and trying not to lose - a thing I view as objectively bad - are all I need for motivation. The problem is that EA thought they could forge PVPers out of PVEers by giving them a half-arsed incentive. In response that's exactly what they got in return, half-arsed participation.

Since you already give out medals for sort of tangential things, like showing up to a shortstaffed team midfight which isn't really an accomplishment at all since the player had no idea usually which warzone they would be entering, I'd like to propose a new warzone achievement medal that's at least less useless than that one. Give out a "No Retreat, No Surrender" medal to anyone on a team at the end of a warzone if their team lost at least half their team's players to quitting. So in an 8 on 8 if your team had at least four people quit and come the end of the warzone you're still there, I think you should get a medal for that. It might cut down on quitters by some tiny percentage and it also makes a sort of sense to praise merit-worthy performance in the face of adversity and low odds.

Which is exactly why making only wins count makes sense for everyone. If they're not going to make only wins count they've got no good reason to hand out companions for occupying space in a warzone twenty times with that person having no interest in the warzone's outcome. Hell it doesn't even make sense with regard to, at least the Pierce, storyline, wherein you're supposed to take the fight to the Republic and demonstrate your worth. We don't give out medals for showing up. Well, EA does in some contexts, but that's not my point.

And no offense intended but I can tell from your comment that you so hate pvp, as well as from your outlier results of 5 wins out of 16 matches, that you really didn't try very hard. Had you been trying to win instead of just killing time your teams you were on may have won more often. If everyone in your shoes, just killing time for Pierce or M1-whatever, was also striving to win to the best of their ability, playing objectives, using good tactics, then you may have had something closer to 5 out of 10 times instead of 5 out of 16. Besides 6 losses in a row is nothing. It happens sometimes. Get over it.

No, racing to 5 wins should suffice. 5 wins would take, on average, ten matches to accomplish, since there's one winner and one loser each match. I did say on average. Nothing can be made individually perfect for each individual person in this context.

This is what should happen, what you said right there. 20 PvP matches is for me something I was planning on doing anyway. For others it's the same but for many it is torture. Instead of 20 matches, win or lose, EA should make it 5 wins to get Pierce or the Republic droid equivalent companion. This way people will only have to do about half as many matches on average as now, which they'll like because those people dreading it are the ones who dislike PVP. Additionally those PVE'ers will actually be trying to win, not just running around wishing they weren't there, which will improve the quality of the PVP on servers, even that being demonstrated by these noob PVE'ers.

Thank you.

Oh you can definitely run the game without BitRaider which theoretically would slow down the client if you have an old computer and which does seem to patch slowly/badly. I did it by buying a copy of the game on ebay. Set me back about five dollars. Now if my game wonks up I just uninstall and reinstall from disc. Problem solved for all time.

No hyperbole here nor any intended. A player in 208 pvp gear will not only do more damage than a player in 216 pve gear but the lower lvl pvp gear has a set bonus that is somewhat meaningful, as well as full 2018 expertise. That makes 208 pvp gear best in slot except for lvl 220 pve gear by my reckoning. If you have 208 pvp gear, take an armor piece and go compare it, without augment, to the 216 pve gear you could buy with glowing crystals.

Oh. Thank you all. I was hoping to spend some glowing crystals to get pve-ish gear so I wouldn't be undergeared in ops. Even the glowing crystal bought 216 rated gear does suck. I guess I'll stick to pvp.