Or, you could just disengage from PvP entirely like I did. The game is actually better without it, imho. So much less frustration and toxicity, and you'll no longer care if Bioware is listening and actually addressing PvP issues anymore. In other words, stop expecting anything from them and you won't be disappointed when they fail to deliver. But, as I've said before, there are times when I miss it. Especially with quality players. Unfortunately, players such as yourself are very much in the minority of the player base at this point.

Amazon does, apparently.

There's several on XBox, such as ESO, STO, Neverwinter, ED, NMS, and hopefully more to come. But to your point, maybe other studios will develop for other platforms thereby leaving SWTOR uncontested, but if it was my decision to make for my studio, I'd make a Star Wars MMO that was cross-platform and put SWTOR out of business so that I had no other competition for that market space. I'd also make sure I took the time to learn from the mistakes made by Bioware so that I didn't make the same mistakes, and I'd keep whatever aspects were working and incorporate those concepts into my game. But that's just me.

I think the other thread does a much better job of explaining this. TL;DR version.... 2023 ends the exclusivity of EA developing games for the IP. It does not necessarily mean that SWTOR will be shut down in 2023. What it does mean is that other studios will be able to develop games for the IP as of 2023, with approval from Disney. The inevitable competition opens the possibility for a SWTOR vs SWG situation, where one game essentially usurps the market of the other. Personally, I think this is a VERY good thing for this game. It will force EA to either dedicate more resources to making this game better toward attracting and retaining more players, or face the possibility of losing us to a competitor studio/publisher that makes an even better SWTOR 2.0 (or whatever it ends up being called). Essentially, EA can no longer afford to keep this game on the backburner while it funnels resources and revenue to other projects, assuming they want to keep this game active and profitable.

I really don't want to get into pointless arguments on the forums, but this isn't completely true. Yes, the game itself, SWTOR, belongs to Bioware/EA, but the license that permits them to use the IP belongs to Disney. If Disney decides to give that license to another studio/publisher in 2023, SWTOR will be shut down. Who owns the actual game is moot because it can't exist without the license agreement to use the IP.

The current licensing deal will eventually expire in 2023 and come up for renewal, at which point Disney, not LucasArts, will make the decision whether or not to renew it with EA. That's all I meant. And when that time comes, if I were a Disney exec making the decision, I would absolutely give it to someone else who's going to give it the love and attention it deserves instead of letting it languish on the backburner while the studio prioritizes other development projects, as EA has directed Bioware to do with this one. There's also the possibility, if you believe the rumors about EA's current CEO, that EA may not want the license any longer, as cited in this article from early last year.

I'm going to be honest, as much as I love this game (mostly), it hasn't had the resources or attention it deserves since EA gutted Bioware's SWTOR team to work on Anthem all those years ago, and as far as I know, those resources weren't returned when Anthem fell on its face. I'd therefore love to see EA lose ownership of this game to a newer, better resourced studio to take things over. Whether that means improving on this game (which is doubtful given the architecture limitations), or closing this one down in favor of a SWTOR 2.0, I think it would be a very positive change. But if this game is making any money, EA won't let it go unless Disney forces the licensing issue. And I think an even bigger question would be, which other studio would get it?

Gotcha. I was referring to elemental damage, primarily, which isn't mitigated by armor. Pyrotech PTs are a good example of that. And yes, Powerlode increases burst potential as it allows a PT to do Energy Burst (with 4 stacks of energy lode) twice in a row. Thanks for the explanation.

I disagree. As I've mentioned earlier, I quit ranked after Bioware killed 8v8 Ranked. But some of the most intense, fun PvP matches I've ever had in this game were unranked WZs. And balance issues matter just as much there as they do in the Ranked formats. And for those feeling nostalgic about PTs, as I am, here's an old guild video I dug up. Excuse the poor video quality.

Fair points, and as you well know, my guild played a LOT of matches against yours back then. But I would often find myself without a premade when I queued later at night when your guild tended to be more active, which didn't help. But back on topic, I was simply playing Devil's Advocate a bit here trying to illustrate the impact that a good Operative/Scoundrel can have on a match, especially if it's Huttball. P.S. I can't say it enough how much I miss both playing WITH your guild and AGAINST it. Some of the best unranked matches I've ever had, and lots of good memories there. /salute

I appreciate the breakdown. I've admittedly been out of the loop. What was the very good DCD they were given in 6x? Was it specific to an advanced class? From looking at mine (who's AP), Kolto Overload is still the poor man's version of what Mercenaries get, and Energy Shield is still the same "meh" DCD it's always been. Are you talking about Power Yield for the 40% armor increase, which doesn't help against yellow damage that bypasses armor? As for Tacticals, I'm not sure which one you are referring to. AFAIK, the best two are Energized Blade or Powerlode, at least for AP. Maybe I'm missing something here?

I'm referring to unranked, not ranked, which I haven't played since 8v8 Ranked. As for PTs, how exactly were they buffed in 6x? 5x? They were nerfed in 4x. When was the last time their advanced classes received a buff? I ask because I honestly don't remember at this point. I'm not trying to make this thread about PTs, because frankly there are bigger issues with PvP than just one class, but my point is that if Bioware can ignore an advanced class for that long, what indication do we have that anything else will change?

That's all true, but the point is that PTs were left behind and that hasn't been addressed by Bioware in years. I've made several reasonable suggestions in years past how they can balance PTs with the other classes in PvP, but nothing has changed. They claim they are listening to player feedback, etc., but then you have situations like this. This is one of dozens of reasons why PvP in this game is in such a sorry state.

When was the last time PTs got any real love? Last time I PvP'd on mine, they were the easiest to global because they have the worst defensive CDs in the game, and because of their burst potential, they are often the first to be targeted. AFAIK, it's been that way for YEARS.

I realize it's been a while since I've PvP'd, but I recall several matches where I was on my (Lethality) Operative and I prevented up to 3 players from capping a node. I could usually do that indefinitely, unless I screwed up or they got lucky. I was never what I consider "good" on my Operative either - just competent - though I've never held off 5 players. I will say that my Operative was my least favorite class to play in PvP. Operatives/Scoundrels in Huttball is another matter entirely. A good player on an Operative/Scoundrel in Huttball can literally win the match single-handedly for their team. In fact, your guild had a pretty good Scoundrel, Kendra, if I recall. There was a particularly frustrating Huttball match I played against you guys on my (Arsenal) Mercenary, and you guys kept focusing me so that I couldn't Enet your Scoundrel. Pretty sure that was your guild, at least. It's been a while.

I wanted to make a general offer to anyone who either doesn't have the resources to own a SH of their own, let alone to completely unlock it and decorate it well (which has become a very expensive venture), that I have six of some of the best decorated SHs you'll find on the server and I'd like to offer access to them to anyone who's interested. Here's what I have: Alderaan - Imperial/Sith themed, this citadel contains a strong military presence throughout, and of course is luxuriously decorated within as is fitting a Sith Lord. This expansive SH contains tons of extras to enjoy and immerse yourself in. Dromund Kaas - Imperial/Sith themed, this apartment is appointed with everything a prominent member of the Dark Council needs, both in terms of security and comfort. Yavin - Imperial/Mandalorian themed, this FOB (forward operating base) is a launch point for strike teams throughout the sector and beyond. It's more functional than anything else, with an entire company of mechanized infantry garrisoned there, along with a sizeable contingent of Mandalorians representing Clans Lok, Vizla, and Cadera. Nar Shaddaa - Resort/casino themed, this faction-neutral cantina boasts some of the latest luxuries in entertainment, to include slots, casino tables, live music and dancing, dining, luxury suites, and even a library for the discerning guest looking for some quiet contemplation. Manaan - On the outside, this SH appears to be the lavish estate of some wealthy Zakuulan nobility, but it's actually just a front for a state-of-the-art safehouse for Imperial Intelligence agents operating in that sector. Coruscant - Republic/Jedi themed, this modest apartment is decorated appropriately for a member of the Jedi Council. All the SHs include the standard amenities such as bank, mail, and GTN access. If you're interested in using any of these, please don't respond here. Instead, contact Mourne via in-game mail with the stronghold you'd like access to, the correct spelling of the character name to whom access should be granted (to include any special characters so that I can copy/paste that into the key invitation), and whether or not you'd like a silver key or bronze key. Both keys allow you access the SH while I'm offline, but a silver key will allow you invite other players (which is useful if you have friends you'd like to include there, such as for RP purposes). I'd ask that if the invitation is only for yourself, only request the bronze key.

Exactly. Actions speak so much louder than words, and at times, it does seem like we get a lot of lip service. Especially when it comes to effective, positive changes in the PvP community.

This isn't functionally any different than what we have now. So for example, I have 6 characters. Because Tech Fragments are Legacy bound currency, if I want to focus on gearing one of those characters first, I simply use the pooled Tech Fragment resource for that one character. When I get random set pieces from the Conquest box for each character completing the weekly Conquest, I chuck those into my Legacy bank. If one of those set pieces is something I'm interested in using for the character I'm focusing on, it goes to him. If I was able to repeat that effort on one character - do the weekly Conquest more than once - I'd still be getting the same amount of Tech Fragments as I would on each of my six characters, and I'd still be getting a random set piece. The only benefit I see to your proposal is for players who only have one or two characters on their account, or, for players who have all the time in the world to play this game and can literally grind out weekly Conquest dozens or hundreds of times. I think it's a reasonably safe assumption that the overwhelming majority of players still here have more than one or two characters on their account, in some cases, players even have multiple accounts. And that most players do not have the free time outside of their real life responsibilities to grind Conquest ad nauseum. Obviously, there's exceptions to that. To me, at least, it's a question of ROI (return on investment). Will the expenditure of time and resources by Bioware result in a net gain for the player base? I can't answer that question accurately from where I'm sitting, but I strongly suspect the answer is no.

If it was really that difficult for you to read, you could just click and drag to highlight the text. Or did that escape you in your failed attempt to troll? P.S. I changed the color to blue. Enjoy!

Over the years, I've submitted several suggestions to Keith (who appears to no longer be available) and Eric regarding ways that they could improve unranked PvP. None of those suggestions were ultimately implemented, which isn't to say that I necessarily know what's best for the game over your development team, but reasonable feedback from a player who's primary game focus at the time was PvP seemed to be ignored. You say you guys are listening, but to be blunt, that hasn't been my experience over the many years I've been playing this game when it comes to PvP, and it was certainly a contributing factor to why I quit PvP completely. Below are the suggestions I had sent prior to my last military deployment to Africa in 2019, and the dates they were sent on..... 5/17/18 Since you're looking at PvP WZs in particular, among other proposed changes, I wanted to preface this by bringing to your attention a relatively new issue that's been discussed recently here: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=949124. From my perspective, this issue has a negative impact on player experience, and in some respects, is similar to the AFK issue in that players are ignoring objectives and not helping their team to win the match. In other cases, a premade will score twice in Huttball, then hold the ball while they farm the other team. However some players may rationalize this, it's toxic behavior that damages the player experience of other players on the receiving end of this behavior. Vote kicking will not work here, because these players are typically in a full premade and you can't simply kick half the team. Not to mention that vote kicking AFKers in a match has never worked in my long experience PvPing in this game. Certainly there are bigger issues you are looking at, such as the rampant queue exploiting in Ranked, acid teams in Ranked, and outright cheating/hacking. But since you're looking at PvP WZs in general, and economy of resources is an inexorable component of your development efforts at this point, it seemed that this was the perfect opportunity to propose a suggestion specific to regular WZs that may solve several problems all at once. Currently, you receive the maximum CXP in regular WZs once you've accrued 8 contribution medals. You also receive 8 UC (Unassembled Components) for a loss, and 20 UC for a win. The common denominator of problems in regular WZs, like many things, is player behavior. In order to affect positive change, you need to address the player behavior itself. My proposal to do this is to change the way contribution medals work in regular WZs. I'll detail those changes more below, but what I hope you'll find attractive about this idea is that it won't involve a lot of new coding or any new game mechanics. You'll simply be able to use the existing contribution medals game mechanic by making some adjustments to the existing code. There are as follows: Reduce the number of medals for doing damage or healing. This should be a one time medal, based on reaching a certain threshold that scales with the character level. Such as at level 70, if you do at least 1 million damage or at least 1 million healing, you get one contribution medal for that. That's it. This will help de-incentivize players from spending an entire match farming other players and ignoring the objectives. Medals for crit heals or crit damage should be removed entirely. It's basically redundant to #1. Reduce or remove other medals that are superfluous to the objectives. I believe there's even a medal for a solo kill. Whatever you decide to keep, players who do not contribute to the objectives, be it guarding, capturing, killing a ball carrier, scoring a ball, planting a bomb, disarming a bomb, etc. should be getting very few medals comparatively. Increase the number of medals for doing anything that is related to an objective. For example, if I guard a node the entire match during Civil War, Yavin, or Novare Coast, I usually get 8 medals total. Considering how critical it is to winning a match to guard an objective, this activity should be worth considerably more medals. It will also help incentivize this activity so that more players will actually want to guard an objective. If you spend an entire match guarding a node, you should be getting twice as many medals as someone who spent the entire match farming players off node. Increase medals for other objective related activity, such as capturing a node (Civil War/Yavin/Novare Coast), scoring with a ball or killing a ball carrier (Huttball/Quesh), planting a bomb (Voidstar), using a buff (Odessen). And so on. Tie UC to medals. So instead of 8 UC for a loss and 20 UC for a win, make each contribution medal earned during a WZ equal to 1 UC. So if you obtain 20 contribution medals by the end of the match, you'll get 20 UC. If you only get 2 contribution medals because all you did was farm players, you'll only get 2 UC. This will reinforce the incentives of playing objective based PvP WZs in the manner in which they were intended. Increase the CXP return based on medals. Currently, you do not get any more CXP for earning more than 8 medals. Once you have 8, there's really no reason in the current system to get more. If CXP rewards are also tied to medals, it is one more way to reinforce and incentivize appropriate player behavior in WZs. The basic idea here is to completely reverse the contribution medal scores so that players who are actually playing the objectives will get a lot more medals, CXP, and UC. Players who want to ignore objectives or AFK, will see little or no return on their time. Eventually, they'll stop doing it. I think this is something you can more easily do with your limited resources, and that it will have a good return on investment for your time/efforts in that it will discourage aberrant behavior in regular WZs. If you find this suggestion useful, and actually implement it, all I ask is that you give me a little credit for it. If you can't do that, I'll be content to see these types of changes as I truly believe it will make a tremendous difference in regular PvP WZs for everyone. 6/6/18 I know you guys are reading the discussions carefully that are occurring on the forums surrounding the proposed changes that are coming to PvP in 5.9.2, but I feel I need to be more direct in my opinion about the changes as it pertains to premades. To put this in context, I'm the guild leader of a PvP guild that has been doing premades in regular WZs for almost 6 years now, but to be blunt, I believe you need to pull the plug on premades outside of Team Ranked. Regular WZs and GSF should be limited to solo queues only. The underlying reason for this is that without the ability to create a separate matchmaking system for group queues, even with the proposed limits to group composition, premades will continue to represent an unbalancing influence in both WZs and GSF. There is no offsetting the advantage of veteran, skilled, geared players coordinating in voice chat, and since Eric already stated that premade teams will not be split up by the matchmaking system, it's very possible and likely to see a PUG team (players who solo queued) playing against a premade team. The healer/tank stacking limitations, while helpful, won't balance that equation. I understand the premise of an MMO is being able to play with your friends and guild mates, but honestly, that opportunity exists in Team Ranked and the entire PvE side of the game. If players want to form groups for PvP, and there is no group only queue system to support that, then they need to be limited to Team Ranked. The people who ultimately make the development decisions on your team may not see this if they aren't playing the game regularly, but it's the reality of the situation that in the absence of a more robust (e.g. cross-server) matchmaking system, all your great efforts and work toward making PvP more fair and fun for ALL players will continue to be undermined by premades. Again, these are all old issues that continue to affect unranked PvP, and while I've stopped PvPing since 2019, I think these suggestions are still applicable and valuable. Perhaps you guys should sit down with some players to discuss a better way forward, because simply listening to our feedback doesn't seem to be working very well.

For the first 7 years or so that I played this game, I spent most of my time doing PvP. Both in unranked, and ranked back when we had 8v8 ranked matches. I've posted guild videos, have authored guides and helped train guildmates, and I even joined a Republic PvP guild (Cambodian Warpigs) on my one and only Republic alt, who at the time was the main competition for my Empire guild (Grim Determination). Over the years, PvP in this game has steadily declined in terms of balance (class balance and team balance), worsening team play (which was primarily due to ranked refugees flooding into unranked and kill farming versus playing the objectives), degrading performance issues (desynch, latency, etc.), cheating (which has become so rampant that Bioware has to do audits each ranked season), and an inversely proportional amount of toxicity (which to be fair, has dramatically increased in all areas of the game, not just PvP). It finally reached the point where continuing to PvP was driving me toward hating the game. So I stopped. I haven't PvP'd in this game in over two years, and it was the best decision I ever made. You might consider doing the same, and if you do, you might be pleasantly surprised how little you miss it and how much more you enjoy the game without it.

Good question, for which I obviously don't have the answer. It was merely wishful thinking to move the story forward to a point in the timeline where something truly pivotal happens. Then again, I'm not sure I'd want to play a Sith around the time of Darth Bane since the Sith Empire is utterly destroyed except for Bane and Zannah. And I'm absolutely not a fan of the literal interpretation of the Rule of Two. But I digress. The point was, is, that it's time to move on from Tenebrae and family. The story arc is like a rock-hard, two-week old stale cookie that no one wants to eat, no matter how much you may happen to like cookies. It's time for some CAKE.

Having no choice but to kill her didn't bother me, since I felt that she was just too psychotic and too broken to be realistically redeemed. And in my personal opinion, I also find her too annoying. She's like this crazy powerful whiny brat thanks to her dad, who was essentially evil incarnate. So understandably I'm very much not looking forward to dealing with her again, and I'm concerned as you are that we'll either only end up killing her again, or she'll be redeemed in some extremely cheesed Mary Sue way. Regardless, it seems we're all in agreement that Bioware just needs to move on and give us something new and fresh.

Perhaps, but Satele is not omniscient. And to that point, Yoda failed to realize that Palpatine was actually Darth Sidious in all the interactions he had with him, and I think it's fair to say that Yoda > Satele. So it's not totally unreasonable that this couldn't be the case with Vaylin, who is arguably more powerful than Satele. But time will tell.