Still unable to read.

Did you read that sentence? It's game-breaking because heals are 'indefinite' and 'powerful'? That makes little sense to me unless you really don't know how to player the other healer classes. They're all 'indefinite' if played right and while they are definitely the easiest to do well with, that doesn't mean that when played at their best, the other healing classes can't keep up. I play them all, my sage healer is my current project. Mostly though it is completely beside the point I was making. Nerf the heals, go ahead, nerf the damage, go ahead. Don't make it a mockery of the entertaining class it was.

I have multiple characters for every class, I play every class, I enjoy every class to some extent. I enjoy the ones that are very effective and the ones that are less so. I have no interest in one class being better than another, I will always play them all anyway. What hurts is when elements that are fun are being cut with the excuse of balance (read: because pvp) instead of simply rebalancing what was there already. And this is not just for Scoundrels and Operatives, I am unhappy with several other changes too, though ripping all the fun and interesting elements out of a class that I admit I find lots of fun to play with, then yeah, I lost my faith in bioware. Everything needs to give way for the 'because pvp'.

Seems like more 'because pvp', like pretty much all of the announced changes, and am pretty tired of it. Nerfing is one thing, sure, go ahead, but turning scoundrel/operative healer from a mobile class with several useful dps options into a heal turret just because they're supposedly overpowered in pve (pretty sure they made this up because too many people were catching onto 'because pvp') is just ridiculous. Nerf already, fine, but don't take away abilities that make the game fun to play.

I didn't care much when I heard about the upcoming 'nerf'. I know how to play my classes, can learn any changes, would just deal with it because even if they're less useful, they'd still be a bunch of fun to play. Except.. I don't see it anymore. Seems like everything that made the class fun to play is just being removed. Am so disappointed with this. Not sure what to think, except that I can't believe the devs actually play the game (anymore). Am not a fan of threats of canceling subs, honestly I don't want to cancel either, but when every thing that puts a smile on my face just gets butchered out of the game, I don't know why I am paying for this anymore.

I don't play warzones, but I hear pve pops when the game is out of focus. I have 'Background Audio' in preference checked, mind you, not sure if you specifically wanted something to only have the pops make sounds.

It is not about the species as a whole, it is about what factors will need to be taken care of to make a player character acceptable by the existing standards. I am not making up stuff here, I am pointing out which things make a player character a player character and not a random NPC. The headtails are not a factor, nothing a player character does depends on whether or not there are headtails. Things that define player characters are the existing body types, the existing voices and the existing (facial) animations. A player playing a new race should be able to experience the same things as with any other race. 1. Twi'lek lekku have zero impact on anything other than outfits/clipping. 2. If you compare all the Nautolans in the game, you will see startlingly little variation and extremely little emotion displayed on their faces. There are many of them in the game, but they cannot do what player characters can do. In order for a Nautolan to have the same impact as existing player characters in existing cut scenes, they need lots of work. They cannot simply use the Nautolan assets they have now because they're too limited. 3. They do, and all of them have (near-)identical faces that show little to no animation beyond moving their eyes and lips. 4. I am not calling you an idiot, I am trying to point out that you are looking at the wrong things. I am trying to look at this from a developer's perspective, based on what I see in the game and based on what BW employees have said on this forum and elsewhere. I am not always correct, I believe I add sufficient limiting qualifiers to my sentences when I am not entirely sure of something, but you are pointing out that it should be no problem because Nautolans are already in the game and I am trying to explain that player characters are being held to a higher standard than any other type of character in the game.

The clipping issues seem fairly minimal to me, the headtails take in pretty much the same space as one of the female hairstyles from the hair pack. If the minor clipping in that is deemed acceptable, I'd assume it would be acceptable on Nautolans too (except for with hoods where it would likely take the twi'lek route).

There only seems to be one person here who is confused as to the differences between races. Any technical difference to human is going to be a factor. Races that have human faces will be easier to implement, which is why it is no surprise that Togruta seems to be the next race, assuming the rumors are true. Nautolans do not have human faces. They do not. Claiming they are not much different (to whatever) does not make them the same as human faces, they are not, anyone can see this.

Are you just naming random species now..? Gamorreans? Really? And twi'leks in this game have human faces, nautolans do not. Isn't really any discussion possible on that point...

It has been suggested, many times. In fact I think that along with Togruta they are the most requested race probably. Problem is, I suspect, in their faces, mostly. Existing player facial animations during cutscenes will not translate (well) to Nautolans without a lot of work. So races with bodies, voices and faces that resemble human are much easier to implement. Still.. I'm reserving 4 character slots for Nautolans, I really hope to see them added some day.

The main factors would be the use of the existing framework. That is to say, any race that can use the existing voices, body types and (facial) animations would generally be preferred, as they are easiest to implement. I won't dare claim that we'll never get Trandoshans, but I don't suspect we ever will, if only because they are so unlike humans. Now that I think about it, are there any female Trandoshans in the game?

My comment wasn't aimed at you personally, '3rd post in' was just a number I picked, but I strongly disagree with your logic here. The OP talks about removing travel restrictions that exist at spaceports and stations, not about adding new ways of traveling.

The problem I have with all these suggestions is that they require either changes to quests or terminals to be added and.. as simple as that may sound, I fear it detracts from the OP. The no-travel zones are likely just a checkbox in their area settings. Depending on how well they've set things up this would require either one small edit in the code or several small clicks for different areas. I think people would be hard-pressed to find a change requiring less effort than this and it would, I believe, be a very welcome change. Now the subject is being diluted with all manner of different suggestions, which might deserve their own topic, but I don't believe they're helping here, only showing BW that the initial suggestion is perhaps not interesting enough to people since they forgot about it 3 posts in.

Unless this would only be done for new sets, it really wouldn't be any less work to accomplish than a toggle, except perhaps that it would introduce the (in my view unlikely) possibility to convert older sets in phases instead of all at once. That being said, I feel hoods should've always been a headslot to begin with, so I approve. /signed

/signed

I wouldn't mind some sabers being scaled down a bit, some are just too big, but scaling by body type or having 'girl sabers' sounds like a horrible idea to me.

The thing is though... they are getting rid of hybrids for a reason. You think they'd go through all this trouble eliminating variables in order to make balancing the classes easier just to add in things like this to the mix? It seems highly unlikely to me that they would introduce a new factor to drastically alter the way a class is played like you describe. Personally I would welcome the ability to have my mara and sent wield just one saber, just because I prefer it from an aesthetic POV, but even just a cosmetic change seems very unlikely with the need for adjustments/additions to the animations.

No, it would mean that they spent a whole lot of money just to still get kicked from their groups. There is no perfect solution here, don't try to force an artificial one down people's throats. Forcing this even for people with the respec causes more genuine problems for people than it solves. If someone is really so desperate to troll, they can spec to tank/heal, queue and then field-respec back to dps, if someone wants to ruin a game badly enough, you're not going to stop them without also stopping the people that just want to enjoy the game. Locking it for people without the field-respec will filter out the majority of issues by making sure that new/inexperienced players won't queue for the wrong role by accident and it won't prevent legitimate queues from playing. What we do not need in this game is to make it harder for people to play it.

I can get behind the idea of locking the role to the active spec if no legacy-respec is active, what I don't get is the need to try and micromanage things for people that do have it. I can't imagine that there are many (if any) people that will queue for the wrong role while having field-respec. It's generally something that people that are familiar with the mechanics will unlock. Just leave the system as it is now for people that have the unlock and limit it by active spec for the people that do not.

I don't pvp, ever.

I don't have the party jawa but I do have some hits for that achievement. Hard to confirm without being able to test it by myself, but I assumed it also triggers when grouped with someone who uses it.

But it is not just a matter of assets. You cannot simply take something that works in one situation and stuff it into another, that's what breaks games and frankly, they do that enough as it is. Even if they were to make not a single new animation, it would still require them to put work into changing something that already works as intended. Mind you, I am not saying they shouldn't do this or that I don't want them to, just explaining why they won't. They've had the tendency to only work on aspects of the game that are either new content (sort of), broken content (sometimes, anyway) or content that somehow causes a problem in other aspects of the game. You want them to change a system that works as intended, add new graphical elements to a system that is not broken. It will not alter gameplay and will still cost time and effort to accomplish, it's not going to happen.

You type up this wall of text about things that are essentially non-issues, from a development pov, and then all but dismiss the reason why we haven't and will not see this, while even acknowledging that you are aware of the argument. Animations are the problem and will stay the problem, even repurposing existing animations will require work to implement and test, effort that would need to be put into a system that already works as intended.

This F2P-bashing feels like a failed argument to me. The simple truth is that there are F2P players out there, a lot of them. They did not ask for a free ride, they were offered one, they took it. Many have spent money along the way, which was the entire point of inviting them along. I don't agree with the people that say most F2P restrictions are too harsh, but there is something to be said for not limiting access to grouped content when the resulting inactivity hurts subs more than the ones that will simply find something else to do.