Of course people complain about the bugs. Do you honestly judge how many bugs there are by how a forum post count? People don't come here to complain about stuff that's not broken.

No, I don't agree with that at all. Certain things foster community, and certain things are detrimental to it. That's true in the real world, too. Just because something can hinder building community doesn't mean there's something wrong with the community at all. I have no idea what you just said, but I've reread it several times and it looks to me like you're saying an MMO should no social aspects whatsoever... and if you're saying that, well, I completely disagree. Community is vital to an MMO. Always has been, and hopefully always will.

So, if I follow the OP's logic, if something is an MMO that means it has to have absolutely no solo content? OK.

I have yet to hear one. Why else would you want to make any sign of the existence of non-straight people disappear? It's not like the people calling for same-gender romances are asking to be able to toggle off heterosexual flirt options. The only reason for a toggle like this would be because someone thinks there is something so wrong with same-gender flirt options that they need to disappear. Why else would someone want that unless they are irrationally afraid of them, or object to those people's choices on moral grounds? There's just no other believable reason for a toggle that I can think of. Saying it's about politics is a joke. Flirting is not politics, and never has been. If you honestly think the only reason anyone would be inclusive in their romance options is for political reasons, that's your issue, not Bioware's, and there's no reason they should have to code in discriminatory, redundant systems just to save you from your own faulty logic. I mean, there's a toggle already on the opposite-gender romance options: Don't use them. It works very well, and happens to be the same system used in the real world. If that's not good enough, then I don't know what is. A toggle would be completely redundant, and I don't get how anyone can ask for them and say with a straight face that it's not about homophobia or morality. Of course it is.

So, you haven't really debunked the arguments; you've just said you disagree with them. Some don't. Personally, I think there's a lot of truth to the argument that LFD systems (at least as implemented in WoW and Rift) do hurt community. Not only do they remove the incentive to socialize by removing the need to have friends in the game for grouping with, but the way groups are slammed together and people are teleported right in front of the first fight removed any need to communicate at all. As a result, people generally don't. Those of us who've played in games with that type of LFD system know that in the majority of cases, you end up with a group that barely says one word to each other. They pop in, grind through their instance, and split up at the end without ever having connected in any way at all. Personally, I think that's where the bad behavior in LFD groups comes from. It's hard to see other players as people in that kind of mostly unsocial setting. Also, the lack of a connection with those people makes it easier to treat them badly. Now, I now a lot of people want a tool that makes finding a group easier. I haven't had any trouble myself, bu I know many have, and that the current LFG system is sorely lacking. However, if/when it gets upgraded or replaced, I'd hope that something is learned from the systems in other games, and I really think it's possible to build something better. In my opinion, just not having the teleport functionality would go a long way toward doing that. It'd give people a reason to talk before they start fighting. It may just be a simple "On my way, be there in two minutes," but at least it'd be something. That may be all it takes to make people in your group seem like actual people, and not just voiceless bots that seem more like NPCs than humans.

That interface is just way more complicated than it needs to be. Cut it down to being just role-based, and filling out groups based on the typical needs (tank, heals and a couple DPS), and it'd be fine. I doubt anyone really cares if it's fine-grained enough to pick exactly which classes you want (and would probably work better if you can't). And, just to toss it out there, the teleport feature mentioned a couple posts above me) just isn't needed. People are complaining they can't find groups. It's not hard to get where you want to go, and teleports are one of the biggest problems with other LFG tools as far as eliminating the social aspects of grouping. I doubt many would complain about having to get where they're going if they knew they'd have a group as soon as they got there.

I love playing Republic. I can be a total dark-side jerk to NPCs, and get to play all the warzones... And even win most of them. Half the time I drop into one that isn't Huttball, the Imps are too stunned with disbelief that they're not on Hutta that they can't even fight back.

Hey, you asked... Worst. Idea. Ever. Making everyone overpowered trivializes everything, and gives you a boring game where everything is faceroll-easy. It'd be a horrible idea, and no game publisher who wants people actually playing would ever do it.

Cross-server PVP makes sense in that fighting the same people, over and over, can get boring. That's not as much of a concern in PVE, where fighting with the same people over and over tends to bond people and make them a better team. I can't really see why a PVPer would be against cross-server queues, myself, though I certainly understand why some people wouldn't want them for PVE. And add another "huh?" to your question about dual specs and cross-server queues. I don't get it. Wouldn't dual specs be more important in a smaller pool?

The fourth pillar usually ends up being something like "support," which typically ends up being some buffing class or off-healer, with sub-par DPS... and in most cases you'd just be better off with someone with decent DPS in that slot at letting people add "support" as a secondary function. With few exceptions, support-type classes are just boring. They really only work in larger group settings.

After the first, they're all sorted alphabetically. I've never had any trouble finding one of my characters, and even if there were 100 slots I can't see any of them ever getting "lost."

I already have 32 slots per server, but I'm just sort of a freak that way.

I certainly would, yeah. I particularly like the earlier poster's idea of gear with Presence, though. It would be really useful for soloing, and wouldn't replace raiding gear at all. Even without that, I know I'd love to see challenging solo content at endgame, regardless of the rewards. More stuff to do is a good thing.

I'm pretty sure that's the kind of stuff major lawsuits are made of by ex-players' next-of-kin.

Ah, gotchya. Yeah, sounds like you guys pulled the lucky server today. [This isn't a bump. It's constructive feedback!]

What part of the OP said that soloing should provide the same experience or rewards that grouping does? I must have missed that part.

Daniel, You've Got Something On Your Shirt

You can't just walk away from hell, buddy.

You seem to think having solo content would prevent grouping. Further, you seem to think there's something wrong with soloing, as if it's some kind of social disease. I'd have to disagree, and I think the more options we have at endgame, the better it is for everyone. There are plenty of reasons to play a multiplayer game that have nothing to do with endgame raiding. And this person isn't asking for "the same experience" by a long shot. I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like you just have some beef against people who solo, and I have to wonder why. Soloers seem to be the last people who'd ever do something to earn hatred like that.

And what's wrong with wanting something like that? Are you trying to say that grouping is the only valid thing to do in an MMO? If so, why? Different people have different playstyles. Some like to group a lot. Some like to solo. The vast majority probably do a lot of both. I don't see the harm in asking, and think it might even be a pretty cool thing to have available.

If you're asking for them to drop the rule about calling people out, no. At best, that only leads to petty squabbles between people, and at worst it leads to one-sided accusations against people who can't defend themselves. The current rule is a good one. Now, as far as what you're asking for in the first sentence... frankly, I think you butchered that part to the point that it's hard to tell what you were saying, but it sounds like you're trying to get Bioware to take action against people for doing things that aren't against the rules, but that you personally don't like. Well, sorry, that's not how it works. The rules are the rules. If you think the rules should be changed, then great -- make suggestions in that regard. Maybe they'll change, and maybe they won't. If they don't, though, it's ridiculous and pretty selfish to ask Bioware to enforce rules that don't exist, but that you think should. This ain't your little personal kingdom here, and there don't need to be consequences for breaking your personal rules of behavior. If what you're asking for is a penalty for quitting a warzone, then I'd suggest that you might get a better response if you just came out and said that, because at least to me it's not clear what you want.

Seems starnge to me the this is effecting "everyone," but only three people have mentioned it. Last time there was a similar problem it was all over the place.

It's not a bug. The CE vendor is only available to people who bought the CE.

I'll be honest. The game could stay just like it is and I'll stay subbed. I'm enjoying it, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters. That's not to say that I don't think it could be improved, but I don't have any deal-breakers, personally.

I'd say you're being unfair, and that it's different people complaining about these different things... but in a lot of cases, it's not. Some of these guys will literally complain about anything without any regard to logic or consistency.