/signed

This would work but it is very very very unlikely. The game engine simply cannot support it. There is really no point in continuing to ask for this feature or use it in arguments. The chance of this happening is probably <2%. Back to the point, choosing specific warzones would mess up the que because it is only server wide. There are not enough people in que to allow them to pick which wz's they want. The wait times would increase by a lot if this was implemented, which in turn would cause more people to quit playing because they have to wait an hour plus to get a PVP match. This would be bad for PVP in every way.

LOL, that made my day.

WOW, so many trolls in here. I hate the internet. I remember when that happened to me once, and i agree with you. I was not expecting it at all and if me me feel really good. Too bad people ruined this thread when all you were trying to do was bring something happy to the PVP forums for once.

This is likely what will happen. This sounds like a good idea, but public voice chat rooms are never as good of an idea in practice as they sound on paper. It wish this was not true, but unfortunately, it is.

This might be the single best post anyone has ever made on these forums full of worthless crap. It actually contains facts instead of basless opinion. It also is from a person who is actually in the software field and actually knows wgat it takes to write and debug software. Taking the servers down for a week does not mean the issues will be fixed. As a software developer myself i can tell you we have internal systems for testing current fixes before they are deployed. When a fix is satisfactory it is put live. Taking the servers down does not mean all these fixes will be instantly ready. Not for the flaming part. Op please learn more about what you are talking about beore you go and tell people you could do their job bettr or they need to do it faster because you think software development is an instant process. Note: sorry for spelling/grammer. Doing this from phone.

This is a pretty good indication that it WILL be implemented in the future. The legacy system is being implemented in the next major patch in March. They officially announced this. The current choose a name thing is really just to hype the fact that it will actually do something later. I know this thread is actually pretty old but since I saw it bumped to the first page today I though I would give future people reading this the correct information. Specifically people that do not read the patch notes/Bioware announcements like this person who posted this yesterday after they announced this: http://www.swtor.com/blog/design-notes-game-update-1.1 I would also like to point out from a software developer point of view changing a legacy name is currently possible. A dev could manually run the database command to do so. Bioware has simply not yet provided the GMs and CS reps with a tool to easily do this.

This would be awesome. Any and/or all of those ideas sound really fun. I would also like to point out the devs already said they are planning/working on additions and expansions to the space combat. Hopefully this makes in in there! +1

I just want to put in my 2 cents coming from a computer scientist prospective on this since no seems to have said anything about it yet. First i want to say that I like this idea. Having servers be different named phases that you can switch to is actually a pretty cool idea. Having not actually ever developed an MMO or any video game for that matter I am not sure if this is possible. Based on what I do know however i would say that it is probably possible, but it needs to be designed that way from the beginning. It would be near impossible to convert an existing game to a system like that. Now for the reason I wanted to post. I want to point out that about 50% of your argument is invalidated by the fact that TOR's (or any other MMO for that matter) "servers" are actually already a collection of physical hardware servers or a "server cluster". That is a lot of the reason for loading screens in games like this. A lot of the time when you are at a loading screen you are transferring physical hardware servers. This allows the areas on the same server to have no loading required, ex. an entire planet. To provide an example, have you ever been out questing on an alt that is in your guild with all your raid buddies on their mains in the major city, then all of a sudden, they all log out at once? This is because the physical hardware server that hosts the major city has crashed while your questing zone's physical hardware server is still running.

So, unlike 98% of the posts in this thread I am going to actually use factual evidence to back my statements here, instead of making baseless claims that cannot be proven. From some relatively creditable sources, including a thread on ArenaJunkies: http://www.warcry.com/articles/view/interviews/6773-Five-Years-of-Warcraft-Speaking-With-Blizzards-Rob-Pardo.2 http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/11/13/blizzard-arenas-were-a-mistake/ http://www.arenajunkies.com/topic/109334-blizzard-adding-arenas-to-the-game-was-a-mistake/ Blizzard developers have stated that implementing area was a bad idea. It caused a lot of headaches for the developers trying to balance classes in a game that was designed to be primarily a community pve game. It was a sink hole of time and resources that could have be better used improving/implementing other features that could have made the overall game a better experience for everyone. That being said I am not against competitive pvp. I am however against small scale (as someone used that term earlier) pvp because it will likely cause that same issues WOW had. This game is a PVE story driven game with pvp play secondary. I think some kind of rated Warzone system might be very fun, considering there are 8 player Warzones that you could easily make permanent teams for. This game is not balanced or designed for pvp in a small scale manner. It is designed to be a team based game with all of the classes working together to protect/heal/compliment each other.

I am using this as my sig.

I am not trying to be mean here but I do not know where you guys are getting your information. DVI/HDMI is a digital signal and VGA is an analog signal. Digital signals carry A LOT more data. The answer to this question is very simple. DVI/HDMI is superior to VGA always and if you can use it you should. If you really don't believe me or are reading all of the ridiculous posts to the contrary in this thread, Google it, you will find the same answer there.

You can actually use this argument to prove why you still need two copies of the game. You each have you own XBox live account. That is the answer right there. You cannot think of this as purchasing the software twice. You are purchasing two different account accesses. You can download the software for free from their website to any and all computers that you want. You need to buy the license to use that software however for every person that is going t use it.

+1 I 100% agree with this. I would add some things to this petition as well: party members targets, your companions target, and unless I am really missing something, a focus target. I though I saw a focus option during beta but I cannot find it again. Also related to this, UI custimazation would be great. I know this was talked about before but I wanted to mention it.

October 26th just got e-mail first wave.