I was aiming my example at the hardline some users were taking; if you pay for a service/good anything on top of that service/good is not free. I wasn't trying to analogise Bob and I with Bioware and us, I was just trying to show how taking a hardline about what is 'free' and what is not can create strange results. I followed up by saying that instead of a hardline approach to what is 'free', a case-by-case approach should be taken. A normative rule as to what is free, as I was trying to demonstrate, creates odd results. Since I believe a case-by-case approach should be taken, I also believe that engaging in hypotheticals is not particularly relevant in determining the current case; whether 'complimentary' cartel coins are free. It would be more useful if people avoided hypotheticals in trying to solve the current case and instead engage in analysis with the current case. My analysis of this case is in my original post. Note: I used hypotheticals to try show why a hardline approach/rule approach is not that effective. I was not using hypotheticals to argue by analogy with the current case of complimentary cartel coins.

Obviously it doesn't matter either way what you call it. I wonder what the limits of the "non-free" group is in terms of their definition of free. If all SWTOR subscribers were sent a copy of Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3 without having to pay for Mass Effect 1,2 and 3 would that still not be free? All non-subscribers would have to pay to buy a copy of Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3. If you say that if you have to pay, at any point, then any further goods or services given to you cannot be free. I hire Bob to renovate the Kitchen for $5000. During the renovation, Bob and I become good friends. Out of good faith, Bob renovates the Lounge as well (worth $10,000) for no further cost. Is the renovation of the Lounge free? Or did I pay for it with my $5000? Taking a hard line and saying if you pay for it, it is not free, leads to strange results sometimes, in my opinion. Whether something is 'free' or not depends on the circumstances. In contract law, something freely given is something given without consideration. Original subscribers came to an agreement with Bioware; I will pay my subscription for access to your game. 'Complementary Cartel coins' were not within the agreement, the subscribers had given no consideration for the cartel coins. However once subscribers re-subscribed after the implementation of 'Complementary Cartel coins', they came to a new agreement with Bioware which included the Cartel coins alongside access to the game at which point their subscription became consideration for the Cartel Coins and the coins were no longer 'free'. In my opinion only the initial give-outs of the cartel coins were 'free'. Giving out cartel coins stopped being free once people subbed or re-subbed after the monthly cartel coins give-out had been implemented.

What a well-reasoned argument.

Being emotionless does not make you emotionally mature. Shrugging off emotions does not make you emotionally mature. It's clear you have a lot of growing to do and need to meet people because you show an obvious inability to understand a fundamental part of humanity. Feeling emotion is normal; control and healthy expression of such emotion is maturity. A leisure achievement in-game is as real as a leisure achievement in real life. In leisure activities, the achievement is not achieved to gain something material from the achievement. It is simply to gain the sense of achievement which many people strive for. Some people learn to do the Rubix Cube in under 20 seconds. They don't plan to use their 20 second Rubix Cube skills for material gain. They are striving for the sense of achievement they will feel upon success - a feeling that doesn't cease to exist simply because an act was done in-game.

Just because an activity makes your frustrated or angry sometimes does not mean as a whole that activity is not fun. I play tennis and sometimes I get frustrated when I'm playing poorly. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy tennis, I really enjoy playing it. An activity does not have to be 100% fun, or even 60% to warrant doing. When people play instruments, practicing for hours on end on the piano, or violin, can be frustrating and tiring. Practicing scales and exercises is not fun. But people love to do it because of how they feel once they have mastered the piece. My girlfriend is one such musician, the feeling of playing a learned piece is well worth it for her. People do puzzles, sudoku, cryptic crosswords for leisure. It can be frustrating when you can't get the answer, but you work at it and when the answer dawns on you, theres a great feeling. People watch films that aren't necessarily 'fun' to watch, but they watch it purely for artistic value. Just because an activity can frustrate or anger you does not make the activity unworthy of doing. This concept of only doing things that are 'fun' is silly. 'Fun' is overrated, and if you think that leisure activities need to be fun 100% of the time I'd suggest realigning your perspective.

Usually "it's just a game" just means chill out. Just like if you get frustrated because a friend rocks up late they'd say; it's just 10 minutes. Or if you get frustrated because you spilt your drink a friend might say; it's just a coke. However sometimes the term 'its just a game' is used as a way to discount a player's feelings, or discount the very real impact games have - like in that thread where someone's guildfriend died. This type of usage of the phrase often accompanies lines like "it's just pixels". Emotions can enter into any and every aspect of a person's life. Be it from playing a game, watching a film, taking out the trash or lying in bed. Any form of media can have real impact. From books (its just ink on a page), to film (its just pixels on a screen), to games. To discount these facts is to show a real lack of understanding and insight into people.

Its a statistical fact? Statistical Randomness exists in human behaviour. Unless you have some miraculous way to map out when exactly I am going to play and Bob, and Bob's brother from your armchair then there is randomness. Randomness has a greater impact the smaller the sample size; this is obvious. There will always be randomness; the number of players in queue and the number of DPS, Healers and Tanks will NOT be the same everyday. The reasons the numbers will not be the same does NOT follow a discernible pattern (hence random). People might not queue because they want to PvP today. Or they aren't playing cos of exams. Or because they have a report to hand in the next day. Or they have an outing with friends. Randomness exist in human behaviour and hence how many people are queued at a particular time of day, and how many are DPS, Tanks and Healers. Randomness has a greater impact the smaller the sample size; I already explained this in my previous post. Let's say on average the ratio is 7:2:1. Hypothetically let's say we have 1000 people in queue. 700 DPS, 200 Healers and 100 Tanks would be the expected distribution from the average ratio. As stated above, there is randomness, there will be consistent fluctuations in the numbers as people queue, unqueue, log in, and log off for random reasons. However for the average ratio of 7:2:1 to be seriously affected you would have to have massive fluctuations of hundreds of players; not very likely. Compare the situation to 10 people in queue. 7 DPS, 2 Healers 1 Tank would be the expected distribution. Again there is randomness and fluctuations. The ratio will be seriously affected if there is a fluctuation in very few players. One less tank means 100% decrease in queue times. One more tank means 100% increase in queue times. A fluctuation of four players from the expected distribution would have a massive effect (while it would take hundreds with a sample size of 1000). Just yesterday I queued into a flashpoint as a Tank during off hours. Both the so-called DPSs, were actually tanks who had queued themselves as DPS because the queue was taking too long; we had 3 tanks and 1 healer in the FP. We ended up booting one of them for ninja looting and we weren't able to find a replacement DPS for 35 minutes - though we were able to find another tank queued as DPS who left after we wiped. So there had been 4 tanks and 1 (or more) healers in queue, but no DPS. It is obvious that randomness has a greater effect on smaller sample sizes. During off-hours there is a considerably smaller sample size. Increasing the sample size during off-hours (through cross-server) would diminish the effects of randomness and have a positive effect on queue times. Note I am only talking about off-hours NOT during most of the day. And I am not advocating cross-server be implemented, because it may create bigger problems in peak hours with the only benefit being moderately faster queue times at off-hours.

Thanks for the replies, its useful to know where one stands and where one wants to head. Thanks for the useful information : )

Thanks everyone for the responses

The point is that with a considerably smaller sample space there is greater statistical randomness. Let's say the ratio is 7:2:1 on averagebetween DPS, Healer and Tank. Lets say there are 100 players queuing in group finder at peak hour; therefore 70 DPS, 20 Healers and 10 Tanks. Statistical randomness still operates - example Bob the tank decides not to queue because he is enthralled in his class story; or his girlfriend is there; or he doesn't feel like PUGing today. That's fine, now we have 9 Tanks, not too much of a big deal to queue times, only pool of tanks has only been reduced by 10%. Let's say there are 20 players queuing in group finder at peak hour; therefore 14 DPS, 4 Healers and 2 Tank. Bob the tank decides not to queue for random reasons. Now we have only 1 Tank in queue, pool of tanks has been reduced by 50% - much larger affect on queue times. The above analogy is not trying to accurately represent queues in SWTOR but to show how statistical randomness has a far larger impact on smaller sample sizes which can lead to much longer queue times. Cross-server would help reduce the effect of statistical randomness by increasing the sample size.

He didn't mean "it doesn't have to be this way! - I have a dream". He meant "it doesn't have to be this way - it isn't necessarily the case that tank<healer<DPS at all times across servers". And this is true, at off-hours there aren't many people in GF. This is even truer if you take leveling flashpoints; how many people are within the level range for Cademimu that are also in queue at off-hours? With a considerably lower sample space at off-hours there is a higher statistical randomness. This means tank<healer<dps ratio may very well not be true at off-hours and cross-servers would help level out statistical randomness by increasing the sample space -> faster queues. This is only, of course, during off-hours.

I'm just getting into end-game stuff, and I was wondering if there was information about what's a good average DPS (on dummy) on different gear levels. It would be useful to know so I can have an idea as to what I am aiming for, and how well I am doing now. E.g. Information on good average DPS for someone in 61s, 66s, 69s, 72s etc. I'm currently in a mix of 66s and 69s with relics bought with Classic Commendations and have 1970 average DPS without stims or adrenals. I would love to know how to improve. Here's the parse: http://www.torparse.com/a/497857

I've recently started on my Shadow Tank and there are just a few things I am unsure about. Willpower vs Endurance: Should I be stacking Willpower or Endurance? There appears to be mixed opinions. Talent Build: There are also mixed opinions here particularly about Mental Fortitude, Expertise, Applied Force and Force Synergy. Should I put any points in mental fortitude, or is it not worth it? Where should the points go between Expertise, Applied Force and Force Synergy?

I like the Pebbles of Doom. I find it hilarious everytime I use Project; smacking trash with them rocks.

Your OP said: PvE queues are long especially for DPS players PvE queues are impossible during off peak hours for anyone PvP queues can be long during off peak hours PvP queues will be even longer once GS is released Once GS is released the wait time for games will become longer due to splitting the population even more. You say PvE AND PvP queues are long. GS will make queues longer. Therefore cross-server technology should be implemented to help queue times. Consequently people will talk about cross-server tech's ability to reduce both PvE and PvP queues since you were the one to bring both up.