Most people will remain skeptical of that. When you increase the level, you antiquate content. The new levels must offer superior items to lower levels. All the level 50 stuff suddenly loses value. All old pve content degrades into leveling activities. In order to actually have endgame, a massive overhaul of old content or a massive creation of new content must happen. That process requires a vast effort; consequentially, most MMOs only do it on expansions so that the box covers the cost of that development time. While they may do it as free content, it is extremely worrisome. Expecting that kind of overhaul to be complete and free is a bit much, even by my cheap standards. If it is free, it is far more worrisome in my mind because I doubt they'll develop the end game that is needed to accompany the change.

Responses inside.

Yes. The special event is an exodus of the refugees of the other 100+ servers.

On launch day, they told us there were working on them. http://www.darthhater.com/articles/swtor-news/19815-a-warning-regarding-launch-server-queues They were either lying or it has been over 5 months now.

So, your business model is not that you have a back up plan for lost subs, you actually plan to lose them? That's crazy man. If BW took your approach, the way you appease the queue issues was to make them quit and alleviate the queue. You guys keep talking about a plan that actually relied on dropped subs for a solution! That's the worst business model ever. Forcing people to quit because you think they might quit is dumb. It's like burning down your house because you are afraid it will catch fire.

Incorrect. The decision to have long queues (as you are suggesting) and basically guarantee that people quit by pissing them off from day one is not a good one. Go look at TORStatus. This game kept a good chunk of population for a couple of months. Having a 2+ hour long queue every evening for a month is a great way to get people to quit. Alternatively, they could open more servers and then prep for the decline (which has happened in every single MMO ever). They opened more servers. They just didn't prepare for the decline. There are other options; like using overflow servers (as seen in GW2). BW had options. Their job is to keep the sane customers happy so that those customers keep paying them. Their launch was rather enjoyable because they catered to sane people that didn't want to wait in 5+ hour long queues. It's too bad that they didn't plan ahead.

I'm not doubting your individual case, though it's not true for me. My sub has expired, I'm debating paying again (trying to figure out when server x-fers will land) and I can post in this thread right now.

This is the reason you don't understand Paige or the math. You are trying to force the numbers to be something they aren't. Paige has explained it insanely clearly. It's the number of people playing on average on your server. Paige didn't state a conclusion because there isn't one. It's just data. You understand this. You clearly state it in the post. Yet, you continue to fall right back into strange claims about the math because you are still trying to warp the data into some claim about subscriptions. As for the math errors, you haven't proven any of them. Using BW's subscription claims and haphazard guessing, the numbers do line up. If we assume that all subscribers play 80 minutes every day (9 hours and 20 minutes a week), the numbers tell us that there are 1.3 million subscribers. Of course the assumptions in the OP and the 80 minute assumption are incorrect. However, they do ballpark into a reasonable amount. If you want to run the polls and then do the math to make it more accurate, Paige would love it. I'd be interested too. Just remember what these numbers are telling you and stop trying to force them into a subscription claim. If someone uses these numbers to tell you that subs are down, you are going to need to argue about the average play time. That is a valid argument. Though you'll need to use some real math or you'll both be spitting in the wind because no one will have evidence of anything. If you can't see the point behind these numbers, there is no point in being here since you'll just warp the data to fit your own paradigm.

Feb 29, 2012: Announcement: 1.2 hitting PTS soon. Mar 16, 2012: 1.2 deployed to PTS. Apr 12, 2012: 1.2 goes live. May 25, 2012: 1.3 Announcement for PTS. http://www.darthhater.com/tag/update-1-2 Timeframe: 16 days from announce to PTS. 27 days from PTS to live. Projected Timeframe {Speculation from 1.2} : Patch hits PTS by June 11. Patch goes live by July 10. Yes, they've stated 1.3 should be faster than 1.2. My best case scenario puts it June 19.

You must not be in software dev, so I'll explain. One of the first things you learn is decouple your code. When you build your code, you want to be able to reuse it. That means that when you write a cut function, you really write a copy function that then follows up with a delete function. That is what the cut function does. It copies the data and then deletes it. You can scramble the two together; but it is terrible design. Proper design lets you use that same code for all of the functions (copy, paste, delete). They already have a delete function. It happens every time you delete on a character on your server. All they needed was the copy function. The bottom line is if the programmer wrote it in the way you are suggesting, he should be fired and told to attend a freshman course on software development.

What is the process to move data? You must copy the data. There is no way around it. You get the data and place it in a new location. Following that, you delete the data on the old location. To move a character to the PTS, it takes less work than a character copy since you no longer remove the original data. There is no possible way for it to be more difficult unless they coupled everything into a giant mess. In that case, they should lay off that guy.

The reason this is frightening is because of server transfers. They have no transfer service for the PTS; clearly they don't have one for live. And considering the PTS would actually let them test it, you'd think it would be in for 1.3.

Yes, bugs exist. It would lovely if they got fixed. The bug that the OP experienced has been in the game since day 1. I even know how to reproduce it. I reported it months ago. It's still kicking. At some point, BW needs to fix the stupid bugs.

It would have been better if you had lost.

In regards to number #2, I'd love to see proof of that. Please, post the aforementioned circle. It's easy to make this claim. The more I look at it, the less I see of it. Certain classes are just fodder and not a hard counter to anyone. Other classes have 1 counter AC (even that is questionable). Edit: Please fill in the blanks. Juggernaut: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Marauder: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Powertech: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Mercenary: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Operative: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Sniper: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Assassin: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy Sorcerer: -Hard: -Soft: -Easy

My merc friend casts missiles from 30 yards. He also has heavy armor. Nice try. Sadly OP, whoever is in charge of "balance" in this game (I doubt anyone is doing it) seems to have failed to take into account the armor differences when it comes to pvp. Enjoy hiding, because that is the only way to be competitive as a sorc. You either make your allies take the hits or you hide and sneak damage onto your opponent.

The best way to tell if you are marked is to whisper or talk on vent with people on the opposing team. Of course this activity also increases the likelihood of you being marked. In general, people tend to think they are marked more often than they actually get marked. If the match isn't a stomp and you're healing, you probably will be marked. If your server pop is insanely small (so that you can list every single BM healer in 5 lines of the chat window) and you are a BM healer, you're probably marked. Otherwise, you probably aren't.

The really sad thing is that BW knows about it. I have an operative friend who told me how to do it (they don't, but they know how). I'd post what makes it happen, but I'd rather not send that out to the masses. Read your tickets BW. It needs to be fixed. Two days ago, I had it happen 3 times with an hour. I don't know if the guy was exploiting it or if it was unintentional, but this really needs a fix.

That bold portion of the post is the largest fabrication ever to grace pvp theorycrafting. It's just not true. Force lightning is, in fact, impacted by armor. It's an energy attack. Every sorc spec in existence will have at least 50% of its damage mitigated by armor. Elemental and Internal damage are the ones that bypass armor. Those largely come from dots (and certain talented abilities). More data on it: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=350113 The majority of pvp stuff is impacted by armor. All of those increase in damage as soon as you start pvping. The end result is that damage really doesn't go down much when you transition from pve ops bosses to players. This holds true even though you actually lose damage by losing damage stats to gain expertise; which nullifies itself. Combine it with the levels of dps, crits, powerups, and resource abuse and it leads to people dying rather quickly. Now, people do need to die fairly quickly. However, it's just a bit too long. 2 seconds is a lot in pvp. 8 seconds is an eternity. They need to look at mitigation / HP and balance it so classes aren't losing 50% of their HP within 1 stun when up against a sole player. Special Note: This doesn't really hold true for operatives/scoundrels. I play a sorc (my operative is level 12) and can tell you that they only get one gimmick; that burst damage. It's offset by the fact that they have terrible sustained damage and can easily be countered with CCs (and have low armor). They need that burst. TLDR: Buff HP on pvp gear; add a few thousand (2k to 3k HP across the board). Slightly buff ops/scoundrel burst to compensate.

No, they won't last longer. The only change in battle time is caused by expertise disparities. Given the stamina increase compared to the damage increase from tier stats, you'll be hard pressed to actually maintain the same time frame. Toss in augment slots, and there is no way it will get better. It will get worse. Stamina on pvp gear needs a large boost. Yes, the math behind expertise is sound. However, the changes to the classes leave TTK extremely low. Consider the following: the average boss has 5815 armor. Every non-tank is lower than that. Assume all classes were balanced around attacking the boss. When that class goes up against a clothie, they automatically boost their dps by 25 to 30% relative to the balance point of the boss. So, a dps that does 1500 dps to a boss would actually be doing 1875 to 1950 dps on the clothie. Well, the gearing is such that pvp stats don't scale nearly as well. Luckily, we can compute the theoretical floor where pve gear would actually surpass pvp gear in effectiveness. With a 1.22 damage modifier and a 1.18 mitigation modifier, pvp gear must be at 70% (or greater) of the damage of pve gear -OR- else pve gear would actually be better. Lets assume it's at 75% effectiveness (which actually means that Columi is better than starter pvp gear and rakata is insanely close to BM). The aforementioned player is now doing 1406 to 1462 dps to the clothie. The TTK on that clothie is about 11.5 seconds. Oh, but there is more. Given the fact that crits exist (and schew the TTK) and many classes possess the ability to push out burst at the cost of sustained dps, it drops it even further. A lucky string of crits or (example) a Bounty Hunter that overheats to push his dps higher just dropped that TTK by 30%. The clothie is now looking at 8 seconds for TTK. That is 50% of his health in one stun. Can't you see the problem here? Yes, TTK actually hasn't changed much from a generalized perspective. However, most pve-ers stopping pvping. They can't use the gear for pve, so they don't do it. They don't like losing, so they don't do it. Now, you are left with people that truly pvp and the vast majority of them outdamage the casual pve-ers that were just there to get a weapon to hold them over until they killed Karagga. Most people pre-patch couldn't drop me by 50% of my HP in 4 seconds because pvp was not their thing. The good pvpers could; however, they are the majority now that the casuals are gone. Yeah the expertise math is fine. It works great. However, the health provided by pvp gear needs to be boosted across the board. When people can drop you by 50%+ of your HP in 4 seconds, it really doesn't make things fun in pvp. It needs to be brought up to about 12 seconds TTK. And armor / mitigation differences compared to dps output really needs to be looked out.

I didn't pay attention to the credits (sadly), but at 50, you typically see anywhere from 80 to 160 comms per win depending on time. Losses typically ballpark 40 to 80; again depending on time. I played a hutball, we won 6:0. Took roughly 12 minutes. I got more than 8 medals and ended with 160 comms. A guildmate on the other team got 80 comms for it. Faster matches, naturally, drop the rewards across the board. Winners still get 1.5x to 2x more comms. Though the loser never gets zero. A guildie lost Alderaan (the opposition 3 capped). He only had 4 medals at the end. He got 40 comms for the trouble.

Is it though? Mathematically speaking, this is just wrong. So, we get 5 comms per medal. Lets say a player gets 6 after a game lasting 6 minutes. That player is looking at 30 comms plus the loss and time offset (unknowns). The players is getting 5+ per minute. Now, if the player gets 12 medals after 15 minutes, how many comms does the player need in order for your logic to be true? Oh, 75+ comms, that sure isn't going to happen! The fastest way to get rewards when you know you'll lose is to zerg for medals and let them win as fast as possible. Do you guys even do math in your office?

That only works in one warzone. Please give real medal advice if you are going to give any. NC: Attacker medals are only given upon capture of the objective. You must be channeling the cap in order to get them. Defender medals are handed out freely. Hutball: Attacker medals are given for grabbing the ball, passing the ball, and scoring the ball. If I pull the carrier across the fire and then heal him while he runs the ball, I get 0 attacking points. Defender medals are given for killing people (most notably the ball carrier or a few for killing people near your goal). Alderaan: Attacker medals are only given to the person who caps the turret. Defender medals given freely. Voidstar: Attacker medals given to the planter only. Maybe if you stand right next to the door forever, as a clothie, that's about the dumbest idea ever. Defender medals given if you sit extremely close to the door (see previous comment). Yeah, you can easily get three medals. Assuming you are actually good, breaking 6 isn't too bad. I've gotten 7 in nearly every match I've been in (assuming I actually wasn't outnumbered by 3+ players). However, for the undergeared folks, it is very difficult. The "objectives" medals are insanely flawed. I don't know why you guys keep pretending they are super easy to get. The only ones that are easy to get involve sitting at the capped node. The rest are not that easy to get.

Many people want an increased reward from warzones. Others do not. I decided to do a little math to actually determine if quitting truly is beneficial. TLDR: After looking at the numbers, I can tell you that the rewards need to be buffed. The losing team should receive at least 60% of the reward of the winning or team or WZ hopping becomes viable. If you want undergeared people to stay in a match against a premade, it must be at least 75%. Math: Assume you have an average match time (match time includes queue time for each match), of 15 minutes. Assuming hopping increased that to 18 minutes and assuming you get 42.5% of the rewards of a win, with a win rate of 40%, if hopping brings you over 62.7%, you begin to gain rewards. Yesterday, I went up against a couple of republic premades repeatedly. I won 2 out of my ten matches. If I had queue hopped and won 1 more match at the cost of losing 16 minutes of time, I would have gained rewards. That's poor design BW. Yes, you can tell me to get my own premade. Guess what? Those repubs were my guild-mates! I was on my imp because I have friends on both sides and after losing repeatedly and getting jack for it, I did go join them. I got on my repub, joined the aforementioned premade and actually got rewards for my trouble. It's really not fun to be stomped by the other team. Getting stomped and getting very little for it is just bad design. Right now, people are getting so little that queue hopping can be proven to be mathematically superior than actually staying in the match! Please fix it BW. You can give the victor more rewards, but your current balance point (right around 50% or less if you don't get 8 comms) is too low.

And where do the theorycrafters get the data? I did theorycrafting in WoW; got in it rather deeply too. I can tell you that when a large number of sane people say something feels off, something usually is off. I saw Blizz make tiny mistakes that made for some crazy gltiches (like giving druids an extra 10% armor due to talent changes). I saw glitches as a DK where the armor modifier would reset and unless you changed presences, you'd get hit like a truck. Given the number of people that said "umm, why is everyone melting?" and combine it with the fact that gleeful friends were decimating people in full BM, I'd actually be willing to give rather good odds that there was a glitch. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a fix in this patch. If not, I fully intend on getting naked, logging, then putting my gear back on when I log back in. Glitches happen often when large patches hit. While the math is solid, I still think there is an issue. It's good to know that it is supposed to be balanced. But I wouldn't dismiss the vast majority of play experience when the numbers on the character sheet don't match what is happening in game.