they were added pretty late in the development. The problem is that there are no aim/endurance hilts, which I understand reluctance to make because actual player characters would have no use for them.

Guild wars was like this, I didn't like it. If I didnt friendlist someone I would never see them again. Chat becomes a mess, naming becomes a mess. There are just too many issues to fix a problem that already gets fixed by cross server LFG-ing low pop servers and high pop servers.

lightsaber crystals are not supposed to overwrite the LS/DS requirement. if anything this was a bug that was fixed. its not too hard to find orange hilts without requirements.

I found it works much better on tanks (already take less damage, so harder to dismount), but the 110% mount lets you move through groups, rather than around them, which ends up being far more than a 20% speed boost.

Legacy is a "perk to having multiple characters" system, not a wicked awesome last name system. the last name to illustrate your shared characters is just one of the perks.

I've had very good experiences with free to play games in the past, but never long term. I haven't ever liked one enough to buy into their "premium packages" (ie where you un-f2p the game), but I've always eventually gotten frustrated by the amount and frequency of micro-transactions and restrictions they impose.

How is it failed logic? They could let people transfer, but they aren't. They've got their reasons for it

ashara doesnt have skin, every time she wears armor with exposed skin she gets the bandanges/tape that male characters do.

It sort of used to be that pvp gear existed so that you didnt have to pve to be good at pvp. So pvp gear was designed to be equal to the same "tier" of pve gear for pvp purposes. Somewhere along the lines that got thrown out the window and it all just became a separate gear grind.

I've never actually had to dictate terms to a group like this. Maybe one day I will get "burned" as you did and feel the need to, at that point that will become a cost to how I play. Again, I feel its completely fair to make sure that group members intentions align with your own. If I was to tell someone to do as I say or don't join my group, I'd feel completely justified in doing so because I don't owe them anything.

I absolutely can say what is and is not ok in a group/partnership. If someone doesn't agree, they will opt out of said partnership. I'm just pushing for people to try and clear this all up before killing a boss, entering a disagreement, disolving the group there, leaving, finding a replacement, resetting and starting again with a bunch of ill feelings about the whole thing.

Just to play the fair game with you for a bit.. Being able to roll need on anything is already unfair to certain classes. Bounty hunters only have companions with aim and cunning. Sith warriors. Bounty hunters have a 50% chance of having an item drop they have a need on, while sith warriors have a 100% chance. I think its fair that each person only roll on their own characters primary stat, giving each member a 25% chance of loot dropping. Which is right? Neither because "fair" is an idealist concept that is fairly subjective and essentially impossible in the real world. Its a stupid argument.

its not about importance. You (in my opinion) are on the less popular side of a very polarizing issue. I think it would be best for everyone if intentions were made clear before groups begin. Because I think everyone agrees that needing on items for your own player character's stat and armor type is fine, I think it should be on the people intending to need on anything else to make their intentions known.

People can play philosopher as much as they want about whats the most "fair", but I could care less. If I'm in a group, my opinion matters just like everyone else. If people cannot come up with a meeting of the minds, they shouldn't group together. I choose to play with people who agree with me on the "loot for companion being greed" issue, for the same reasons I spend any other social time with people who tend to have similar beliefs and ideas of whats fair and enjoyable. What I think is dishonest, is the refusing to acknowledge that rolling need for companions is going against the grain, and not speaking up about their intentions ahead of time because they either feel their way is more righteous to begin with, or because they're worried that they will not be invited because of it. And I'll go ahead and end my usual note, thankfully this is just a hot issue on the forums, and not a real problem within the game.

Sort of depends on whose hype. I feel that outside of the bugs, this game's everything bioware said it would be.

If you want a game to fill out your entire social calendar, this is not it. No new mmo will do that.

The market keeps trying to supply new and innovative games, games with better pvp and grouping aspects. And nobody buys them. They'd rather buy the big budget attempts to please all fans and then yell at them for not being enough of the niche game they probably should have bought to begin with.

I'd be all for a toggle option to flag yourself same/opposite/both gender flirt options. What I don't want to see out of this is every 3rd quest giver and every companion trying with some kind of romance option.

its actually No No Sometime around march.

Oddly enough thats more or less the requirements of an MMO.

go back and farm strong and above mobs. try instances that are about the same level range? do the repeatable heroic quests.

My first trip through I tried to do most stuff. I didnt bother making sure I'd done every quest if I outleveled them. For my second and third empire guys though, I just did my class quests and then quested to fill in the missing XP to get to the next planet afterwards.

There are plenty of ways to make easy money in this game. Space missions, pvp, dailys. All you're doing is picking one aspect of the game that doesn't net positive for you and whining about it.

its because planets take about 6-8 hours to play through, generally only cover a 4 level span, and there is very little reason to go back (which is fine, because there is also very little reason to have level 20s and level 40s in the same area, they still couldnt meaningfully group together).

As you spend more time with something, the magic goes away. For the people who began 10+ years ago, I doubt they'll ever be happy again because they've seen and done it all so many times, and the genre has moved away from what they liked. Its similar to how people tend to like the music that was popular (or just what they liked) during their teens and twenties for the rest of their lives. The other trend I've noticed is rather than look for MMOs that will work out best for them, every subgroup of mmo fan tends to flock to the newest big budget mmo designed to cater to the everyman, and then complain that the game is too X or not enough Y because its catering to the everyman.