If it builds resolve and breaks on damage, that's the worst If it builds resolve and doesn't break on damage, that isn't quite as bad, and in the absence of a trap, a judgement call in my opinion, if you think that will let the carrier get focus fired dead If it slows or immobilizes, doesn't build resolve or break on damage, like sever force, that's the best, spam all match, especially on the tanks, from the time they spawn out to wherever they're going

I wouldn't be able to rank them in order of general satisfaction. There is much I like about each one more than the others. i.e.: Asheron's Call (1) - character development and skills based experience expenditure no talent points Dark Age of Camelot - realm versus realm versus realm pvp, two factions = ok, thre factions = awesome World of Warcraft - playing the auction house Star Wars - stories, story lines and more story lines (with voice acting) Combine all the best of these in a steam punk setting and I'd be set for life

I can't say with certainty, but I suspect after a month it transfers to either the next active highest ranking officer in the guild, or maybe to just one of the remaining 3 charter members if they are still in the guild. I've seen guild leadership in two of my guilds change when I would for example, not play one faction or another for a month, without even lapsing in subscription. Fortunately for me the only people in the guild are family or friends, so getting it back is/was not a problem. Honestly, since the transition to f2p, I do have to wonder if a subscription has any effect. My guess is that it's a lack of activity. If you are still in the guild and the character designated guildmaster is not playing any longer, there's hope that it should just transition back to you. But you do make a case for having a customer service rep making that happen immediately for you. If the person designated is still in guild and being a douchebag, then things get trickier. Best of luck to you

My experience has been Imperial Guild > Republic Guild > Republic Pug > Imperial Pug Average republic pug = 2-4 people in recruit Average imperial pug = 4-6 people in recruit And I've noticed just as many pubs rerolling the other side as imps, and vice versa. I figure I'm part of the problem for the imps. I just completed my 50 operative/medic this weekend and spent all weekend healing into a half set of war hero. Hopefully by next weekend I'll be in a complete set and be part of the solution. One thing I'll say about playing both sides is that I have a much keener sense of who the really dangerous and effective players are, no matter what side I'm playing from. The faction simulations are very insightful.

I took about 6 weeks off from the game, and when I came back I thought PVP in general seemed to be at a much slower pace and wins were coming more easily despite playing poor by my own standards and having to relearn a lot of muscle memory and target prioritization. But I don't think it's an imperial only change. Even republic versus republic matches seem easier for me. I couldn't tell you if it is people learning and gearing alts, a matching system change, or just a flood of f2p players who subscribed and don't know how to play well yet. But having only played republic pvp I can say without a doubt my win loss ratio versus any match up since coming back has been better than it ever was. I'm personally really liking that last part.

I play all three healer types on the Republic side, and my scoundrel gets more votes by far, and my sage the least by far. On my commando, if I'm spewing the green beam of "come kill me I'm a healer and this is how to find me" I get votes for clearly being bold. But I find myself shorting sages on votes quite often when I don't actually see them healing when I'm playing my tank or dps for the simple reason that most often when I do find them they are fluffing their numbers with noble sacrifice and healing themself. To a lesser extent I don't rewared the ones that are casting salvation and begging people to fight on the aoe spot. Sorry, but I'm not going to stand there in the current class distribution of warzones and get roflsmashed by a combination of 5 marauders and/or juggernauts in less than one tick of that salvation aoe. I reward the healers that are in the right place at the right time healing the right people, not the ones by themselves in a corner healing themselves, or healing themself for most of their total. That's not to say sometimes healing yourself is exactly what you should do. i.e Like if have half the opposing team of baddies on you away from an objective or facing the wrong way so your team can ninja it when they're being stupid. As someone who plays all the healers, I almost always give my vote to anyone who puts forth even a moderate effort at producing protection points, whether its guarding me, someone else, or simply taunting. I often vote for what I want to reward and encourage (good play)

"If those premades were so awesome, then why aren't they running ranked warzones?" It's because just like solo players, they don't like to pay to lose more often than they win. Losing is not fun, and rewards alone will never fix that. Otherwise you would see everyone doing ranked, because getting geared up, even losing 100% of the time, is faster on ranked. Once the alpha is determined in a ranked/hierarchical system, the challenging population always fall and the betas try to justify their beat down on the omegas to make themselves feel better, period. That's nature at it's most essential. I'd love to hear the opinion of THE top ranked teams. Not of any beta wanna-be's. My guess is that you wouldn't hear them crying about queue times being long in ranked. I bet they'd be crying about there being NO ONE at all being worth fighting. I would also bet that they often challenge people to do ranked and get ignored, and know it's because no one essentially wants to play them for a guaranteed loss. Betas' egos are fragile, even more so than Omega's who accept failure often.

This is a protected memory mode issue with Windows 7 applications. The mouse software is being prevented from communicating directly with SWTOR. That's why generic system button calls work and custom key binds requiring the mouse software do not. You can either add and/or raise security permissions in Windows 7, SWTOR and the mouse software so they can talk to each other. Or you can take the easier way out and turn off this Windows 7 protected memory mode. I don't recall exactly, but it's a slider that either dumbs it down to minimum or maybe off.

Guarding healers and taunting targets attacking them can help the protection numbers. But the mistake I see defense tanks make in pvp is that they are guarding the best geared healer. That may be wise, but it can be the cause of small protection numbers in that, one, they tend to know how not to be targets and get hit all the time, and two, they have great gear and mitigate more on their own. If you want to see those numbers soar, guard the healer in recruit gear. Aside from them being greatful, and you effectively power multiplying their contribution, they will get focused and your guard will go off like crazy. Then you'll see really high protection numbers. Taunts are much simpler. If the opponent keeps wacking on the same target, you're reducing their damage even though they are ignoring you. The aoe taunt on someone focusing on a healer you're guarding will get you about 4-5 medals in 15 seconds. And if you do that all match you end up with protection numbers that look like top end dps or healing numbers.

Winning after some pvp guilded full war hero quits, before the match even starts, which is what I see routinely, is extremely satisfying. It's like they're assessing their team and judging you a loser before things even start. The only way that gets sweeter is if you seem them backfill on the other side and you still win. Har har har. On a topical tangent, if anyone really wants to marginalize and reduce the quitter aspect, then advocate that EA give social points for enduring rather than rage quitting. It won't stop pros slumming down from rateds from whining about baddies. But I guarantee you queue times will shorten and there will be baddies and alts of baddies up the ying yang doing pvp to get the latest sparkle dust spewing mutant droid pet doohicky for everyone to roflstomp. They'll be roflstomped and they'll like it!

Handicapping is the answer. Bolstering failed at this. Skip bolstering altogether and handicap the result not the match. Think bowling leagues. You don't bolster the less skilled players by letting them throw the ball three times. With handicapping, they still lose on the raw number, but the actual victory is determined after applying the handicap. Whoever plays above their average more wins, not the person with the highest raw number. This is of course for non-rated matches. Rated matches are like going for the prize money in the pro tournament, and you compete against others. Random/handicapped matches are for the drunk redneck scrubs who are there to have fun, and who actually win when the put down the bottle for a night because they are competing against their past performance. You know you're awesome when you win prize money. You know you truly suck and are getting worse when you continue to lose handicapped matches. PvP populations dwindle because unless you are competing for the bragging rights of being the best, you don't pay to lose all the time in something many people think (but isnt actually) random

Simple fix Rated queue - 8 man group vs 8 man group Group/Solo queue - any non-eight man group combination vs any non-eight man group combination Solo queue - no grouping of any kind Everyone can have it their way. The only thing that will change is that those thinking their way is the right way will soon find that the majority of pvp players are not in their group no matter how you divide it up. You can compete for a rank. You can play with your friends for no rank. You can play by yourself in a "random draw". "Random draw" is how I interpret what EA really wants out of solo queue since Baron Deathmark states that's how the Huttball groups are drawn. But then again he does say cheating is encouraged too, so maybe all the groupers are "cheating" their way to easier victories. You decide.

I like this suggestion. But I would go one step further. Add a legacy perk that you can buy at legacy level 50 that allows all legacy experience that you would have received if there was no cap on it, to apply as experience points to any character in your legacy that you don't already have at level 50.

I play a TK spec'd sage. My heals suck. But all it takes is one or two to get marked. And yes, they do chase me to all ends of the map trying to lol smash/sweep me. It's actually been quite fun in recruit gear on the way to BM gear, because there's nothing more satisfying than seeing 1/2 a team deal with me instead of the ones actually doing the dps and healing. When 4 WH/BM marauders/juggies chase me all match, I win, even if I die every 30 seconds. I just succeeded in 2 minutes of crowd control on half a team of baddies every time I respawn. I can't even recall a time when guarding one objective that the raging bulls didn't chase me for 30 seconds before capping something. It's like they all see noob and have to get some. I suppose if you want to do that with a dps capable sorc in decent gear, you still win, but to a lesser degree, since you might actually kill some of them along the way. They might actually refocus on the objective when they respawn.

If Warzones = Slot Machine then I would probably win more. Slot machines are regulated and required to pay out a certain amount of the time or have defined odds. I have never seen a statement from Bioware (and I wish I would) that would state their intent for non-ranked/rated warzone matches. Are they intended to be balanced, in the most global sense, with overall matches turning out as 50/50 win loss ratios? Are individual win/loss ratios supposed to balance out over time? Or is it ok that two 8 man premades (one imp and one rep) go 199 and 1 while 200x8 soloers go 1 and 199 to balance that win/loss ratio out? I understand rated stuff is clearly defined as without any balancing rules, to define the pyramid. But is group/solo queue really supposed to be the same way? The core issue isnt skill or gear, it's the advantage that making a group up with an ideal class breakdown has over some random mashup. I don't mind a rock vs paper matchup as long as every so often I get a rock vs scissor matchup. How would you like to be randomly be thrown into a group with just rocks and scissors when some other group avoids the random matchup and makes sure he has two rocks, three scissors and three pieces of paper every time? That's what actually demonstrates that unranked Warzones do NOT equal slot machines which is the real problem.

Having 8 50s and all companions' legacy bonuses unlocked, I can tell you Companion quests get unlocked when two conditions are met: 1. When you have passed the required affection level 2. When you are beyond class quest chapter endings 10k affection on level 1 will only get you so far in the companion quests. Then when you complete a class chapter (1&2), BOOM, more companions quests will unlock. If you are past chapter two, and have maximum affection, and can complete the quests (some make you do things like go to Hoth and save Aric Jorgan's deadbeat, er deadeyes, buddies), then the legacy bonus is unlocked. They all seem to give you some sappy "Oh, I'll be there for your children" quest or "I'm your buddy for life" drama as their last quest. So if you had that, and your not yet at 10k and wondering where that last quest is, you've probably already had it and didn't realize it.

My money would be on 2-8 people in a group at the top of the queue sitting there wondering if the queue is broken because their premade of 2-7 players won't back fill one empty slot with their people. I doubt it has to do with people being afk.

Regardless of gear, regardless of skill, the primary problem with pre-made (not even ranked) groups is that it takes the random factor out of match. If the game was ever in any way intended to be a balanced regarding win/loss ratio (and Bioware should clarify what they actually intend), pre-mades take this right out of the equation. To the whole point of doing ranked is defining the pyramid. Solo queue should be nothing like a pyramid. It should be balanced as close to 50/50 win/loss for ALL players. That is what keeps them playing and paying. The solution should be as simple as: Ranked queue for ranked warzones for 8 players in a group Group queue for non-random warzones against 8 players with one or more group components in the subset of 8 Solo queue for random warzones where the matchup is random and no one is grouped with anyone

Yeah, I second this thought. Why can't I have a queue preference that essentially lets someone else in line in front of me to backfill positions. I would much rather wait longer to get into a new match and own my success or failure from beginning to end.

They should rate all players, and when not in a ranked warzone, add up said ratings on each side and balance the equation to within +/- 5%. Ratings are not based on gear or valor rank. They are based on win/loss ratios. The point of ranked warzones is to define the pyramid and who is at top. Non-rated matches should be based on challenging play and a balanced win/loss ratio among participants (they are there to have fun, not be ranked) In other words, if you constantly queue premade and constantly win, you should be forced to wait in the non-ranked queue until you are matched up against a challenging set of opponents. If you are rated at the top of the win/loss percentage and have really long queue times because there is no equal to you, that should tell you something. Go play ranked, wait in the non-ranked queue for challenging opponents OR enjoy your spot at the top of the pyramid while you wait.

For me it's not mailing items ocassionally that's an annoyance. It's when I have to mail materials for crafting back and forth. Shared storage across alts, even one faction would be an improvement. All materials in the cargo hold means that much less mail in their system, and any character just crafts from that inventory. That for me would be worth even paying another $1-2 a month for. Yes, I'm a serious crafter. Doing all six.

I don't see the issue as being level, gear, or stat related. It's a problem with the system matching players randomly. I don't advocate random. As you can see from this discussion, random isn't even close to being "balanced". Stomping > Balanced > Being stomped The problem right now isn't 50s steam rolling 10s. It's the system that pits 10 50s against a mashup of 10 level 10s and 20s no matter which side it happens to be. How hard can it be to track win/loss percentage per player, a whole group of players, and compose a group on the other side with a similar calculated rating? For me, that would be worth the longer queue times. If you're God and own pvp and you do a pre-made of your cult and win 99.99% of the time, then if the system puts you up against 10 level 10 scrubs, they should boost the crap out of the lowbies to make them have a 50% chance of winning against you. That's why when you have one bad *** ninja in a story there's always a million scrubs to take him on all at once. Google trope of Conservation of Ninjitsu. You can't fix stupid, but you can boost them to accomodate. It's boosting that's failing right now. Bioware sold everyone this dog food. They said this would set them apart from "other pvp" and make it enjoyable. Somehow I don't think they're eating their own dog food. I'd love to look a Bioware employee in the eye who does low level pvp and have them tell me its fun without lying.

"most" <insert YOUR favorite metric here> is not necessarily the measure of "value" players use. You may think a quarterback that passes for 500 yards in a game should be an mvp. But maybe it's just the guy who comes through in the clutch with the catch, the interception, the sack, or the left guard who blocks the other teams MVP from getting to his QB. That being said, there are issues with people simply voting for friends without making it an honest value judgement. I haven't even seen how it works yet, but if it doesn't already, I'd recommend that any stats aren't revealed until after the voting. I believe value should be judged by its effect on the triumph or defeat, not by some metric performance like some Star Wars equivalent of a fantasy football league.

My money is on it being a mouse software configuration issue. On the WoW gaming mouse, only the first 5 buttons worked for me in SWTOR. That is until I turned on the software in the OS instead of relying on the "detect WOW gaming mouse button" in WoW to be in SWTOR. Once you custom map the keys to key combinations in game, like ctrl-shift-f1 through f12 or something, they can all be used. Instead of the SWTOR keybinds saying mouse button 13 (for example), SWTOR keybind of your choice, say jump, could be set to ctrl-shift-f1. If you set that to be your button 13 in the OS (not game), it will send it to the game and have the effect you want. The same thing applied to my old logitech mouse with setpint. So I'm pretty sure you have to set something. I'd go so far as to say there is some unspoken standard somewhere on what those keybinds are for gamepads and many button mice, but that instead of some prefix like ctrl-shift, bioware could be using control-alt.

Pre-ordered 10/28 Registered codes 10/31 Invite received at 11:59pm EST