That's what you are doing, in fact... You just pay for having 25 extra endurance and 25% bonus to Project's final damage. ...I have never interpreted anything like stacking +25% Project, rofl, that would be sooo OP. What BW should do is finnally ADDING the 25% bonus to damage to the tooltip of Project itself so more ppl could start trusting tooltips (If you check the damage you do with a Project after Shadow Training you will realize you do 25% damage more... The tooltip stays as if you were a Sage, although)... ...It's paradoxical that a working mechanic, Shadow Training, updates Project's tooltip wrong while Clarvoyance updates the tooltip correctly but its 1st stack is bugged and does not modify the real damage nor the tooltip . Bugs can be wonderfull .

As one of the replies imply... I think the "idea flow" is more or less like this: "Untold" Han Solo stories -> Firefly Show -> Space Cowboy looks I liked the show and I immediatly catched the reference to Malcom on the Gunslinger Cinematic Trailer back in beta (In particular the "Peacemaker"-like guns he uses).

This subject was brang also on beta and it's a simple taste related issue: - PvP -> You hate cover because common environments do not favor it. - PvE -> You like the fresh approach to it by giving very cinematics firefights and there are plenty of environments to support it. If you are bothered by Cover you simply chose the wrong class, I'm afraid... Remove cover from the Smuggler Class and you have a Trooper (Specially accurate if your AC is the Gunslinger). I'm assuming that the OP has practiced enough with basic cover mechanics (Beyond the simple "rotations with powers linked to it") to appreciate the net advantage you have against other ranged attackers and is just bothered by the fact that, indeed, on most PvP environments is hard to use (We can also analyze why is so easy to skip it by the classes that, in theory, should be more usefull against).

DoTs/Debuffs you or your companion places on others also takes you back into combat.

Just a bunch of facts: - If you need to compare your DPS with others in real time, you are just looking to showoff. If you want to improve your DPS and analyze a combat you just need what BW is providing. - Behind the reasson "it's too slow to compare" e-peen contesters are just hiding the fact they have not enough game mechanics knowledge to compare different logs coming from different players. They just need the "black magic" of parser programmers to adapt their gameplay to them. So no, a comparative tool doesn't help you learn the game better or faster than the combat log that's been provided by BW. - Ranks on DPS meters just promote average DPS... They systematically hide burst DPS which is as important to fullfill the goal than the miriad of stupid things (mainly AOEing when it's not needed) E-peen contesters do to "score high". OFC, linked to this is the systematic "parser discrimination" as the new popular way to create FOTM builds/classes. - Threatmeters are basically equal to removing threat from a game... Unless some ppl refuses to use them, makes ALL "reaction" tools (like taunts & agro dumpers) irrelevant = poorer gameplay. They are usually needed by ppl that simply have no clue how important is to learn how threat is generated on PvE... Basically PvPers that want to PvE casually. That's why I'm so sure I will not see Threatmeters on the game... ...It's one of those Priority Reassons to cancel my Sub... I just like Team PvE too much to whistand it seeing it converted to pointless predictable scenarios were you spend more time looking at moving bars than looking at the enemies you need to kill... It's what I did on WoW and Rift and what I will do here. EDIT: Oh, btw, when you see ppl claiming that BW "confirmed" dpsmeters & threatmeters in the future, they are just having some issues distinguishing between "confiming the pressence of a feature" and "thinking on the pressence of a feature"... Which, ofc, makes a lot of a difference on what you will find really implemented at a given time.

The problem with "PvP" vs "PvE" perception is... ...Each side lacks experience from the other side gameplay. So what you usually see ppl discussing is not that a given change is PvE or PvP driven is that how each person perceives each change from their side of the game. Then you have the well known fact that for some reasson the PvP section of a game is ALWAYS the noisier on the forums... And by this, I mean that there is a higher proportion of PvP driven players that post on forums. There is also a higher proportion of PvP players reading the forums... It's obvious, a given PvP player results is driven by what other players do that, in turn, makes very valuable to be up-to-date on what the others are doing. With the above bias explained on what you see on the opinions in the forums... ...I don't agree with the OP. There are changes triggered by PvP and others by PvE, in fact, most of the changes triggered on 1.2 are just altering the efficiency of the cycles classes use to fight in long combats... Which has always a bigger impact on PvE than PvP. For example, the Medpack change is another clear example, already confirmed it's a direct consequence of how tight BW wants to adjust the difficulty on PvE encounters (BW now just need to be sure that the basic premise, which is, "on PvP players stay for longer OOC" is true for all classes & builds, which is not the case ATM). If I do a lookback excercise, in fact, the main bulk of changes on classes is mainly PvE because they basically aim at killing Hybrids, to increase the attention each class has to pay to play (Removing easy rotations) and affecting efficiency over long fights. There have been some changes related to the duration of CC (And associated changes to resolve) and the specific kill of some particularly popular PvP build, but you have never seen an "across the board" PvP driven change as we are having on 1.2 for PvE. To end the loop with the beggining... What I have seen is ppl thinking is their side of the game fuelling each and every change. Regarding what the main attention of the Devs is on a MMO, I learned to follow a simple rule... Check the main progress mechanism of a given MMO (Loot on this one) and then proceed to evaluate how much teaming effort (Teams is what distinguish a MMO from other types of game) is needed for a player to progress... The activity that requires more is the main drive behind game changes. You can perceive such a HUGE difference on SWTOR... Which shouldn't be a surprise... A story driven MMO were story is stricly triggered by PvE actions is already a loud enough statement for me.

Exactly... Or following the new "labeling" for civil time, EU has moved from CET to CEST... As you can guess: CEST = CET + 1h.

No... it will stay at 12 GMT. GMT time reference DO NOT obey DST.

On a potentially world-wide product they can't simply follow DST as it's a strict political/economical decission each country adopts (or not)... ...If you also pay attention to how "randomly" DST are applied on US, you will realize why all US-based Devs has grown used to simply ignore DST (On a technical level having sytem clocks going up and down in sudden jumps, in general, is not a wise decission to take). It will screw EU custommers even more by increasing the "Desert" feeling some servers have on the mornings during weekends 1h more? Surely. BW is showing a total lack of awareness/care for the implications of this and the impact is having on EU Communities? Absolutely. They are been cynics by trying to justify keeping this absurd Daily Reset paradigm (Carefully placed to minimize the "Desert effect" across all US Timezones ONLY) by linking it to coordinated Maintenance (That have a very strong reasson to be performed synchronously across all your Data Centers)? Totally.

Interesting... In my way to play it's one of the top priority powers to use... ...go figure. Regarding your floating point: - 1 Point in ShRe = 12 extra energy each time you pop out of stealth. - 1 Point in InTa = 10% per hit of "not wasting" 25 extra energy each time you use SS. According to your own words you don't stay in stealth often so... IF you can't spend it anywhere else, I would go for InTa for the occasional boosted SS (A lot of ppl insist on ignore that 50% armor bypassing is as important as the 25 energy save, specially against heavy armor and specially if you want to trigger a damage burst.).

I understood you... ...Let me rephrase... What makes you bring a Shadow as DPS to a group fight? I better answer with a radical example: SOA with everything but healers as Shadows (I'm going to the peak of the asymetry with other DPSers). "Bringing usefullness" to a group doesn't have to be always to provide a party/ops buff. That's why I bring 1.2 to the table... When damage avoidance while DPSing becomes more of an issue. I'm aware that this advantage (100% active avoidance on relative low CD, 45s/60s) is extremely easy to kill if BW starts to include systematically instant powers hard to predict (or instead of powers, direct attacks)... But so far, on EV & KP has always been an edge I enjoyed (And my healers also).

Will keep it short... ...Learn to evaluate appropiate use of Resilience and you will know what a Shadow gives, no1 else can... ...Collaterally wait to see 1.2 "1 Medpack per combat" policy and the increase on the importance on which DPS classes incurr in extra healing, while doing DPS, from the ones that do not... Specially as 2/3 healers got balanced to be closer to the long-term performance of Scoundrels.

First of all this not by far an original suggestion, it has appeared under different incarnations on past MMOs (Some examples): - AA on EQ. - Horizontal progress on AoC. The Goal The goal is very simple... Increase the visibility of characters, that in turn requires giving motivation for ANY player (new ones or old ones) to get involved into day-by-day activities on your MMO. The Changes - Instead of paying money or automatically unlock ALL options under your current Legacy Level (LL from now on), each LL should instead give you a certain ammount of Legacy Points (LP). - Keep the special requirements triggered by game achievements (Like having a certain character reach certain Level, unlock a certain PvP Valor Rank, complete a given quest/FP/OP or reach a certain crew skill level, etc). - Legacy experience requirement for level up should remain constant across different levels. - You "unlock" Legacy features by spending your Legacy Points on a given feature, not by reaching a certain LL and/or spending Credits. - A new category of Legacy Rewards should be tied to the current character but the LP pool should be the same for ALL characters. This means there would be a section that can potentially differ from character to character based on how the player decides to spend LP on the "character-bound" section. - When a legacy feature can be improved in different levels, there should be a sharp diminishing returns curve BOTH in the effect and in the cost. Meaning that a player that wants to maximize an effect has to pay considerable more than a player that wants to just access the basic functionality. - No Legacy Respecc possible... Instead, players should be encouraged to earn more LP. Overall Effects - Potential Open Ended system that do not penalize new users wanting to access a specific feature nor it's made trivial by having each new feature automatically acquired by players at high LL. - Conditioning Advancement to strict game visibility, not just by "Credit Injections". - Full control to players on how they want to priorize their Legacy Progress. - Full control to Devs on how long each INDIVIDUAL feature should last through the sharp diminishing returns curve. I know that it's late for 1.2 as moving from LL to LP requires far more than just "giving X LP per LL level", but... It would be a waste to not turn Legacy into an Open-Ended progress mechanism that motivates both new players and old ones.

Or... You could stop selling a 99 stack in "comfortable" chunks of 1.

If you refer to the tokens of my idea... They aren't the current tokens allowing you to buy a whole Rakata piece... ...It's a simple implementation allowing you to convert ANY old rakata enh/mod into any other Rakata enh/mod (preserving mod -> mod and enh -> enh, ofc)... Once. So, like energy, the ammount you have before and after the process is the same... It's just transformed.

Obviously they are short on time because what they should have done is the following: - A special "part scavenger" that accepted OLD rakata Mod/Enh and give New Rakata Mod tokens and New Rakata Enh Tokens on 1 by 1 basis. - A special "new part vendor" were players could trade their "New Rakata Mod/Enh Tokens" into new Rakata Mods and Rakata Enh, again, on a 1 by 1 basis. All Rakata gear acquired after 1.2 will have all their Mod/Enh labeled as new, preventing post 1.2 Gear to benefit from this "conversion" mechanism. And voilá, with independence if you were a pack-rat, if you did or did not mod... Every1 will be able to trade old mods/enh for new ones on a 1 vs 1 basis, ONCE. The above approach is how things should be done each time you update a system of items composed of independent parts, not just because it's fairer for every1, it's because you give in hands of your custommer the decission on which part loadout is better for their gameplay, saving you the hassle to check one by one each container to "guess" which part you leave from which part you change... ...And BW will find this situation more times in the future but... ...Due to the lack of time, they will simply go with this "dirty approach" that will penalize more the ppl that has been using the related gear for longer (and thus has more chances to overwrite/loss the original parts).

First of all... While migrating from Columi to Rakata was quite common for our tanks to replace Rakata Enh with accuracy with a variety of Columi Enh with just defensive stats while waiting for direct drops of Rakata Enh with usefull stats (Even some of our DPSers did exactly the same... But not to such a wide scale, some accuracy is more usefull for DPSers). I would advice you to do the same BUT with a BIG WARNING. On 1.2 Rakata default enhancements are going to be modified and George Zeller here has already confirmed this will only happen if the Rakata piece has the default Mod + Enh you bought at from the vendor (He didn't specify if you could customize 1 of the slots and the other would be updated) so... ...If you do the above to improve your performance until 1.2 hits, BE SURE you keep all the "default" mod/enh stored so you can plug them back to leave all your Rakata gear in its default state right before 1.2 comes live.

Erm well... With the slight difference that each proc of ST does close to 4 times the damage of CT and double the damage of FT.

- Project without Circling Shadows (That requires you to be on Shadow Technique) does less dps per energy point than Clarvoyant strike (Specially if you have the PvE 4-pieces bonus) (If you are upheaval specced then it stays more efficient than CS even without CiSha)... But far less efficient than FB or FW assisted SS. - You loose around 10% of your total force on each fight. Some ppl neglect the impact of earning 10 force each 12 seconds (rounding effects of procs) on a class that has a base regeneration of 8 force/s (If you want to think on optimal rates... Not having Shadow Technique on reduces your base regen from 9/s to 8/s). On a class that's basically force starved... on long fights, this translates to close to 10% less DPS. I repeat, I'm using broadly rounded arguments to make you see the impact of some, apparently small, magnitudes. - Your Force Breach swaps to do sucky Kinetic Damage instead of Internal that hits very hard on crits. Those are the main reassons... ...Yes, Shadow Technique is as important for Deep Infil as the others are for each tree.

- You know that the increase on expertise will not be there until you farm the new gear and that for most players it will be nerfed initially (less than 300 expertise curve has been nerfed). In particular check how carefully the "turning point" has been chosen in regard of some popular "PvP + PvE" hybrid gear recommendations. - Are you also aware that you can heal yourself for 10000000 million points and you still be screwed if you can't sustain it for more than 20 seconds? Most healing on PvP is pure overheal... The key concepts are how fast you can heal yourself between movement phases (ie avoiding interruptions) and how often you are forced to take a break to regen your resource bar. - Have you seen ANY confimation on PTS that Expertise is STILL affecting damage increase, damage decrease and healing increase in the same way as now? Zeller has repeatedly warned ppl about the changes on the underlying mechanics on PvP in 1.2. I still haven't found a decent post from a decent tester that has checked in detail if this is the case (And I mean checking... Reading tooltips is something any1 can do).

At BW they just learned to translate properly that when a PvP Grinder ask for: "I want objective based world PvP" In reality they mean: "I want to maximize my grinding speed... Fighting other players slows it down, you know" I just can hope they also realize soon that the problem is not the design... Is some of the players that are encouraged to use it... ...When your PvP is invaded by the Grinders, the 1st thing you need to address are the rewards... And then the PvP content itself.

+1 less buff seeking and more action looking Add an option for OTHERS to NOT listen to it... ...SCREW THE WHALES!!!... ...SAVE THE MANIAC SCOUNDREL!!!

Weakening healing is not the best term... ...Weakeing sustained healing is the best short way to describe it. Commandos sustainable cycle outputs less healing (Put closer to the Smuggler capabilities)... Sages can't avoid draining their full bar if they try to go full HPS. Additionally, for them, the slow, but efficient, heal stays as a slow heal (They can't boost its casting speed to 1.5s any longer)... This is probably the biggest impact for PvP as Sages/Inqs willl be more vulnerable to interruption if they try to use the slow heal.

It's a real pain in the *** and is the default behaviour of most Bosses. The real pain is that they force you to stay so far away from them that even using force speed you don't reach them fast enough after pulling, making you loose dps (As an Infil, you are interested in staying on stealth for the extra force on opening). So they just need to put the stealth purging (That's there to prevent stealth teams to skip content) at the same range than visual spotting (It's so incredibly absurd atm, that the 1st Boss on T5 HM can be skipped by simply walking visible... But it's impossible to skip it if you stealth... A B S U R D).

Erm... There is nothing to discuss here. Preference-wise You can't discuss what some ppl is more comfortable with... Is as pointless as to discuss if pink is better than yellow. If a player is not comfortable with his control scheme... Doen't matter how "good" he can be, he will become tired faster and less focused on the activity he has at hand. Performance-wise Nothing to discuss neither, a clicker is imposing himself the following limitations (At different grades, depending on physical shape, attention level, etc, etc) Less actions per unit of time - Most actions requires 2 pipelined steps. Click to select your target followed by click to trigger the action. Meanwhile a Key + Mouse can perform this 2 steps concurrently (or very close to). The degradation is propotional to how often you are forced to change the target of your actions and the distance between the targeting elements and the action elements of the UI used. Less combat awareness - Clicking a given button requires your EYES to follow the mouse cursor. Activating a key press do not. This means that a key user stays more time looking at the action increasing the chances to react faster at changing conditions. Less precission while moving - The fact that Mouse Steering allows for variable rotation speeds means that players that use keys can choose to minimize the time needed to perform any facing change WHILE activating powers. Impossible Actions Depending on the details of the UI of the particular game a clicker cannot take advantage of some specific, and very common, maneuvers like: - Mouse Hover Targeting. Specifically designed to cut down reaction time for key users facing frequent target swaps. - Preaiming Ground AOE reticles. A clicker simply cannot pretarget the zone to trigger a ground targeted AOE attack. - Multiple actions. A clicker simply cannot activate multiple buttons at the same time... A key user can do it arranging buttons in rows. So repeating myself... there is nothing to discuss. There are users that sacrifice performance for comfortability that will help them stay focused for longer on the game... ...And users that want to give always the max performance possible.