My server on Thrall is 2:1 for horde vs. alliance. Wintergrasp was no good, but tol barad was fine with how Blizzard has it setup. Well like I said, Shadow Hand is my server on ToR and it had ~800 players when the server said standard (not prime-time). This is on the Empire side, I have no idea how many the republic side had but I know they are usually about half the empire side. As for Anchorhead, the server at this time is listed as standard (this is not prime time right now) and it has 452 empire players and only 263 republic players. Like I said, my server which is Shadowhand had ~800 empire players alone when it was called standard, so your server does seem to be much smaller in population. However, that is a total of 715 players on your server, so saying that your server only hits 800 on a weekend is a bit of a stretch, as it is currently only late afternoon on a thursday. Anyway, I don't think total population is what is important, as you said, so I agree there. Since balance will be hard to achieve, ToR will have to do something like WoW did with Tol barad to make open world pvp better.

You'd be surprised how comparable in size the servers are, in terms of population, between WoW and ToR. I logged onto my server on WoW just to count the players, out of curiosity. My server is Thrall (a fairly busy server), and I play horde, which is the much larger faction on that server. At the time Thrall said medium population, and my server here (Shadow Hand) said standard population. Thrall had ~850 players on the horde side online. Shadow Hand had ~800 players online on the empire side. Obviously these numbers would go up during prime time for both servers. I used /who for each level and broke it down based on class when the search results were capped, which allowed me to get a total count without capping any results at the time. During prime time I would expect the search results would be capped on both servers so a number would be harder to get, but each server certainly goes up in population substantially during prime time. As a side note, ToR seemed to have about 75% of the population in the 1-49 bracket, and WoW seemed to have about 25% of the population in the 1-84 bracket, which is expected for a new game vs. an old game. This could account for all the people afk in ironforge or whatever. Note: I did this test the day before yesterday, so it is current.

I agree that coordinating the group is indeed the group leaders responsibility, but even when the group leader is clear and concise you will still have people make mistakes either from not understanding the instructions (and being too embarrassed to ask for more information), or from just being lazy/bad. I was the raid leader (one of two) for all of our WotLK raid progression for my guild of a few hundred people from naxx through to the end of icc. My role in the group was dps (the best leader spot is always dps, imo, because their task is simpler, thus allowing them to watch others more closely). What I discovered after leading an evolving core group that often took on new members to fill out spots, including pugs from time to time, is that players who play tanks are the best listeners generally speaking, healers are next, and dps is very often poor at even simple instructions. It might be because people who take on tanking and healing roles know that they are going to have lots of responsibility dumped on them, or it might be just because those type of people are just more interested in progression, or it might have all been one big long couple years of coincidence, although I very much doubt that. My point is, the leader can't fix everything, and sometimes it is the dps's fault. I don't believe it is a good practice to start flinging that word around in a raid setting though, as it breeds dissent, and leads to the group falling apart. I had this one dps in the group that we all loved because she was very nice, and she wanted to win really badly, but she just could not get certain things right. In fact, we got stuck on festergut the first week on him in ICC (kept meeting the enrage timer because this person kept getting killed mid way through, which was 5 mins, and getting owned), and after about a week of trying, and explaining the tactics countless times to everyone, I was talking to her separately and going over the tactics, and she revealed that she had been doing something very important wrong all along (their was a spore placed on two people and you had to clump up to get a good buff from it to live through the next phase - and some damage, and she was not clumping up, because she thought because it did damage that it was bad), because until now she did not understand it despite all my constant explanations of it. We had a good laugh and next week we got the boss down because no one died and our dps was enough to surpass the enrage. Moral of this all: it can be anyone's fault, but sometimes they really don't understand, but not for lack of trying. Being a good strong leader can't always fix that easily.

I was interested in this thread, and you had to go and mess it all up. He didn't project fears on you, don't try to excuse your behavior, you were rude back to him. His question was legit, your response was rude. Anyway, the idea is good if they limited the bag capacity and let you see what was inside. However, just because it was in SWG does not mean it should be here. I would think this would be very very very low on the priority list of things you might ever see implemented, since it adds very little value compared to other stuff they could fix/implement instead.

If they used this solution, please make it optional. I used the mod in WoW that did this, and it was terrible for me. I couldn't see what abilities were what when they were on cooldown, which matters to me with my play style.

They can only appear in one yard at a time, so keep drinkin, they will come.

Reminds me of the Rift commercial:

By your description (lots of people with sabers fighting, a ship crashing into a bay, etc.), it sounds like you are talking about this commercial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kHk2XAuhuQ If not, please point us to the commercial you are referring to. This commercial is just clips from the cgi videos, no real surprise here (which is also pretty obvious).

Oh Quinn... every time I look at him now a voice inside my head screams "douchebag". When I send him on a mission and he says, "If you think that's the best use of me." I think... "No Quinn, the best use of you is falling on my lightsaber.". He is a valuable resource (as our healer companion), there is no doubt there, but throughout my story I killed off valuable resources in the form of military personnel and intelligent civilians, no matter how valuable they were, if they betrayed me or were a threat in some way, I killed them to make an example of them. I am a Lord of the Sith, failure or betrayal is not tolerated in any way. An example MUST be made. This is how I role-played my character. I think Bioware SHOULD allow you to kill off companions during pivotal moments such as Quinn's betrayal. Keep moments such as that within the stories so they can regulate the players ability to kill characters. And to fix the imbalance created from having one less companion, open up a quest option that allows you to recruit a new companion with a very similar skill set to fill that crew members void. Here is my caveat to this: By controlling who and when you can have the option to kill a companion, they can minimize the extra companions that they would have to create. I don't even care if the new companion has no real story attached to them (this would make the job of adding them much easier), they just fill the void skill-wise, and you can get affection through gifts... a small price to pay for the ability to kill that backstabbing douche. Losing Quinn's story is better than having him on my ship. And, after all, you now have all those extra credits that was paying their salary... Just a few thoughts on the subject. It is truly annoying to have Quinn on my ship. I liked him, he was my Captain, I actually took his side in arguments... how could you Quinn? I can see if I was a Jedi filled with forgiveness, but a Sith... I have no mercy.

Yes, I enjoy the game in its current form. It is, simply, fun. I would like to see the existing features refined, and more cool stuff added in the future. However, as it stands, this is the first MMORPG in a long time to really get my interest because it has all the fun and exciting features of a true RPG that other games in the genre often neglect (the class stories mostly), paired with the addictive game play of an MMO (dailies, gearup's, pvp, dungeons and raids, advancement). It might not be perfect, but in time I think it has a solid enough base to grow into one of the largest and most successful games around.

Yes, Bioware's story telling makes this game awesome. Class stories, flashpoint stories, companion stories... makes me feel like I'm playing a real rpg within an mmo envelope, which I like. All the other mmo's are just the envelope, they forgot about the rpg inside. Sure some of the envelope's are very polished and have nice features, but they mostly seem to be missing something. Source: My Opinion.

My sith warrior was almost unplayable yesterday due to the amount of times I would have to click a button before it would go off (note, by click I mean hit my keybind, I don't actually click). This happened constantly, and after reading today's patch notes I note that the bug fix for some abilities displaying off cooldown when they really are not (or something to this effect). Today, I have not yet once noticed a situation that I clicked an ability and it did not trigger as expected, so for me this has made my sith warrior fun again. This fix was needed and wanted, thanks.

I don't find it that annoying that it takes me a couple minutes to switch planets. Just my opinion.

Satire is an art oft lost and rarely found.

Chrono doesn't even talk, and yet I never skipped the dialogue in that game