Thanks, didn't know they were doing a live stream as I don't use Twitter.

West Coast people; type your server IP into https://gsuite.tools/traceroute - Do you see any East Coast hops? Because I don't think you will. All traces end in California, but we can be pretty sure the servers aren't in California, so that must be EA providing false WHOIS or something to obfusticate the server location, which leaves Texas, which every server seems to jump through before reaching California. The safe bet is on Texas being the location for all US servers now, and BWA is having teething issues with the new arrangement, which is causing the lag.

I'd be more interested to know what people's lowest recorded pings are in these cases, not so much the spikes (even if they're currently forming an average), which could be caused by technical issues on BW's side rather than the actual location.

I made a couple observations that I think are pretty interesting, using the site https://gsuite.tools/traceroute Let's first look at the hops made by The Harbinger (East Coast, IP 159.153.65.219), and by Jedi Covenant (West Coast, IP 159.153.65.234) - they both go through Texas and end in California. Now, let's look at an EU server; TRE (159.153.78.101) - the hops end in CA also, kind of strange for an EU server, yeah? But actually, instead of jumping through Texas on it's way to CA, it hops through Ireland. It's been known for a while that EU servers are based in Ireland, so that hop before CA must be the actual server. If we follow that logic then we should assume that all US servers (both WC and EC) are actually currently located in Texas, near Houston. That's where my logic takes me anyway.

I'm from the EU, so I went on both servers and checked the ping for a while; it mostly stayed in the 98-105 (ignoring spikes) range on both Harb and JC, tried a traceroute too and got pings in the 90s for both servers. Is this anything to go on? I'd figure I'd receive a much more varying ping from actual West Coast and East Coast locations.

Yes, that's what I did. If that could be false, then is there any way to find the real location for sure?

I did some testing on The Harbinger (EC, IP 159.153.65.219) and on Jedi Covenant (WC, IP 159.153.65.234); both of these IP addresses are located in California. Am I missing something? Or perhaps the servers for EC and WC were always located in California (the West Coast), because I have seen this claim made in the past as well. When Kieth uses the term ''data center'' and its ''West Coast location'', do we know that this is actually synonymous with the server and its actual geographic location? Or is it that their datacenters/servers were previously just located in separate places in California? Someone can correct me if I'm wrong and have misunderstood something, but I think everyone flipping out in here needs to wait for some clarification. EDIT/UPDATE: I'm from the EU, and went to log in on both servers: my ping remained exactly the same (98-105, ignoring the occasional spike). I also ran a traceroute on both servers and received pings in the 90s. It seems unlikely I'd receive identical pings from both sides of the US.

Change always provokes the desire for the past, but when WoW launched; it launched with enough content to tide people over until they added more; and they did add more, steadily, year by year they added large amounts of content to what is now considered ''vanilla'' WoW. Before even their first actual expansion, they built upon the base game until there was a solid foundation. A foundation that a considerable amount of players today are content to revisit. This was not even close to the case with SWtOR. You can search for ''WoW content at launch'' to find the content timeline, compare it to SWtOR and see for yourself. Nostalgia plays a part, but if it were merely rose tinted vision then it wouldn't last long enough to sustain communities like Nostalrius. WoW was not the first MMO, but it redefined the shape of the genre and created a new standard. When SWtOR decided to imitate WoW, it couldn't afford to be a mechanical imitation with a half-assed roadmap and shoddy, lackluster delivery post-launch.

Personally, I would have been happy if SWtOR went with the ''buy to play'' model, had paid expansions or DLC, free access to all content that had been paid for, a cosmetic cash shop and optional subscription for fast-track benefits + a trickle of premium currency and minor QoL stuff like ESO's craft bag.

I think that while WoW may not have been what it is today, what was there in vanilla was good enough that a massive community of people still have the strong desire to play vanilla WoW on private servers, and there's a well-known demand for Blizzard to introduce legacy servers to satiate this in some legitimate way. I don't see this ever being the case for SWtOR because what SWtOR had to offer in vanilla was nowhere near as compelling, and could never gain a lasting following.

Like WoW and FF:ARR? Neither of them failed miserably and had a mass exodus of players shortly after launch. In fact; FF:ARR shows exactly what it takes to get back in the subscription market after a catastrophic failure - A total redesign from the ground up. Games unwilling to do this will likely have to turn to some form of f2p in today's MMO market, and we have plenty of examples that prove this besides SWtOR. The problem is; that SWtOR should be thriving now, (especially with such a namesake a Star Wars) but its f2p model is a joke compared to other MMO's that have been forced to adopt it.

I wonder if even our glorious Lord Kanneg is going to avoid acknowledging this thread, and if so, why? My money's on it being a sensitive topic with the higher ups and shareholders, and that the idea to them; is that at board meetings, subscription numbers are the only numbers. It would explain some things like the recent doubling down on the f2p restrictions, like the removal of passes, and the implementation of an exclusionary system like CXP - all ideas with a clear intention of brute-forcing an increase in subs. A lack of open-mindedness towards the business model seems prevalent everywhere here, I wouldn't be surprised if; in the end, this is just an issue with the exec management. Meaning that maybe, it's just not up for discussion ... sure feels that way. By the way, these should be at least somewhat telling of sentiments outside of this echo-chamber: Worst MMORPG Business Model Of 2016 Best MMORPG Business Model Of 2016

Discuss the free to play model, the re-implementation of passes, and/or the addition of something akin to the WoWToken.

Yes, you're probably right. I was never actually debating the truth of this idea though.

They didn't differentiate in the way that you seem to think, not as I read it anyway. The poster was just suggesting that there was no proof that the game actually needed to close as you were suggesting (i.e. not making any money), and that EA rather just wanted increased profits that may not have been necessary to the game's survival. Again, I am not arguing the truth of this idea, simply that you are missing the point. I'm getting pretty tired of this though, so if you still disagree then I will leave it. As for, ''witch hunting'', it's more or less what you're doing by going after anyone that does not hold the same opinions as you, sometimes going so far as to search them out or see opposing arguments where they don't exist.