I am offended. Aside from that, judging from Georg's most recent statements, he'd be more likely to say "you can complete the content, so do it! It can be done so obviously each of your friends should have to spend a couple extra hours every week grinding for repair bills and consumables because they would be wrong not to. in fact they're wrong to think that is necessary, even after they've done it consistently for several weeks because my super-sekrit metrics say it's all just fine!"

He said several thousand over the course of a boss fight, not per second. Several thousand damage over the course of a fight is enough for me to say "I think I'll play my Marauder or Assassin so my friends aren't having to carry me." No. The question is: "if this can be completed by all classes, but we have a much better chance of doing so, doing it faster, with less expense of resources including repair bills and consumables which we are having to spend non-raid time grinding to get which is patently un-fun for the majority of the players, then why would we subject ourselves to additional non-fun play so someone calling themselves a "friend" can have slightly less fun than they would playing another class? And why would I, as a player of that ineffective class, subject 7-15 of my friends to even one extra hour each of grinding per week when I can just play another class?"

"Can be done" does not equal "can be done with equal effort." Viable≠fun. I said nothing about players. Okay, so i bought a right to be *******r than other classes? See, I don't recall seeing that on the box or in any of the official press releases. I recall some statements from the developers entirely contrary to that. Tautological statement is tautological statement. However: Different does not need to mean "better" or "worse." One of the fundamental goals of game design is to remove "unfairness" in the mechanics of the game itself. Players are unequal enough, and no game needs to enhance that gap. Would you play a game of chess where the opposing player starts with a board full of queens? Checkers where the opponent moves twice for every move you make? Would you play a sport where the opposing team need only walk across a line to score, while you were playing pitz? (the mayan version of basketball... incredibly difficult) If you think inequity in efficacy of classes is a good design precept, then who deserves to suck? Which group of people deserves to be the most disadvantaged in the game? And, more importantly, WHY? Disadvantaged classes lead to "bring the class, not the player," which seems to be the opposite of what you've been preaching. That and another 65¢ will get me a coke from the machine.

Respect goes both ways. I deserve to able to complete content on whatever class I choose to play--as the game was sold to me with those exact expectations EXPRESSLY STATED by the creators. However, when those creators break their word, my "entitlement" does not "entitle" me to drag down 7-15 other people's fun. I am not more important than 7-15 other people. I am not so important that if the class i like to play is not effective that they should all have to work extra hard to cover the failure of the designers. I am not so important that if I can play another class which I have less fun with but can still have some fun with, and that fun will contribute more to the enjoyment of my friends rather than saddling them with the burden of overworking to make up for my lack, that I should do whatever the hell I want. I earn my place as their friend. I earn my place in a raid. I earn my spot on the next raid because I'm not only looking to have fun but to make sure THEY have fun. If you think "i pays my money and so all these folks should carry my non-functional hind end" then I do not envy your friends you.

This: Is as helpful and relevant advice as: How many other people do you raid with? 7? 15? Even on a simple flashpoint run you have three other people with you. That is three to fifteen other people who also pay their subscription fees and have as much right to fun and enjoyment as you do. Monetarily, that's $45-$225 per month to your $15. Just like you, as a paying customer, deserve to have a functional, useful, balanced set of mechanics to play under, those other individuals deserve to play with someone with a functional, useful player using a balanced set of mechanics. If they choose to drag along a boat anchor to hinder their progress and add additional difficulty, then they should be able to do so, by all means--but they should not be forced to do so because you "gotsta be an operative" any more than they should put up with the Assassin tank who "will only ever use Wither and never uses any other ability/cooldown/attack/etc. because for roleplay reasons that's the only force technique they want to use." Given the fact that BW's designers have chosen to use "gear checks" via enrage timers as their primary raid mechanic, relative performance is important, and if I'm relatively underperforming, then I would rather my guild leave me behind than spend all night long trying to carry me through content, because i'm not a self-centered and entitled *******. "Viable" does not mean "fun." It does not mean "balanced." It may (sadly) mean "working as intended," even when it doesn't mean "genuinely working." I pay for fun. So do the people I raid with--so my Op sits on the back burner for now, until either the issues with the AC are addressed or everyone is geared enough on the toons they want to bring that they can afford to carry the albatross that is my Op.

Because while combat logs are informative, they don't tell the whole story, nor are they even necessary in every case. Do you need thousands of dollars worth of advanced testing equipment to see a car is totalled and undriveable? Generally, no. While the operative isn't that bad off, (despite some people's hyperbolic claims) it's relatively easy to see where the flaws lie when you compare it to the alternatives. If class 1 does A really well, B really well, has good options for C, D, E, and has utility options F, G, H, I, J and K... And class 2 Does A okay, B okay, has difficult to use options for C, and D, and has no utility options... Class 2 may still be "viable" "playable" or "able to complete content" but that does not mean it is "balanced" "fun" or "not an exercise in frustration to play." EDIT: Since your responses to other threads mark out that your main is a sorcerer, and you frequently PvP, I find it interesting that you've spent so much time in the operative forums lately talking about how Operatives are so great right now.

I spent a lot of time on my Op over the weekend, (entirely PvE) and had the same issue occur multiple times. I play on a PvE server and was not flagged, I was not in a PvP area, nor near any 'Pub locations that would have flagged me. (at least not long enough to actually be flagged) I didn't notice any other players near me, (and playing on a low pop server, there probably weren't) but I wasn't really looking for any, and it occurred pretty much at random, in that I could find no discernible pattern.

Thanks, I needed more irony in my diet. I guess what the OP was pointing out isn't a bug, just a feature... a really annoying feature? a feature that makes him mad? a bad feature? Like other people complain about in other threads? Granted, I don't agree with his tone. I generally dislike his posts. I may agree with his conclusions, even if I do not agree with the methods by which he came to them. On the other hand, BioWare's behavior since launch continues to fuel my creeping suspicions that they do not WANT feedback, reasoned replies, honest answers, mathematically relevant logic, or any response that isn't either: "Thank you, sir, can I polish your 'lightsaber?'" so BW can break their arms in a mad race to pat themselves on the back. "RABBLERABBLERABBLE" so BW can go for the "easy win" by trolling them right back. Twitterbombs from legions of semi-organized idiots who want to see somone else "nerfed" because something is happening and they think they don't like it for some reason, so BW can cave due to "popular demand" and write it off as a "bug we were going to fix anyhow, really!" then ignore the fallout when their "bug fix" actually breaks things even more... until their "metrics" show that it's a new "bug" that needs adjusting and they start jackhammering on all the related systems to bring things pretty much to where they were before relative to eachother, just with lower numbers. So, while I don't agree with the OP's post in bulk, it seems to be one of the few methods one can get any response at all from the developers... unless you'd all like to organize some sort of mass twitter feedback/protest. And, frankly, people like you, who rant and rave about whatever your pet issue might be in another thread, then pop in to talk down to someone else who's got a peeve of their own strike me as enormous hypocrites.

I think you meant to say "briefly mentioned and then immediately dismissed as inconsequential by BioWare."

And a couple of Mercs as well. (The more you know!: clicking a person's name, then clicking the statistics tab will bring up the option to show previous posts... Like where a poster has spent days talking about Sage specific skill trees and Merc healing.) Just a polite reminder that if your success depends on my failure, you're in a very sad place.

I appreciate that the snarky response is to someone who was rude (to be kind in my description) but to those of us who aren't acting like *******es, could we get perhaps a better explanation? (fixed) I can appreciate that the comparison between classes and advanced classes that are not mirrors (or even ones that are!) will never truly be a strict 1:1 comparison. However, there does seem to be a sizable disparity between the two. Not to the point of comparing apple:apple, but in "large handful of apples:large sack of oranges." I appreciate variety in class design. Really, I do. I also understand how difficult it can be to provide variety along with semi-equal ability--it can be a daunting and frustrating task. On the other hand, the differences I see between Scoundrel/Operative performance (healing, DPS, and utility) and Sage/Inquisitor performance are... excessive, and obviously weighted to be not in favor of the Sc/Op. I know you've got plenty to do, but a lot of us would really appreciate a straightforward answer to some of the questions that have been posed politely (i.e. not by someone calling for you all to be "punished." What does that mean, anyhow? Spanked? I mean, you might be into that. If you are, let me know, I know this cute little nurse, and... yeah.) such as: Do you feel "Viable" is the same thing as "Desirable" or "Fun?" Do you think the addition of a stealth mechanic (which is all but non-functional in endgame PvE) is a fair trade for the plethora of utility, control, ability and sheer throughput available by choosing to select any class other than the Operative/Scoundrel to perform either as a healer or DPS? I understand that certain amounts of compromise are necessary in a design process, but do you feel that Operatives and Scoundrels genuinely fall into the "5%" that's been mentioned as the general margin for effectiveness? Thanks, Jack.

All things considered, he's probably not too far off base. A medicine specced operative with a well geared Kaliyo can solo nearly any content that is close to their level, including champions. It will take a very long time as you'll primarily be relying on Kali's DPS entirely to bring the thing down. That said... A moderately well played sniper will pump out DPS that's exceedingly tough to match as an operative that's specced for DPS. Some people label this a "L2P issue." (in their minds, if you can, with great effort, match the output of a semi-afk player of another class/spec/whatever with a great deal of effort on your part and constant vigilance, then you are just fine and need to learn to play better. I don't particularly agree, but that's their thing. I greatly enjoy playing my operative, in spite of this difficulty (some people enjoy it because of that difficulty) simply because the aesthetics/playstyle suit me pretty well. If you enjoy your operative, keep going, but it will likely be a difficult class to play for some time. Snipers are much easier to both learn and master, and do yield greater results when "learned" than operatives do when "mastered." That's just how it is for the moment. The developers may change this, they may even change it soon, but I am a pessimist and do not expect it to be any time within the next 6 months to a year. EDIT: as for the rifles/pistols... go with whichever you can get with the better stats on it. I don't recall any of her abilities having a requirement for one or the other. If you can find an orange/mod-able one, I do think the damage is the same for both with the same barrel, but I am not sure about this and you should probably check at some point. Easiest way to check: look at a commendation vendor that sells weapons. Dromund Kaas has them. Check the damage stats on pistol and rifle and compare. In answer to the overall question: His Kaliyo is the exact same Kaliyo you have. No different, nor will any of his later companions be different in any mechanical way. The main difference is the gear they wear, and how the player interacts/performs, and any boosts to the Presence stat. (get some naturally, through levelling, datacrons and from stims if you choose) His Kali is probably finishing out the fight at higher health just because the two of them are either trading aggro (he'll do enough damage to actually pull the mob away on occasion, and take some himself until she pulls it back) or he's pumping out enough damage to kill the critter before it can get her below half health, or both.

My Op has Lennon-style ocular implants only available to the common pinkskins, but my sniper...? da-ba-dee da-ba-die.

There is something to be said for leaving behind a bunch of pincushions when you're done, (dang knives fade out too quickly for my tastes) but, the scoundrel's mirror ability is SHOTGUN TO THE FACE. The scoundrel gameplay is almost a mirror of the operative, so they're quite similar, just some different animations. The one thing I miss about my smuggler is the debilitate analog: Dirty Kick. The animation, the sound, (despite the short root effect during animation) are a lot of fun. The assassin definitely has a totally different look and feel to it, but I've found the play experience to be far less frustrating. If you're not concerned about gender on your toon, the voice actress for the female smuggler is absolutely perfect.

Was that before or after the tearful "why do you make me hurt you, baby?"

Then perhaps we're having an issue of vocabulary. "Room for improvement:" Marginally underperforming, but functional and does still have positive points, and reasons to genuinely objectively select this class based on mechanics and performance. For instance: "The operative has excellent damage output that can exceed a ranged class's output if they are allowed to constantly connect with those attacks, which is countered by short range and a lack of an effective gap closing mechanism. However, we find that the absolute lack of a gap closing mechanism and easily countered utility abilities is leading to a slight decline in actual effectiveness compared to our projections and you can look for more mobility soon." "Broken:" (and I agree that many posters have overstated the downsides, if only to counterbalance the fact that many posters also seem to think that "underperfoming at everything" is "**** GREAT CLASS DEZINE GAIS") Underperforming greatly at assigned class roles. Lacking utility. Lacking mobility. Matched or exceeded on every point by another class. Example: "The operative is easily replaced and frequently exceeded in performance by other classes with less effort on the part of the player. An operative player who performs their role adequately with that class would rock face with any other class." I have fun on my operative. I don't have as much fun as I could as I am often stymied by content that was astoundingly easy with other classes I have played. I am often passed over for group content because the community recognizes via play that my chosen AC is not well suited for some content. I am frustrated because when I do succeed I may be congratulated, but I know I had to work MUCH harder to complete the same content compared to what I have experienced elsewhere. Yes, it's nice to be "the good operative player" but I'm not so hungry for self-esteem that I need the class to be an absolute hot mess for other players just so I can claim superiority when all I'm really doing is underperforming the other options my group had using far more effort. You're naive. It's nice, and I appreciate the sentiment. I used to think the same thing, as a matter of fact. Every set of patch notes seems to only further erode my belief that "valid, constructive feedback" is anything other than dismissed as soon as the devs get a twitterbomb of people crying about how someone else having a good time is ruining their fun. See, the amusing thing is that (while it was no longer the game for me) WoW was astoundingly popular and profitable when they "removed all the challenge." Aside from "lolpandas" their greatest population drop was when they caved into the "QQ-***-to-hardmode" crowd (isn't it great how we can just invalidate someone's opinion by sticking two letters in front of a nebulous and often inaccurate description of them?) and put challenge back IN. The funny thing is, they could have just had both crowds by allowing the players to choose the level of difficulty. Want to spend all night wiping? Here's nightmare mode. Wanna see the content the easy way? Here's QQ-Carebear mode, which we had to name it that because the "hardcore players" aren't happy unless we deride you for not spending 80 hours a week preparing to enjoy 4 hours of raid content. Frankly, all things being equal, they're not. Assuming we're all strangers or all friends, people are anywhere close in skill, and there's not some doofus asking who's 50 and wearing level 40 greens gear... If I've got a reasonably skilled merc/sorc that wants to heal vs. an operative? The operative is sitting out because the rest of the group should not have to work extra hard to cover his decision to play an underperforming class. If it comes to DPS, I'll take anything else (probably a tossup on a DPS jugg) that knows how to Garth Brooks. (standing outside the fire) the jugg can at least get back in the action quickly while the Operative is walking back.

Providing offheals and being stealthed? Nevermind the fact that you cannot do both at the same time, the main question is why the @#$% would you want to? "Look, I can do one job worse than an assassin as I do not have the mobility needed to be a more effective stealth capper, nor do I have the staying power or damage to counteract an assault should my cap be noticed by another player, and when I'm not out all by myself, I can heal less effectively than any other healing spec." Riiiiiiiiiiight. Sounds awesome. I think you meant blinders. Also, congratulations on assuming I'm a "bad player." Just because I choose not to focus on PvP doesn't mean I'm bad at it. It was super-convenient of you to invalidate your post in the first bullet point. Thanks. Player skill can be a larger contributor to success and failure than class abilities, but a level 50 sorcerer who is semi-afk is not going to lose to a level 40 assassin whose been PvPing since the cradle in open world PvP. It simply cannot happen due to the mathematics of the game. And I'm all for player skill becoming the final, deciding factor in PvP decision. I really don't give a flying rat's tuckus about warzones, but if you win in one, then you should be able to say with confidence that it was because you were a skilled player part of a skilled team that was more skilled than the players on the other team. That's not a possibility when the immediate counter is "we would have done better if Joe wasn't so hung up on playing a ****** operative." I'm all for introducing some form of system mastery to games. However, that works best when the mechanics are divorced from the aesthetics, or there is an alternative provided. Additionally, what reward are you getting for your mastery of the operative? "I'm REALLY SKILLED!!! Look at me still underperform drooling uncoordinated idiots playing other classes." I agree. An increase in difficulty of utilization can be very rewarding. However, the reward should not be "subpar performance less subpar than usual." "great" is a relative term. Is a player controlled operative better than... a companion? Usually so. better than any other class used to fill that same role controlled by a player of equal skill? No. I'm sorry you fail at reading comprehension, and make broad assumptions about people who you do not know? Got one. Frankly, it's kinda boring. I by far prefer my Marauder and would be thrilled to see the operative gain that kind of performance, even if it came with similar kludgy and unintuitive interaction. Yeah... Do you honestly think this is how it will work? Scenario 1: Bioware never bothers to correct what they've screwed up on the operative, or failed to design into it in the first place. "UH-OH! Here comes Rye! He's the most BA operative around! He's so good that I'd almost want to have him on the team." "Almost?" "Yeah, almost. Jack's here on his Sorcerer and even though he's totally fail because some guy on the internet who doesn't know him said so, a fail player on a sorcerer is still better than a ****** operative." Scenario 2: Bioware finally gets around to fixing the class. "UH-OH! Here comes Rye! He's been playing an Operative for a really long time!" "yeah. Well we've got like 8 other great operative players already because everyone rolled one after the fix and they're the new FotM. Let's invite Jack because even though he's totally fail because some guy on the internet who doesn't know him said so, we really do need a bit more range from a sorcerer and they're still easy enough to play that he can perform as well as most of the Operatives here."

Okay. So you chose something that loses at half of the matchups, and only ties the other half. On other words, you consciously made a decision to never win in any case whatsoever and be easily defeated by any variation of your opponents choices. This is an objectively bad choice. (which sort of goes against the point of designing a proper game. A proper designer should create situationally bad choices to include the possibility of loss which produces risk/reward, which many people find enjoyable, unless you're designing games exclusively for masochists who want to punish themselves for playing.) Didn't play Darkages, but I've played the others, among several others. In other words, you played the tiniest portion of content that magnified class imbalance present, rewarded being overgeared with granting you more powerful gear, and was heavily weighted in the beginning of the season towards those who had fully geared themselves from the previous season. (which you had) I'm sorry, but arena play in WoW was fundamentally flawed from start to when I quit playing. I'm glad you had fun with it, but the development team's emphasis on esports for epeens was the cause of a lot of consternation and lost fun for many, many players. If you are the worst at everything, you are not a good class. If the thing you do best is met or exceeded by others, you are not a good class. Here's my issue: BioWare has already shown that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, regardless of how well greased it may already be. Operatives weren't that great previously. In PvP they excelled at one thing and failed at everything else. In PvE they were acceptable damage dealers, (in the few cases where they could have 100% uptime on the target... which is pretty much never) had no real utility, and could heal well enough that you didn't have to cancel your Operation run if your sorc healer didn't show and all you had was an operative to fill in, but not well enough that you WANTED to take the Operative if you could avoid it. But people complained. I don't think those complaints were justified, and I think BW's claims of "magic metrics that we totally aren't going to let you see, but they're there. Really!!!!" is anything other than a desperate plea to ignore them caving into vocal whining. And now the operatives no longer excel at the one thing they were good at and have gained nothing in return for the loss. In other words: BW has shown me that the only way to enact positive changes is to whine incessantly and very vocally. Saying "it's okay, and I can participate in content, even if I cannot excel in it" is counterproductive to the goal of having the class "eventually get some love" as you put it.

So you care about people not being able to perform on par with everyone else in a tiny minority of content. Okay. Assassin. Assassin. LoLno. I suppose if you're heavily geared and they're vastly undergeared you can pull this off with an operative, but you could do it faster under the same circumstances with nearly any other damage specced advanced class.

Sniper Any other class. Assassin. Or sorcerer. Depends on which task you're talking about. Also assumes incompetence by the other team. You cannot stealth cap and heal teammates at the exact same time. All met or exceeded by other classes. Lemme hand you some background: I've been playing games for 25 years, 10 of those years were MMOs. I've been designing pen & paper games for the past 2 years, and while it has some limitations built into the medium not found in MMOs, many of the same design principles apply. Specialization always beats out generalization. One person's ability to do many things terribly is never equal to one person's ability to do one thing very well. By way of example, lets make a new game--don't worry, it'll be simple. Rock, Paper, Scissors, Mush: Rock loses to paper, beats scissors, ties with mush. Paper beats rock, loses to scissors, beats mush. Scissors beats paper, loses to rock, beats mush. Mush ties rock, loses to paper, loses to scissors. Before the game begins you choose 8 selections made up of any combination of Rock, Paper, Scissors, and Mush. Lets play. How many times did you choose mush?

Yes, yes, that's nice. You probably missed something in my wall o' text there. Actually, several somethings, but here's the big'un:

Warzones are not the only endgame content. Warzones are not a majority of endgame content. Warzones are actually a miniscule portion of endgame content, and with more Operations slated for release and no new warzones announced in development, the relative portion of content that warzones are is shrinking every day. All bullet points above apply to PvP as a whole as well. This does not mean I am anti-PvP, I am simply pointing out that there is less game content in place for PvP in the entirety of the game than there is for one single starting planet. Instead of trolling and telling us how bad we are and how we should learn to play, why don't you list ONE THING that an operative can do better than any other class.

And you believe this all hinges on your playing? Because your entire team and the entire opposing team doesn't really count, AMIRITE? I know you claim to have been 50 for about a week, think Orbital Strike is the bees knees, have no mathematical backup for anything you say, admit a bug exploit is a great way to get the damage you NEED out of the class, think you personally are responsible for the 80% win ratio in PvP, think PvP is apparently where this game should be balanced, and PvE is tantamount to meaningless, and admit that other classes are fully capable of accomplishing what an Operative can accomplish with less time and effort and usually with better results, in addition to additional tasks that the Operative cannot accomplish at all, but because you can rack up 10 medals in a warzone that the class is great! Good. They probably should be. Frankly, I'd be pissed about having wasted all my time on my Operative if I didn't already have a sorcerer and Marauder at 50, and if I need to go play something faceroll easy or actually functional in melee, I have the answers already. If I'd gotten to 50 on my Operative just to find out I was really not welcome in most endgame content, or welcome only as a "well we can't get X, Y or Z, I guess this guy will work since that's all we've got." I'd be pissed. Okay. Challenge time: Name three things an Operative can bring to a group that cannot be provided better, faster, more dependably, etc. by another class. Honestly, I'll settle for one thing that an Operative does absolute best coupled with a couple of things they just "break even" on. Yeah, and they'd have an easier time winning if they weren't carrying the hot mess that is an Operative. You may be a fantastic player--you're just hindered by your class. Yeah, we're all jerks. "HAI GAIS! I AM NEW 50 AND OPZ IS OPZOME! UR ALL BAD N NEED 2 LRN2PLAY IF U THINK OPZ IS NOT OP!!! LULZ WE SO GUD I WIN ALL TEH TIME AT LIFE." Here's my point of view: @#$% pvp. Seriously. I'm glad you have fun with it, and it's really cute that you get to waggle your epeen at people and feel like a real man. Good going on taking credit for a win ratio influenced by the entire rest of your team as well as the opposing team. You're doing great at taking a comparatively microscopic portion of the content in the game and making it the sole focus of your play--I mean it'd be like someone literally refusing to participate in any game content other than running their very first class quest on one class over and over and over and over. I'm thrilled that you are so easily amused, because it means it takes relatively little development time to produce a new warzone. But PvP is a small portion of the game. It's not a portion I care about, and while I do not want to see you lose the ability to PvP, or have a hard time doing it, or whatever, it's not where the focus on balance should be, NOR should I be blocked from completing content I want to participate in, or frustrated to the point of non-participation because of PvP.

qf-mf-t No comment on the preceding bits, as I didn't play WoW in Cata, but the bulk of PvE balance issues throughout BC and Wrath fell squarely on changes made for PvP balance's sake.

I would like you to examine this statement. "It is powerful." Power is relative. If I can bench press a mini cooper, I would be powerful compared to your average person. But what happens when your average person is bench pressing skyscrapers? "Well, not powerful compared to the competition." If it's not powerful compared to the competition, then who is it powerful in comparison to? Weak mobs? Standard mobs? Scenery? Congratulations to BioWare on making a character that is powerful when compared to scenery?