I personally prefer to roleplay with people whose speech and emotes I don't have to translate. Extremely poor spelling, syntax or punctuation can make a sentence confusing (at best) or utterly incomprehensible (at worst). This is especially true when many of the nonverbal cues we normally use to communicate (such as vocal tone or posture) in a non-text medium are missing. I play to have fun. If I have to translate nearly every sentence from leet (for example) to something actually resembling English, it's going to feel like work.

There is quite a difference between choosing to perform an act and doing so deliberately to create harm. If I bump into someone, chances are it is an accident. The mere fact of my making a conscious decision to walk in a particular direction does not suddenly turn the offending contact into a deliberate attack. Yes, RP griefers exist, and some of them create characters with "non-Star Warsy" names just to annoy others. This does not mean that all names which do not pass a particular RPer's immersion filter were chosen deliberately to grief the RP community. Some players might be new to RP, and may not have a clear idea of what might constitute an "immersive" Star Wars name. Some might disagree on where exactly that boundary is, as it appears in (often radically) different places for different RPers - note the ongoing controversy over whether or not nicknames are acceptable. Other players might merely have mistyped during character creation, or have forgotten that they were on an RP server. Careless, certainly, but nevertheless accidental. I prefer to judge names on an individual basis. I do report names that violate the current naming policies set by BioWare (IP infringements, slurs, profanity, et cetera). Anything else, I'm willing to tolerate peaceably unless the owner proves him/herself a complete tool through inappropriate actions or speech. Harassing or other EULA-breaking behavior gets reported. Anyone who breaks my immersion too much or is merely too irritating for me to stand, I simply won't interact with.

So apparently names created in good faith and for good reason, for intentions of RPing an immersive character, are still unacceptable if they fit your personal criteria for being non-Star Warsy? Including such names as "Tracer-Missile," which, as others have noted, function perfectly well as callsigns or nicknames? How is this any different from the "unfortunate situation" detailed in another post?

"Med Units" are similar to medpacs but will heal both you and your companion together.

The human bright green-eyed color option gives me a glowing, bright orange eye color at Dark 1.

They will be adding server forums - sort of. http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=173672 Servers will be divided by type (e.g. PvE-RP, PvP), then thrown into groups organized by alphabetical order. Since each forum will contain multiple servers, players are expected to preface their posts with a [server Name] tag. Not quite what most of us were hoping for, but it's a start - and the devs have said they're open to revisiting the issue as necessary due to high post counts or difficulty of use.

Typically the whole point of Roleplaying is to create and develop a character that *isn't* merely oneself, the player, in pixelated form. Thus in-character flirting is guided by the gender identity and sexual orientation of the character, not the player piloting him/her.

If BioWare had planned to remove every form of griefing, harassment or rule-breaking through mechanics blocking rather than through reasonable policy and enforcement, we'd be waiting for the game until 2023, if it came out at all. Also, such wholesale blocking of mechanics would likely be an unacceptable infringement of generally accepted MMO conventions. Do people really want a system where you're forced to accept a randomly generated name at character creation, since that's the only practical way to "block" millions of slight variations of "BoobaFet" and "DarthSkywalker?" Do we want a game with no chat system, simply because people could (and do!) use it to harass others? The rules are there for a reason. They *are* being enforced. The process is just a little slow right now.

You're continually asking for additional and more restrictive rules to naming. The OP seems to be asking for better rules enforcement for names that already violate current policy, specifically the infringement of intellectual property rights regarding the SW canon. I agree that moderation in this area is pretty poor right now, but I think much of it is simply a function of Support being utterly swamped with requests. Names my gaming group and I have reported for various violations do get removed... eventually. Give it some time.

We're still not getting individual server forums, though. Apparently they're planning to implement filtering by type (e.g. PvE-RP, PvP) and then clumping together same-type servers grouped by alphabetical order. Since there will be multiple servers per forum, we are expected to use the [server Name] tag to preface all of our posts within the applicable forum. The devs have noted that they are willing to revisit the issue should further breakdowns become necessary due to unmanageable post counts or difficulty of use. More work for them, I guess.

And if a sufficient number of players were indeed clamoring for "pets," despite some disagreement about the type of pet, and with a negligible amount of opposition to the idea of implementing the addition per se, that would indeed be considered consensus. (I don't think anyone in this thread has claimed that agreement needs to reach 100% or even close to 100% of affected players.) But even here, unless the devs have the time and inclination to add multiple *types* of pets (in other words, if limited resources dictate only a single implementation, and the devs have no preexisting preference due to difficulty, lore considerations, et cetera), the addition with the most support is most likely to go in. I'm not going to get into this here, to avoid derailing the thread. Suffice it to say that there have been numerous scenarios posited in the other threads where well-intentioned RPers playing in good faith would, under the more restrictive naming and moderation policies suggested by a certain contingent of the community, find their personal playstyles to be unacceptably and unnecessarily limited. In these circumstances, I don't think the views of a narrow cross-section of the RP playerbase should be sufficient to convince the devs to remove freedoms that already exist under the current system.

Apparently what you want, then, is for people not to be able to choose their own character names at all. After all, we're named by our parents, not ourselves. You really should be campaigning for the complete removal of name choice in the character creation screen. Instead, every character will automatically be assigned a name from the random name generator. That solves everyone's problem, right? I see the oft-vaunted maturity of the RP community is in full force today. Well, generally people who insist on trying to force others to play their way (or else!) are not well-received or much liked within the community, so I can certainly understand this. Thank you for volunteering to be the sole judge and arbiter of what all RPers want - now you just need to run for election. I don't think the conclusion is as foregone as you seem to believe. ("Dewey defeats Truman!")

Consensus certainly makes it easier for the devs to look at something and go, "We should add this," though. Especially when they're trying to predict what improvements will provide the best return on their investment. When it comes to pure mechanics, BioWare is going to do what the development team feels is best for the game; they'll rebalance and tweak things in order to maintain their vision of fun and fairness. In these cases, community consensus plays a smaller role. It's less about agreement than about bringing problems to BW's attention. The devs may even go against the majority opinion in order to implement fixes that they feel are necessary for the long-term health of the game; we've seen this before in other games, where some changes are quite poorly received by the playerbase. When it's a pure quality-of-life addition, especially one with the potential for adverse side effects, I suspect that even PvPers are going to need to reach a certain level of agreement before the devs will look at adding it in. Insofar as we're discussing pure content/QoL additions as opposed to something sticky like RP server moderation, I'd argue that consensus may be "louder" and therefore more audible to the developer's ear, or perhaps it's simply that consensus in the RP community tends to supply the devs with proof of a certain critical mass of opinion, above which they're more willing to consider adding things that they see as appealing to a sizable number of players. I do think that when it comes to issues like additions to RP server rules and enforcement, consensus is going to play a much larger role (assuming, of course, that the devs are A)willing to consider such changes but are B) nevertheless satisfied with the status quo).

I'm not focused on how much I can "put up with in order to RP." I'm concerned with the very real possibility that any additional restrictions implemented will impact other players' ability to create and flesh out the character concepts they're interested in - including my own, and I'm an RPer. There are people clamoring for naming "smell tests" (based on their own personal and highly subjective opinion of what constitutes an RP name) and new rules that basically boil down to "Names can't be words, ever." These are changes that I feel we can do without - that we *must* do without. In other words, I'm not "putting up with" BW's policies in this regard. I'm against the addition of any unreasonably strict and arbitrary rules that have the potential to harm valid and non-infringing character concepts and playstyles in order to quell the angry mutterings of a select group of RPers. I'm all for swift enforcement against true griefing and harassment of RPers for their choice of playstyle ("breaking my immersion" does NOT fall under this category). I'm all for quality-of-life additions, and we're slated to get some, which is great. More would be even better: Personally, I'd love to see more character and ship customization options (including the ability to update one's appearance). But you're not asking for shinies; you're asking the devs to overhaul community dynamics. And I just don't see them trying to do that. This, right here.

How is it a myth? The evidence is in the naming threads - we *don't* always agree with each other. Sure, there's a fair amount of consensus on a number of issues, and those are the places where additions may be more likely. I don't see anyone maintaining that RPers shouldn't get anything because the community isn't big enough. The reality, however, is that the vast majority of improvements are going to be slated for PvE mechanics - because the vast majority of players engage in some form of PvE play. It's easy to "break" PvP or to leave it in such an unbalanced state that fewer and fewer people will participate. It's not so easy to make RP a playstyle that's undesirable or flat-out unplayable to its intended audience. Unfortunately for us, PvP is a playstyle that, IME, has tended to require constant and vigilant maintenance from the development team, lest it implode. We don't normally require that kind of dev attention just to be able to play. Unless chat or emotes get completely borked, we can usually manage to get by. Sadly, this also puts us lower on the priority scale, since many of the things we tend to ask for fall under quality-of-life improvements rather than outright fixes or rebalancing passes. Mind you, I'm not saying it *should* be this way, just that it's a plausible explanation for why there might be disparities in how community wishlists are addressed. I don't buy the argument that we get shafted because we're just not loud enough. I think we're plenty loud. But (gross generalizations follow here) RPers tend to stick around more for community than for shinies; PvPers leave when their game gets unfun, unbalanced or just plain old hat. Guess where the attention goes?

It might simply be that RPers tend to use local chat as IC conversation anyway, so there's less need for an actual IC "RP" channel, and the devs are aware that OOC LFRP channels tend to spring up on their own as well. On the other hand, I really don't want PvPers cluttering General with their plans and play-by-plays if there's another option available. Take it as a compliment, if you're so inclined: The devs trust us not to bother people, so they're content to leave us with the default channels. The game has only been out for less than a month. It's been my experience that as time goes on, those channels do fill up as people become aware of their options. Granted, it might be nice for them to make it easier to find information about custom channels, and as that's an addition that would impact the entire playerbase, it's a request that might get a little more traction with the devs. Yeah, this is pretty ridiculous. I had a "***?" moment when I learned that emotes don't go cross-faction. It's probably intended to make cross-faction harassment more difficult for the griefers, but that sort of behavior is already prohibited under the TOS anyway, and should simply be reported and punished as appropriate.

This. We often can't even agree amongst ourselves what we want. The devs are going to place additions where they'll have the most player impact. Most of the time, that's PvE game mechanics, and to a lesser extent PvP. And if you go by the opinion of some posters, who believe that anyone who doesn't agree with them isn't a "real" RPer, the RP community's actually a hell of a lot smaller than it looks.

I feel the same way about having to fight Revan in a midlevel Flashpoint as I do about the introduction of midichlorians and the retconning of Boba Fett into nothing more than a violently-orphaned clone tot: Meh. Too much prosaic and extraneous detail can ruin even the most magical concepts. Take away the mystique and Revan is no longer a legendary Sith/Jedi, he's just some 300-year old guy in a mask.

I might agree with you, were it not for those posters who freely admit that certain names do *not* violate current naming policy, but maintain that they should, and therefore those names should be reported. These players are reporting based not upon their individual interpretation of how naming policy should be applied, but upon their subjective dislike of a particular name as not being "RP enough," despite the fact that, by their own admission, the name is perfectly legal.

It may simply be that the GMs are severely behind in getting through the name reports. My roommate reported a name right around launch (violated policy, pop culture reference) and he finally just got a response back today saying that the reported name had been moderated. It does suck that you can't use your actual name, but the BoobaFetts and their like *will* be gone. It's just taking longer than expected.

If the primary reason why there were no deaths or wipes was because both the tank and healer were really on the ball despite having to work extra hard just to make sure everyone stayed upright, then you're in the wrong. If the entire mission was a cakewalk for everyone involved, then they overreacted.

There are a couple of flights of stairs going down, like a subway, on the concourse between the Senate Tower and the taxi service. The stairs lead to an underground area which has Galactic Market kiosks as well as class trainers, crew skill trainers and vendors.

If you've gotten to the end of your class quest line on Tython, you should have a mission that directs you to Coruscant. There's a shuttle bay within the Jedi Temple where you can get transport. If you don't have that mission yet, you may have missed some quests or contacts. It's also possible that you have missions, but they're not being tracked. Open your mission log to check.

No. It demolishes the argument, which is propped up by the "No true Scotsman" fallacy, to admit that not all RPers want stricter naming or rules enforcement. Therefore, players must be lumped into one or the other category depending on whether they agree with that poster or not, RP credentials notwithstanding. "Many of you who say they are not are not truly role-players. If you were, you would see bad or silly names as RP griefing and not something to be passive about when you see it." Not the poster you're responding to, but the mindset appears to be the same.

That guy isn't me, but I just wanted to point out that some of us are actually RPers who post on the "non RP side of things" because we don't want to see the community turn into nothing more than a cannibalistic elitist clique where people are no longer comfortable playing as they wish because of the RP server police. We post because we care what happens to the community, not because we're griefers or like "stirring the pot." Dismissing us as nothing more than "non RPers" venting their "spew" (as you called it in another post) simply because we don't agree with you strikes me as the tactic of someone who can only defend his argument by telling himself that anyone outside of his "charmed circle" of like-minded RPers doesn't really matter anyway. Let me reiterate: The RP community is not monolithic. People do not always agree on what is acceptable behavior. Some people find that even callsign-type names break their immersion, while others have no issue with it. Some people think that there should be no use of double brackets (( )) because everyone should be IC all the time on an RP server anyway, while others use IC only in very specific IC situations. Some people allow any imaginable concept that doesn't directly contradict canon, while others prefer to follow a more traditional, canon-based approach to character building. Here's the thing: Nobody has the *right* to not be irritated by other people during their playtime, even if it's on an RP server. BioWare is trying to walk a reasonable middle ground by providing an RP-friendly environment while choosing not to enforce naming guidelines or behaviors that not all of the community would agree on anyway. Where such enforcement could infringe upon the behavior of players RPing in good faith but not adhering to the strictest level of RP conventions, I'd rather see less enforcement and more playstyle freedom for those who don't fit the narrow RP mold. If it's a choice between some people being annoyed and other people not being able to play as they like - even though they're well within the current rules for the server - I'll take people being annoyed. (That includes me, by the way. I find the decision BW made to allow player character Chiss to be incredibly immersion-breaking. But I deal with it. And I don't even go out of my way to avoid Chiss these days - because that agent over there might just have an incredible backstory that it'd be a shame to miss.)