PvEers would throw a fit, 'cause "PvPers don't work for their gear."

...No it does not. All I have to do is sit in cover as a Sniper and wait, and my relic will proc at some point. All I have to do on my tank is run into the enemy team and stand still, and my relics will proc. All I have to do for any DPS relic is to just spam my basic attack, and the relics will proc. No input required. Could just go AFK. It takes more skill to roll a die than it does to use passive RNG relics. You are, frankly, a moron if you actually believe what you're saying.

Since it was missed before, I'll say it again but louder. It is an observable fact that in all instances of Freemium (hybrid subscription/free to play model) games, the lion's share of revenue comes from non-subscribing players. Preferred players are what keep this game going. Not subs, Preferreds. Bioware has no interest in marketing to subs because a) you're already paying monthly and b) you're purchasing less off the market, thanks to your monthly grant and access to all content. You're not "better" than Preferreds, you don't support the game any more than they do, so stop acting so damned superior. Stop insulting F2P, stop giving Preferred players nasty remarks, stop being such ***** all the time. If it weren't for us spending like we do you wouldn't have a game to subscribe to, so be a bit more grateful.

Seems like most of you think subscriptions are the primary form of revenue generation for Freemium games. Nope, not true. "Preferred" players are, in all cases, the ones who spend the most money on F2P games. So stop thinking you deserve more for subscribing because you "actually support the game," or giving preferred players nasty remarks and insults, because frankly they're doing more to support the game than you are by subbing. The amount of Preferred/F2P hate in game and on these boards is staggering and completely unwarranted, and this transcript proves it.

So you're saying the only reason you do SM stuff is because you get a reward from it? Interesting. RNG by its very definition involves no skill at all, nor any input on the part of the player. It happens by itself, at random. Again, no input whatsoever. Purely luck-based. No input. Player doesn't need to do anything and cannot do anything to affect the chance of the proc. No input. Nothing. The player could go AFK and the relics would still proc. NO INPUT AT ALL. Have I made that clear? No skill. None at all.

Yes, please remove the last few semblances of an open world from this game. I want to see only NPCs and friendly players from now on. I shouldn't have to suffer this tiny inconvenience! In fact, I can be inconvenienced by PvP so it should be removed. Group PvE content, too, that can inconvenience me; other people can be such *****. Get rid of chat as well, so I don't have to be inconvenienced by nasty remarks or spam.

All I've heard you guys say is that it's better than Civil War. Even if it is better than Civil War, it's still worse than Novare. I've yet to see an argument that it is not. Novare's system would be considerably better, both for new pilots and experienced ones. New players wouldn't be discouraged by steamrolls, as they'd have the opportunity to come back at all times without needing to *massively* outplay the enemy to do so (and don't tell me that holding three sats for the duration of the match isn't massively outplaying the enemy). Experienced pilots would also enjoy it more for the same reason; they'll never be able to sit back and coast to a victory, which feels absolutely awful and unfun. Instead they'd have to keep working throughout the match, never letting their guard down even if a match *seems* like a sure victory. People were overjoyed when Novare was first released, as we finally had a true 3-point domination style map. It was unanimously praised and for good reason. Civil War was *hated*. Where is the logic in choosing to emulate CW over Novare? Bottom line, they could have at least *tried* to use the Novare system. At least for one map. We didn't need two identical maps, especially with the CW system.

Same setup, three points to capture. The difference? In Novare, points only tick down for the enemy team if you hold two of the points. The only point of no return in Novare is the point where it takes longer to cap than there is time left; until the last few seconds there is *always* the opportunity for a comeback. It's an objectively better system.

It's terrible design. It was terrible design when Civil War was first introduced, and people complained about it then. It's still terrible design now, but apparently people accept terrible design nowadays. Seriously, someone explain to me why a system like Novare's wouldn't be objectively better than the current one. I'd really, really like to hear that explanation.

You're a lot more likely to score 6 touchdowns in the second half than you are to score nine, which is what the Civil War system forces you do to if you want to come back. Oh, and you also need to prevent them from scoring even a single one from that point forward. And you'd have to go an extra fifty yards per score, too. If it were Novare, you'd only need to score seven to win, and if they scored again you could attempt to match it. That's what makes it a better system.: there's actual opportunity for comebacks without needing a hail mary to do it. Basic analogy here, you need to do 150% more than your opponent to come back. 3 sats instead of two, spreading your team between three locations while they can devote fully to one, etc. You need to *massively* outplay a team that may have only *slightly* outplayed you to get into this position. The point of no return could come at 800-600 and you'd have to turn a relatively close game into a massacre in your favor just to have a *chance*. How does that seem fair to you?

Close. --OS is used in Sniper single target rotations in all three trees. --Devs dislike that, so they nerf OS --Marksman and Engineering drop OS from their rotations, suffer a massive DPS loss and have their most iconic ability become barely better than Snipe (and arguably worse than Frag Grenade) --Lethality Snipers continue to use OS in their rotation and actually get a DPS *buff* from it. So, the Devs ****ed up royally. They failed to achieve their intended goal, instead actually giving Lethality snipers even more incentive to use OS in their single target rotation. Moral of the story, these devs are idiots with no foresight whatsoever.

If a piece of gear lacks Expertise, regardless of its rating, set it to Partisan gear values. Otherwise, leave the gear as-is. Simple, easy solution that keeps PvE gear within a few percentage points of base Conqueror but a decent amount below Obroan. Obroan is now BiS as it should be, PvE gear is weaker but still viable for unranked WZs (aka, for gearing up to Conqueror level) and Conqueror is in between the two, exactly where it should be. Anyone have any disagreements with this solution? I think it makes things pretty even between PvE and PvP, in that you can already use PvP gear to help get your "base" PvE set but won't stand much of a chance at tougher content. Most importantly it gets rid of the ridiculous 66/69/61, 46 blue and other problems with the current Bolster. It simplifies things pretty nicely.

That's three examples, out of how many games? A hundred? Two hundred? Five hundred? More? The quoted part should stand out to you as wrong, though. There are no rated GSF queues, and there is currently no matchmaking. Odds are any matchmaking system Bioware comes up with won't be perfect. Therefore, skill/gear discrepancy is a HUGE deal. GSF will also be opening up to F2P players very soon, and that means even more players that aren't geared and don't know what they're doing. Capping all 3 is not easy even when everyone knows what they're doing, let alone holding them for any period of time. Capping all 3 when you're behind, possibly *very* behind, and holding them for the rest of the game without losing even one? That's just not going to happen; I'd imagine one out of every hundred games ends that way, if that, and it'll just get worse when a flood of F2Ps enters the fray. But here's the thing. They could have used the Novare Coast system, and it would've been a lot better. Can you disagree with that? I doubt it. They had this system in the game already for Novare Coast, and they could have easily used it again with minimal tweaking to the maps. Hell they could have made one map Civil War and one map Novare, but they chose not to. It's ridiculous that we have two maps with the same objectively-worse-than-Novare system.

Yeah? Can you count them on more than one hand? I doubt it. What you're describing is an *extremely* rare occurrence. Particularly with PuGs, the vast majority of games have a point of no return closer to the start of the match than the end. It's worse than Civil War in that regard.

No it will not, because camping the satelite isn't the issue. The issue is that at a certain point a team needs only hold one satellite to win, which is a LOT easier than holding two. It's the reason Civil War was/is so hated and the reason Domination is just as bad. Moreover, the match can spiral out of control in no time at all, particularly if it's an uneven match. If you don't get a full group you may as well repeatedly suicide for the duration, 'cause by the time the group fills up the PoNR will have come and gone. The point I'm trying to make is that comebacks are nearly impossible for anything other than a perfectly coordinated team. If you have a perfectly coordinated team, though, then you're probably not the ones that need to worry about comebacks. It's silly and stupid, especially when they could have used the Novare Coast system instead. You cannot tell me with a straight face that the Civil War system is better than the Novare Coast one at accomplishing the same exact goal.

Good for you. The majority of matches are not even remotely like that. The majority of matches are either blowouts in the first two minutes that become completely unwinnable due to the winning team camping a single point at the PoNR or close matches that end up the same way, with the winning team camping one point once the PoNR hits. It's terrible design and not fun at all, for either team. Winning with a PoNR feels just as bad as losing due to one.

GS are annoying, but the real reason people don't play is the ******, retarded scoring system. No one likes point of no return systems. No one liked it in Civil War and despite the thousands of complaints about it over the past two plus years, they reused it for not one but two maps. Not only that, they made it ramp up even faster, making the PoNR come even quicker and be even harder to avoid. How stupid could Bioware possibly be, thinking people would actually enjoy this system? GSF would be just fine if they used, say, the Novare Coast system. Or something similar to Voidstar. Or something similar to freaking Huttball. But nope, they chose to use Civil War and everyone hates it just as much as ever. In two plus years of playing I've never met a single person that enjoyed the Civil War scoring system, and this is an even worse version of it.

Seriously, why on earth would you use the most reviled scoring system in the game for new content? Hasn't there been enough complaints about the Point of No Return system in the past two plus years? You want to know why GSF isn't popular, this is reason number one. The Civil War-style scoring system was universally hated when the WZ was first introduced and it has remained hated ever since. Why you would reuse it for not one but two maps for GSF is just mindboggling. It is NOT FUN to have a point of no return. It is NOT FUN to make comebacks nigh impossible. It is NOT FUN to have to sit through several minutes of a battle that is already lost, with no hope of turning it around. I thought this was all made clear ages ago, what the hell Bioware?

I don't understand why there's so much opposition to this. It affects absolutely no one other than the people that would actually use the crystal from 10 onwards. Seriously, the only thing it does is make things easier for those of us that want to use the crystal while leveling. Why do so many of you want to stop that? What do you gain from limiting our options? What the hell is your problem? Entiltement shmentitlement, it's a *********** cosmetic crystal. It's a model that already exists, but just isn't as convenient as the CM crystals. It doesn't give any advantage at all, to anyone. All it does is make pre-order players happy. Why do you have such a stake in stopping it? What's wrong with you?

What happened to the armor appearances that were removed prior to the Thanksgiving Beta Weekend? Why were they removed, and will they be returning to the game soon/at all?

40 second intro song? Really?

<--Evyy, former SWOOPer and Bestine's resident Twi'lek stormtrooper. Good times, those :3

I have plenty of AoE to stop caps; cycling through targets just lowers my overall damage output, destroys my energy regen and makes it easy for healers to ignore my damage. If my team is passing to me, something went horribly wrong. I have no means of defending myself or advancing the ball and am useless if focused. No, I'm much better off using my damage to clear people from the ramps and keep them away from the carrier.

Hi, I'm a Sniper. Damage is the only thing I do. If I do more than anyone else, I'm doing my job. If that doesn't earn me MVP votes, something's wrong.

I get that on my Sniper once every few matches. Your point?