Well said. I’m fully behind Willpower boosting saber damage for these classes. Sages’/Sorcs’ saber attacks will never really compete with their force abilities, so those only focused on playing a class to its maximum utility will not re-add these abilities to their quickbars. But the proposed change is not for them, and that’s not what it’s about. It’s about reclaiming a little bit of immersion and Jedi/Sith awesomeness for these classes, RPing, inching closer to lore, and using that damn glowstick for SOMETHING even if it’s just to finish off the occasional mob.

This is particularly frustrating for me as I want to be able to fight without my companion. Because dialogue cutscenes cancel 'dismiss', the only way to get rid of your companion for any length of time is to send them on long gathering missions. Now that doesn't work either. Looking forward to a fix.

I also deliberately waited, as I was pretty sure there would be bugs. As I'm in no rush at all to move, I'm still feeling like that was the smart thing to do. I think I'll wait a little beyond 2.2.1 too...

Yes. More easily, I'd venture, than the forum community can resist devolving into paranoid hysteria without even a trigger.

I feel for you. Sadly, there is sometimes a real failure of imagination when it comes to strategy and tactics in this game, emanating in particular from the “X or you’re doing it wrong” crowd. Some of those people might really know their stuff, but I’m not sure that makes it any less of a failure. Other times, they may not, but are still stuck in their ways. There can be a tendency to just want to run the FP and get the loot at the end, and it makes people averse to experimentation, or entertaining the idea that there might be alternative approaches. Now, if you are going your own way and the group is really carrying you, and they are trying to politely explain that you are doing something stupid, that’s a different story. I’m like you and I’m willing to usually go along with an assertive player rather than force a tired argument, even if their tactics seem whacky. But I also always try to be conscious of the fact that they may also know something I don’t. So yeah, in PUGs I have sometimes been told what to do in various roles, sometimes even before the start line, and sometimes by players who didn’t really know as much as they thought they knew. It was kind of obvious/annoying/patronising at times, but I recognise also that it’s probably better to be on the same page before you start.

This thread is just delightful.

Lots to be excited about! BUT why no update or mention of (insert trivial, irrelevant non-issue that, despite my posting about it every other day and it being addressed by the devs elsewhere, I simply couldn't pass up the opportunity to post it again here)?

Many of the responses against the OP’s statement that xp gain is excessive come from players with whole platoons already at the level cap, with comments like “How can you stand doing only those quests for the 5th time?” Well, what about the first four times? What about players who are experiencing the core content for the first time? What about players with different playstyles who aren’t merely set on levelling every class to the cap and then sitting around on fleet? /hyperbole Don’t get me wrong, to each her own, and if your playstyle requires you to race to the end game before you can “start playing”, then more power to you. As branmakmuffin said, everyone is different. But it is a curiosity to me, even kind of backwards, that the game should be engineered to that end. I believe the xp gain is excessive. To those who cannot grasp why this is a problem, being overlevelled degrades the game experience by: a) diminishing the level of challenge; and b) diminishing the sense of reward. I’ve seen quite a few of these threads now, and a host of helpful suggestions varying from “just do the gray quests, what are you complaining about” to “just equip low-level gear/dismiss you companion/deliberately play badly, what are you complaining about”. While those suggestions may achieve the end of being able to experience the content and still (technically) have a challenging game, it’s counter-intuitive to what makes playing a game fun. It actually takes the basics of gaming and flips them on their heads: typically, you spend time, effort and thought on improving your character to keep pace with the difficulty curve of the game. This tickles the reward centres in the brain and may be interpreted as ‘fun’. You’re instead asking us to spend time, effort and thought on handicapping our characters so that the difficulty curve keeps pace with us. See why it seems backwards? TL;DR: The game should be balanced so that players are always creatively seeking an edge to progress faster, rather than having to dream up ways to handicap their characters to progress slower and keep pace with the difficulty curve. Best suggestion I’ve seen: Give xp consumables a major boost for those who want to play that way, and ditch the double xp weekends and other imposed bonuses.

I'm pretty sure there is an option B.

Gault lacks something critical that Zenith has in spades: motivation. My credits are on Zenith to take this one out.

At least being able to vendor trash them for paltry credits would be okay. Deleting them feels so wasteful, but I'm already always overlevelled!

That. Is. Awesome.

Yes, something to solve the naming issue would be great.

They betrayed and murdered your father.

Haha, Moonshadow, you crack me up.

You're making two different comparisons there: 1) “When I was forced to move off of a consolidated server, I was given no choice or information about future plans. APAC players have more choice and more information, and this is unfair.” The earlier server consolidations were handled poorly, and BW has learned from some of those mistakes. Would you have your APAC friends suffer equally just to make it ‘fair’? I doubt it. So no, this is not unfair. 2) “APAC players now get a free one-time move to any server of their choice, while I will have to pay for a transfer, and this is unfair.” APAC players are being forced off their servers of choice to move to distant servers, in many cases tripling their latencies and bugging their legacies and achievements. It is entirely appropriate that they are not charged for this privilege. By contrast, paid voluntary transfers are the convention and are also entirely appropriate. So no, this is not unfair.

To those who dismiss the stated reasons for why people don’t want AC change implemented as ‘invalid’ (because anyone who disagrees with you can only have ‘invalid’ reasons for doing so), and saying that such a change would have zero impact on those who don’t want it: You are right that the impact would be minimal. I certainly wouldn’t quit over it. But having such options available in game, even if I don’t utilise them, diminishes many important aspects of a social MMO. These include little regarded dimensions such as comparison, competition, sense of progression and achievement, identity, difference, completion, investment, reward, and consequence. This puts a damper on our fun. But really, the opposition camp and our arguments against are largely irrelevant. As the party advocating change, the onus is on YOU to make the case for how this change would add value. No even remotely compelling argument has been forthcoming, beyond ‘convenience’. Convenience shouldn’t strip or invalidate content. It would be similarly ‘convenient’ to have the option of starting at Level 55 with BiS gear and all achievements, but then, why even play the game? And to the arrogant couple of posters, who I guess (*shrugs*) are in favour of the change, simply quoting and parroting each other, patting each other on the back, and deliberately not addressing the other participants in the thread: you’re not helping your own case at all. At least your absurd and laughably extreme comparisons add some humour, I suppose, like saying not wanting this change is analogous to hamstringing major human achievements and innovations throughout history (LOL!). Do you understand that when you use the word ‘analogy’, you need to invoke a similar situation, right? It’s not that anyone here is “afraid of change”; it’s that what you are proposing is kinda moronic.

Okay then: Bad idea. This pretty much sums up why: But then, I'm a grumpy RPer who thinks every choice from race to tree specs should be permanent and there should actually be consequences for your decisions.

It would be no different than when the prequels came out. Really, the bar is set so low already, it can't suck that badly. But go in with low expectations and then you can't be disappointed.

I feel you, OP. I'm also on Gav Daragon, checked my character names' availability on all other English language servers. None are available. I'm sure that, like me, your names are critical parts of your characters. Your best bet may be using Alt keys to get names that at least look the same, but this can frustrate the chat and mail functions. For me, it sucks but it's a trade-off I'm willing to make.

Nice pack, with a bit of everything. But… Dyes! Unless I misunderstand, new dyes are being added in 2.2, but only as part of this pack? Gah! There have been many complaints about the dye system (the generally awful colour combinations; the lack of variety and inverse selections; the “rarification” of many of the most basic/least awful combos; the logic of the whole primary/secondary system etc.), but the most common complaint I have seen is the necessity to gamble on the random packs in order to get something tolerable. By putting new dyes into the general pack, you’re adding more layers of complexity and uncertainty to what is already the main annoyance: by having to gamble on the whole pack, you presumably can’t even be sure you’re going to get a dye, let alone the right dye! In this way, it will do little to mitigate the lack of variety and choice that is the status quo. But maybe I'm mistaken. Courtney, are you able to clarify whether new dyes are coming in 2.2 in the dye packs, or only in the Archon pack?

Thanks guys, I've learned a few things reading this thread.

Fantastic! Can't wait to see more.

I agree with you that it is more the player-selected prevalence of one or two models, rather than a huge variety of skimpy models. But I don't think that was what the OP was suggesting either. Saying "We don't want more" is not the same as saying "There is an over-abundance of x model types." We're just expressing a preference for more realistic/less misogynistic armour types, a little more on par with the selection available to male characters. When I said earlier that SWTOR was "not as bad" as other games in this regard, I was acknowledging that there is a lot more selection of female armour in this game and less of the pigeon-holed chainmail bikinis that are ubiquitous in some MMORPGs. Needless to say I avoid those games with a passion.

I always though it was a strange omission. No doubt trying to implement it now would raise some sort of technical hydra...