Ah, c'est amusant de voir comment certains vieux codes du jeu vidéo sont encore peu compris. Le "GG" signifie effectivement "Good Game". Il a été répandu essentiellement sur le jeu de stratégie Starcraft, où lors d'une défaite il était coutume de dire "GG" afin de féliciter son adversaire avant de quitter la partie perdue. Une sorte d'étiquette, en quelques sortes. La partie pouvait ne pas être particulièrement amusante d'ailleurs, mais voilà, c'est comme dire "bonjour" alors même que la journée est mauvaise. Ce terme s'est peu à peu amplifié, et surtout répandu dans les autres jeux en ligne, quoique parfois pas bien compris. Peu à peu, on s'est mis à dire "GG" pour féliciter son équipe dans une victoire, même si l'usage le plus correct par rapport à son invention voudrait qu'on le signale aux adversaire en cas de défaite. J'ai souvent vu des "GG" en cas de victoire de mon équipe. Mais jamais encore en cas de défaite. Le "GG" suivi de point de suspension pourrait en effet signifier un usage ironique. EN tout cas, c'est particulièrement curieux de le voir en cas de défaite, puisque dans SWTOR l'équipe adverse de lit pas nos commentaires. Voilà, c'était l’histoire de Papy Chestair.

First, the definition of "stronger" is clearly needed here. No one will honestly claim that Siths are better than Jedi to build durable civilisation. I assume we're speaking about warfare. In this subject, the average Sith is in fact stronger than average Jedi, taken individually. Two simple explanations for this: first, the Sith are specifically trained to be warriors and powerful, where Jedi are nod destined to be warrior per say (no saying that they do not train for combat practice, because they do, but it's not the only focus of their learning). Second, the SIth code implicitely include a rude selection: be stronger, or die. The Sith who survive is one who killed his opponent from his own faction. You normally don't encounter weak Sith, because stronger Sith killed them before you had the chance. Jedi don't kill each other for power, therefore there is more "weak to middle-powered" Jedi. Don't mean there is no powerful Jedi. But it means that if you cross a Jedi, you have more probability he's a weak one than a Sith, statistially speaking. But that's the point and the main difference between the two faction, and the Rule of Two is the embodiment of it. Jedi are helping each other, and believe you should help the weks to become stronger, even if it's not "elite-class strong". The society in his globality is stronger, even if the strengh is no individual-based. On the other end, the SIth believe a society is strong if it has only the strongest individuals and no weak. Hence, instead of helping the weak became stronger, they chose to eliminate the weak and only keep the strongest. This way, individuals are indeed stronger than the Republic... but there are less individual. Is it better to have more weaker people working together to be better, or less people who puts a rude and cruel selection to only keep the best of the best ? The second option sounds more appeling to our ego, but history suggests that the first otpion, the Jedi one, is clearly more durable ^^

Hi, first of all excuse me for my bad english but as you know, frenchmen are not quite skilled with other langages than their own. Second, I don't know if it's the right forum to post, but well, here it is. It's more a translation problem than lore problem. In French, "Wrath" is translated to "Furie", with implies an uncontrolled and devastating pure form of anger, wich is a correct translation. So, in French, we are not "The Emperor's Wrath" but "La Furie de l'Empereur". It's a really cool title. But you see, the translation for "Empire's Wrath" is actually in-game "La Colère de l'Empire" instead of "La Furie de l'Empire". Which is wrong for two main reasons: first, Darth Marr himself designes the warrior as "Furie de l'Empire" (wich is right). Second, in english, "la Colère de l'Empire" is more like "The Empire's Anger", wich is, I think, anunderstatement to what the Wrath is supposed to be / to represent. Perhaps it's for the sake of diversity... I know i should post this on the french community forum but alas there is no such thing as a community manager in these deserted forum. If anyone could report this request to the translators team, it would be great. Otherwise, I won't complain, but It could be a so much powerful title