I'd argue that you could release chapter 4 realistically with Makeb and one more planet plus a couple old ones. Hell, I'd like a combat free storyline on opposite faction's capital world. Perhaps either political or espionage. It could even be a seperate instance for only your faction like Taris.

Stop trolling, the FAQ answers the level cap question

There's a FAQ on the page...

We have lots of planets going to waste currently after they're completed. Asking for lots of new planets for chapter 4 is unrealistic and will keep us waiting years. Why not re-use planets and perhaps expand them? What does everyone else think? Flaws with it?

Seems to support Scorpienne's stats that PvP is decreasing. Good to see RP is reasonably popular though. Heavy RP servers is encouraging as they used to suffer.

You think the game has lost an estimated 400k subscribers in a month despite these stats showing the drop has been very minimal and pretty much stable? Well I'll happily take your money.

I instantly thought 'no' but then thought about it. I'm not sure why that'd be such a bad idea. It'd open up the galaxy and mix players and let you play your own way. Then again, grouping would be harder as players would rarely be the same level and therefore it'd be hard to scale. That's quite a big issue. I do wish the galaxy were more open and free though.

See, I saw that stand off and thought it looked new but wasn't sure. If this is indeed the case then THAT is what we need. I want to see more of those. Ideally they'd all be yellows and you can intervene and attack. I feel like bioware should create 'encounters' for every planet. Only like 4 or 5 and then have them spawn in random areas such as... Spice deal gone wrong. You have two gangs spawn in an alley and they are in a stand off with voiceovers enhancing it. You can choose to ignore it, join a side, or kill them all. Ignore it=Eventually a shootout will happen. Last survivors flee. Join a side=two options depending on dev effort. 1. The other team get a quest icon over their head and they offer you a split of the money/some of the spice to sell. 2. You get to loot from the head of the gang their money or spice. Kill them all=Much tougher but get to loot all their spice and money. If you could include LS/DS points then that'd be great.

See I find them more relaxing. You can take your time and not constantly be worrying about your health.

Whatever you have to say about the event, I'm liking the more intelligent style of missions and they're a huge breather from constant shoot outs. I hope these kinds of missions are going to be more frequent in the future. My personal favourite is the following the bounty hunter as it makes you actually watch the cinematics and doesn't hold your hand to every location. I want to see more non combat missions and this event has done exactly that. Anyone else agree?

I do feel that is the issue. Single player games don't need repeatable content but MMOs really do as it creates community, a world and reason for players to keep playing if they get bored of playing in a certain way. The idea is to have multiple playstyles so that it never gets too stagnant.

Hey folks, I've noticed a lot of the content coming since launch has been story based or to do with new missions but was wondering where people stood on more repeatable content such as minigames lke pazaak or swoop racing. If you had a choice for which you'd prefer priority going towards, what would be your choice? I personally feel this game is full of story content and is in the unique position for an mmo where it can rest on that for a while. There's a reason why warzones are so popular and that's because it's repeatable but changes every time whereas story will always end up getting samey. Opinions?

Closer to 22 healthy servers. Not saying that means the game is doing well but still, important not to just throw out inaccurate info.

Honestly, I like this game and would like to see it grow into a fantastic game but the lack of communication is ridiculous. You said it right, it feels like they've abandoned us. I see my monthly fee as partly server costs and partly trust that it's a good investment and with no communication, no idea what our future is, no idea what content is coming or if criticisms are being listened to, I am very ready to unsubscribe. If we had open discussion from devs and at least some sign that the game has a strong future then I'd happily continue giving them my money but the game isn't good enough in my eyes to keep giving them my money. As I said, I like the game but a monthly sub for something that may not improve is not worth it, that's a bad deal.

35k and 1.7 millon are two numbers being compared completely out of context by you. There was never 1.7 million concurrent logins. 35k is non peak focussed entirely on the destination servers. As mentioned in the original post, the origins could be anything from 0 to 90k players. I'm betting it's roughly between 5 and 10k but that's purely speculative from what I've noticed so I'll happily assume 35k as the only solid-ish number. Either way, my point is that for a month it's been a steady number so therefore the game is no longer 'dying'. It can't be dying if it is making no change. The 10% rule is most commonly used with peak times as it is the most consistent time to measure. It is measured at peak times as that requires the least speculation. I've never said the game is flourishing or that it's not in trouble but let's not fear monger by comparing total number of subs at launch to concurrent numbers at non peak times 7 months after launch. They're completely different numbers and make your argument come across as rash. I'm not even bothered about how this game does, I'm pretty certain I'll unsub next month as I'll be too busy with work but it's pretty ridiculous when people claim the game is dying or dead when statistics over the last month show differently. Come EAs earning report, I'm sure we'll see a big drop from the last report but all I've seen recently is stabilising populations.