An excellent thread (and a good idea to show it in a consolidated format to indicate a portion of the scope of -current- discussion of the APAC community's perception of the problem) Personally I am in favour of instance consolidation based on content (grouping people by language and game area supported game play types (eg areas where PvP is not supported, can obviously consolidate both PvP and non PvP designated characters) server connectivity (server location of instances generated to be based on server utilisation, based on rule set application (such as PvP enabled sections being located on PvP servers) and/or client latency (which would be more important were a cross regional approach used, but less so given BW's current system architecture design)) rather than a more general region based server consolidation approach. Though given the size of the APAC user base, a regional approach is probably sufficient tbh. Regardless, some form of player consolidation is necessary in order to preserve a MMO dynamic, otherwise, one must concede that the APAC SWTOR will soon degenerate, no longer capable of being called a ' Massively ' Multi-player game and the dependant game features - such as war zones - will become increasingly untenable unless BW takes steps to consolidate a disparate APAC player base.

Acquaintances huh... yes, yes I think i can manage that... much easier than that f- f- friend thing. I was saying that as a means by which to facilitate a single player approach to those holocrons.

Consolidation of low population PVE and RP servers are workable (and better than having too low pops) but merging PvP with anything else is more tricky, it could work though (esp in oceania since we are all desperate here) TBH, they are better off consolidating based on player language and a gameplay type selected by the user - corresponding to a type assigned to each instance (i.e. instances that are RP focused (which is likely to be mainly class mission instances), PVE focused (most of the game) and PvP focused (general instances used in lieu of PVE instances as well as warzones)) than consolidating the servers entirely - instead consolidate players to instances based on player parameters.

Or allow the player to tell their companion to activate it >_> *also has no friends*

it would certainly be nice (and a lot easier than say, rolling back quest progression; though Id love that for the class quests too )

In [HEROIC 2+] THE FACE MERCHANTS on Coruscant, we meet a group performing cosmetic surgery to change people's faces. Will such functionality be provided to people in order to change their at least non racial / gender appearance (I make the exception because it may otherwise be difficult to account for in the coding as your Male Sith becomes a Female Twilek, creating a whole bunch of dialogue fails) I ask because this would facilitate changing our characters in order to accommodate additional options, such as applying the different facial cybernetics used on cyborg smugglers for your cyborg trooper and similar, such as unlocking new Miraluka masks etc. I.e. options that are compatible with the models we already have (or perhaps even allowing us to alter the body shape... that would be nice too )

Okay this is a nice and simple little request of mine (unlike some others I have submitted) I believe that it should be possible to take two items of the same type (i.e.any two pieces which are compatible with the same weapon/armour/equipment slot) and pay a fee (perhaps credits based on the price of the peices) in order to transfer ALL of the stats, customisation options and so forth from one to the other, in effect creating a customized version of the first while using the second's model, animations and effects. (in the case of items that change the animation or effects such as weaponry i.e. blaster pistol as opposed to rifle in which case this would also likely require the same proficiency, thereby limiting the choice of items to combine, but I would prefer to avoid this with the armouring in particular) This would allow people to appear in the outfit they prefer while maintaining their kitting.

Invisible rankings do much to ensure the ability to match ppl based on their skill levels; I would however note that this would require that the rankings adequately reflect past Ops performance, i.e. the ROLE of the player in their previous Ops, rather than merely damage / protection / healing / objectives some sort of combination thereof... any such metric(s) may well favour specific roles over others - therefore you may find DPS scoring disproportionately high or tanking objectives scores particularly low or that some actions are simply not factored in (such as cloaked scouting of enemy positions to inform team mates of defences)... Personally I like the idea of having changes to ranking from each PvP which are modified by MVP votes (or some other team and enemy based feedback)... but seriously, I think it would be 'rather difficult' to implement.

Targeting Suggestion: Reasoning: Assists healers and players with other support skills to encourage and facilitate teamwork in PvP (especially sub 50s) Description: Provision of additional targeting option: Target (visible and in range) friendly (i.e. group mate / companion) with lowest health Potential Impact: May make healing more effective, this is unlikely to unbalance things however given current heal spec limitations. Optional UI Component Suggestion: Reasoning: As above, facilitates support activities encouraging more responsive teamwork Description: Provision of an optional support focused UI to enable greater collaboration between supporters and tanks/dps to replace existing Ops team mate icons -Larger Icons -Health more prominent (less emphasis on other information) -Smaller sub icon for major role (such as Shield for tanks, Saber for mellee DPS, Gun for all ranged DPS, Cross for healers) -Team mates currently out of range / sight of user (and therefore not readily supportable) have more transparent greyed out icons or perhaps those within range and sight for casts have an icon to indicate such Arrangement of Icons -in a row that can be attached to bottom or top; or -in a column that can be attached to either side; or -in a split column that can be attached to either side of the screen. Potential Impact: May not be possible with 16 man teams, or may require smaller icons to suit - however prominence of health extremely important and really does need revision. Boosts Removed due to complexity