Am 14.11.2017 soll zum ersten Mal auf den zusammengelegten Servern wieder Eroberungen stattfinden. Jetzt kann man natürlich spekulieren das am Anfang nicht alles Reibungslos ablaufen wird. In der Vergangenheit gab es schon verschiedenen Probleme mit den Eroberungen wie Datenbankfehler die dazu führten das der korrekte Gewinner nicht den Sieg zugesprochen bekam, Gildenbelohnungen die nicht zugeteilt wurden und andere. Wie genau sich hier die Serverzusammenlegung bemerkbar macht bleibt abzuwarten aber Bioware wird wahrscheinlich Gründe gehabt haben warum sie die Eroberungen vor und nach der Serverzusammenlegung pausiert haben. Von daher kam die Idee auf das es vorteilhaft wäre eine Möglichkeit zu haben wo sich die an Eroberung beteiligten Gilden austauschen können ob sie auf Probleme die mit den Eroberungen zusammen hängen gestoßen sind. Dazu soll der Conquest Chat Channel dienen. Wie alle selbst erstellten Chat Kanäle kann der Kanal Planeten übergreifend von allen die ihm beigetreten sind gelesen werden. Er ist einzig nach Fraktion getrennt sprich ein imperialer Charakter kann sich nur mit anderen Imperialen unterhalten, während Republikaner sich nur mit anderen Republikanern unterhalten können, dies aber unabhängig davon wo sich die anderen Teilnehmer des Chats aufhalten. Dem Kanal beitreten kann man indem man in den Chat folgenden Befehl eingibt: /cjoin Conquest Wie bei einer Versicherung wäre es natürlich schöner wenn wir den Kanal nicht für seinen vorgesehenen Zweck benötigen würden aber für den Fall der Fälle wäre es besser wenn man ihn hat. Auf jeden Fall wäre er umso wirkungsvoller je mehr an Eroberungen interessierte Gilden sich an diesem Kanal beteiligen. Auf jeden Fall würde die Gilde Funnyfarm auf imperialer Seite diesen Kanal unterstützen.

I did receive the error as well. Non streaming launcher, also from Germany. But now after multiple attempts of trying again I got into the game. Other guild members were able to get into the game before me.

After I still have to wait for the repair of a hardware component I couldn't play or check the chances so I can also only judge by the patch notes. While I respect Ramalina's number crunching abilities I am not sure about the impact of the slug railgun changes and as a result the T1 Gunship position in the meta game. While the slug railgun get's the accuracy and tracking reduced it also get's it's base accuracy for medium and long ranges increased. Considering that bevor the patch Wingman was only necessary for shooting a high evasion scout and you could regulary hit a target while "targeting" by moving the mouse over it when seeing a new target arriving at the scene I do agree that such ROFL shots will be harder but I am not sure that after such shots were possible that this changes will break the slug railgun. Especially after it's two main advantages, the range and it still can one shot targets with a DO, are still intact. From the T1 Gunship perspective I am more concernd about the Ion railgun nerf in combination with the EMP field buff. The position of the T1 Gunship in the meta the ability to clear a satelite from bomber stuff were an important feature. If an EMP field can do that better why should you take a T1 Gunship over an EMP field carrier? That might be a greater discussion than slug railgun shots beeing a little bit harder.

The road map was released and it included four changes that will impact GSF from which so far only one was discussed here. So I thought I might drop in and comment myself to start the discussion. 1) We get a new map. This is the only one disscused so far but it might be the least important of the anounced changes. Still there where some complains that it is "just a TDM". Do you remember not so long ago we were asking for the Denon TDM because the map already existed so it wouldn't take so long to create the map? We got more than that an entire new map where in the future we can ask when we will get Denon TDM and Iokath Domination because the maps already exist so it wouldn't take to many time to develop them. Still some said the would like an entire new game mode instead. To be fair we all can dream however I am happy that the developers deceided to do step 3 and 4 before a new game mode because creating a new game mode while existing problems still persist would eventualey compromised the new game mode. So I am happy that the developers deceided to fix some existing problems first. Still we got a new map and it was not only the adaptation of the existing map but an entire new one, that is more than expected. And after we already have 3 Domination maps and 2 TDM maps and different people like different thinks I also can't argue that it is a TDM and not a Domination map. So in my opinion the developers exeeded my expactation here and I can fully agree why the did and in which order. 2) QoL Updates Ok this is hard to discuss because we have no details here right now. So I don't know if the developers would consider bug fixes as QoL Updates but the two QoL Updates I would die for are the fixing of the component unselection bug and the mouse cursor disappears when spawning at the end of the game bug. I wasted a lot of gaming time on this two bugs and if they are gone for good that would really update my gaming experience. I am not so high on legacy hangers than some other players at least not without knowing what happens to cases like two different characters have two different builds on the same ship, which one did I get? But after we don't know what will happen here all I can say right now is that i am rooting for the fix of the two mentoined bugs. 3) Now we get to the serious part of the business, the balance changes. Again we have no details yet, and considering they should go live next tuesday I am a little bit disappointed that compared to the class balance chances we didn't get any information in advance what is planed. There was a lot of emphasize in the previouse road map on increased player communication. If you see some comments in the three GSF feedback threads there are some that already started to beleave that they were another pointless exercise of a Bioware anouncement that went nowhere. What did you think how the player reaction would have been if we got the planned GSF changes as early as the class balance changes with a comment that they are a result of the player feedback? If we really getting 9 pages of changes it doesn't look like that this changes were thrown together in a 5 Minute brainstorm session that happend 10 Minutes before the roadmap release. As mentoined with the new game mode comment in the new map section I think the balance changes are more important than a new game mode, because we all know for years where the issues are and that they are part of the frustation that prevented GSF from beeing a greater success. Fixing them definitely is a step in the right direction. But that makes it even more surprising that we didn't get any information that changes will happening earlier than one week in advance and half a week earlier we still don't know how they will look like. Still if done correctly the compleation of the balance changes can free up ressources that could be used elsewhere. Including the development of the game modes that than hopefully could also be enjoyed with now competitive strike fighters. And that is why I fully support that balance changes were addresed first. 4) Server merges Ok some will now say what server merges have to do with GSF? But we all know that only part of the population playes GSF brinnging them together on fewer servers might be more important to GSF than any chance to GSF itself. If you have followed the server merge discussion you know that Bioware wanted to solve some technical issues first. Reading the server merge announcement Bioware seems confident that they solved all of the issues. Similar to my comment on balancing I do think this will free up developer ressources and it will create an impact when launched. What does a new game mode help you when there are not enough pilots left on your server to get a game? So again I thing Bioware spend there ressources at the right think first. And if tbis turns out like I hope it does it may create the foundation for more things to come.

I think you mean the 9th of October after the 9th of September is a little bit behind us. I like the idea but can't say if I can come. After I am out of town this week I gave a hardware peace to a shop for repair, so far I wasn't notified that it is ready. Unfortunately I need it back to play. So I have to wait and see what happens.

vicadin will you update the DPS / HPS ratings with the changes in 5.3? I definitly think that the ranking has changed.

I am not sure if this is intended as part one about the Crew members but if you want to talk about Crew members I find the differences between the active abilities much more pressing than the passive. Outside of a bomber who are a little bit the special snowflake of GSF "gearing wise" when was the last time it wasn't outright wrong not to select Wingman or Running Interference on a ship? I think a lot of topics mentoined in this thread should maybe combined into two questions. Did the accuracy versus Evasion fight went to far as a game mechanic? Much of the components and the crew member choices can be combined how to max accuracy and evasion. Would that still be the case if evasion is capped stronger than it is right now? And would scouts still be viable with this reduced evasion? If not could that be solved by reducing the evasion from components that are always active in favor to increase cooldown based evasion from abilities like distortion field or running interference? You can hit a gun ship with it pants down when you attack it while it is still charging its rail gun. You can catch a bomber with its pants down if its mine / drones are out of order and the ability to redeploy it is still on cooldown. It is much harder to hit a scout with its pant down because even without running interference or distortion field a scout has still a lot of evasion. If we switch the evasion from scouts to be more cooldown based you can wait for the moment where the scout is without its cooldown instead of gearing every possible point of accuracy on any ship. This would make other gearing choices more accesible. I don't think that we can see the full impact of such a change without trying it on the PTS but on paper it definitly would be something to look into to make other choices more accesible. The other questions that affects more than a single component is 100% armor reduction to strong? Instead of nerfing BLC, Slug Railgun and so on would it be an idea to reduce the effect of armor piercing from completly ignoring any armor to ignoring a given percentage of armor? Maybe this needs to be made possible by reducing the effect of charged plating and the armor on turrets so that armor piercing is still the answer to charged plating but does not make anything else ineffective. If every component with armor piercing it to powerfull maybe the problem is not BLC or Slug Railgun or what ever component with armor piercing you could name but armor piercing itself. If changing one game mechanic can balance a bunch of components dosn't make changing the game mechanic more sense than changing a bunch of components?

I think this thread show a lot of missunderstandig what Starparse and dummy parsing does and in a way that is relevant to the opening question of the thread. First of all and most important Starparse does not create "third party stats". All that Starparse does is reading the in-game combat logs and present it you in a readable way and allow you to display them mid-combat. That is why you need to enable combat-logs in the SWTOR settings to be able to use Starparse. And while enabling combat-log means it creates a log file on your computer the log itself is in the game regardless if you enable the creation of the log-file on your computer or not. Ater the mentioned webpage that Icykill_ didn't wanted to promote even if she put their name in the thread title dosn't do anything else than allow you to upload your log-file the question is not "does the dev read this webpage" the question is "does Starparse and the Webpage allow us to see the Dev metrics". As previously mentoined Starparse just reads the in-game combat-logs, but after the compat-logs where included into the game by Bioware what do you think why Bioware needed this combat-logs in the first place? Next the question came up how to dummy parse and how does it translate to PVE and PVP. First there are Operation (PVE) and Warzone (PVP) Dummys that reflects the different affects of the abilities against Player and non-Player opponents. As already mentoined there are items that can adjust the health of the dummy parse and one that can simulate reduced armor from abilities of other classes. All of this items are bound to legacy and can be purchased from a droid who appears on your ship after unlocking it in your legacy. After you can also unlock both type of dummies on your ship from your legacy and a legacy cargo bay on your ship if you want to compare two or more of your characters ignore the fleet dummies and invest in the unlocks. After unlocking all this stuff appears on all ship of all your characters you can purchase the items parse, put the items in the legacy cargo bay log into the other character grab the items from the legacy cargo bay and start again. You can use the items as often as you want but after "killing" the dummy, the dummy resets and all effects of the items have to be applied again. And that leads to the question how long to parse. One parse is finished when the dummy "dies". However after Crits are RNG based so is your Parse. If you want to take that into account you have to do multiple parse and average them. After it was already mentoined that it takes between 4 and 5 minutes to kill the PVE dummy with 2,5 Million Hit points you should be able to figure out that taking 10 Parses will allready take around 45 Minutes. So if you want to have a statistically relevant sample sice you need around 1000 Parses but I think no one really has the endurance to invest so many time in parsing. So what does dummy parsing do than? Well first of all the main point is to create a uniform sampling enviroment that makes the results compareable. You can parse how you guarding grass while the enemy team is zerging mid you can parse how you tunnel a guarded healer or you can parse how many damage you make when attacking G4-B3 Facricator with all the debuffs that increases the damage that you deal to him or you can parse how you are standing in front of Soa waiting for the tank to remove the 100% damage reduction shield from Soa, all of them "actual player environment" and all of them completly meaningless in any other situation. That is why for PVE the measuring stick right now is 2,5 Million hit points on the PVE dummy with the armor reduction buff applied. The 2,5 Million hit points are roughly compareable to the average amount of damage that a DD has to do agaist a single boss after all DDs in an operation are very likely to hit the same Boss you can apply the armor reduction buff because you benefit from the debuffs the other DDs apply to the boss. So if you want to translate that to PVP does this make any sense to use the same conditions? If you find yourself in more 1 on 1 situation you definitly will not benefit from the debuffs of other classes so the armor reduction buff does not make any sense. Then do we consider the amount of damage that you have to do against a single player or the amount of damage you have to deal during the entire arena or warzone match? As mentoined by others the smallest amount of hit points the dummy can be set to is 500.000, I think we agree that you didn't see a single player in PVP with so much health even for an arena 500.000 damage is a little high if you add how many health the individual opposing players have and divide that through the number of damage dealing players in your team. For a warzone 2,5 Million Damage on the other hand is doable. Then after the PVP community mostly opposes parsing there is also no agreement how the standard should look like and there is no webpage like the one mentoined here for PVE where you can see collected parses to compare your results with others. So right now if you want to compare your results versus others you have no other change then to use the PVE setting and compare your results with them. And of courese if your results are 50% below the results of other players of your class you should ask yourself what are you doing differently then others. The combat log view of the parse tells you exactly which ability you used in which order and at what time of the fight. If you upload your parse to the already mentioned webpage you can compare your parse to others. If you figure out that you doing exatly the same things than the one with the double amount of damage but at half the speed it might be an idea to check if you should keybind instead of clicking abilities, have to reshuffle your keybindings to make them better accesible or if you just have to practise your rotation more often to do the rotation faster or if you have not enough alacrity to reduce the CD and GCD enough. On the other hand should you see while comparing your parse with the other one that it uses the OCD always before specific abilities and you are not then it also can mean that you missed how to get the maximum out of your rotation and changing your rotation to be more like the one you compared your parse with might also increase your DPS. And that one could also be relevant in PVP when you don't have time for a full rotaion if you know I get the most out of this OCD when pairing it up with this ability. So while every one who parses know that dummy numbers do not translate 1:1 to real fights discarding them completly is as stupid as reading to much into them. There are always things that you can learn from a parse especially when comparing it to other parses or theocraftet numbers like the one from Bant / vicadin. After you can't see the Gear rating in the parse you can look into Bant / vicadin numbers how much should be possible at your Gear rating if you are significantly below that number it is definitly not the fault of the Gear that your parse is so small. So TLDR: Bioware probably didn't need third party sites to know what you are doing damage wise. And there is definitly to much back stabbing against parsing and dummy parsing in this thread.

Planet: Section X Faction: Imperial Server: T3-M4 Guild: Funnyfarm Guild Rewards for Top 10 was given out and the planet displaced as conquered by us. But as far as I know no one received the achivement or the titel Conqueror of Scetion X from our guild.

Well after no one else stepped in to keep this alive: In regards of the shipbuilds: 1) Your TDM Legion / Warcarrier with a Railgun drone is using shield piercing over armor piercing. These seems to be against the conventional wisdom of how useful armor piercing is. Would you might to explain that? While I think I know the short answer, you want to protect your gunships from scouts and scouts don't have armor I am of course interessted in the Drakkolich answer not the short answer. 2) The increased crit chance versus increased base damage debate on the Slug Railgun of the Mangler / Quarrel. When asked why you chanced from increased crit chance to increased base damage you explained the impact of the damage overcharge in killing specific ship build and after you get around 5+ damage overcharge per game that was your decision maker. However there was a discussion a few month ago if the frequency of the DO spawn rate was reduced. I am not sure if it is the reduced spawn rate or just my server but I rarelly see TDM now where both sides combined get more than 5 DOs. So the question is what do you think how many DOs per game do you need to justify running increased base damage over increased crit changes and what was your experience if this number of DOs is still available or not? 3) The cartel ships. While I more or less expected your answer and right now the thread is a little bit slow I pulled a Gladiator out of one grand Starfighter Packs where I have no idea what to do with it. Any suggestions? And not a question but something I noticed the links to the individual DO spawn point screenshots in your DO super cluster guide seem to be broken in some of the Lost shipyard locations for example #2 B2-low, #4 Asteroid, #6 Asteroid, #7 Space debris. The rest seems to be fine.

The Idea behind this thread was to advance the ground game while playing GSF. In my opinion there where recently two big steps in that direction that can be mentoined as a point moving forward. 1) CXP and Unassembled Components rewards and Character below Level 70. I definitly can't complain here. In regards of actual gear, read gear with stats on them, this is definetly all you can wish for on a Level 70 character. The only two think that might be necessary here is maybe tweeking the amount. I definitly can't complain about the per game rewards but 8 unassemled components for the daily and 20 for the weekly looks a little bit week compared to the regular warzone daily and weekly. Of course the number of games for the GSF daily and weekly are lower than the one for regular warzones but if I remember correctly the weekly for regular warzones was also increased from 14 to 20 to justify giving out 40 unassembled components. So if this thread would be a poll would you accept a higher amount of matches for the daily / weekly in exchange for handing out more unassembled commonents I definitly would vote yes. While this focus on the daily / weekly might seem odd a bit consider this, in- game performance rewards of CXP and Unassembled Components are performanced based, a win rewards more UCs than a loss and more medals rewards more CXP, the Daily and Weekly rewards are guaranteed. Which means a new player in GSF terms that is still trying to figure out how to contribute in a game would be most likely looking for the guaranteed rewards first because even while learning the game the player still will get them while a new player will probably not feal sure enough about the performanced based per game rewards to count on them advancing his character. That is why I think increasing the guaranteed rewards would be worthwhile even when it means increasing the number of games to get the rewards. On the other hand as great as the CXP and UC rewards are below Level 70 characters are a little bit left out of the party. After other mission also handle giving out rewards based on the character level wouldn't it be an idea, this could also implemented for regular warzones, that completing daily and weekly missions on a below 70 character rewards a gear box like the one that you get from completing heroic missions below level 70 in addition to what this missions already reward? While that one wouldn't be game breaking it would be a nice boost during leveling. 2) Conquest I think that the Conquest Intro mission was giving out Fleet and Ship Requisition was already a sign that you noticed that Conquest is definitly an area that you can advance while playing GSF. And as someone who yesterday finished the conquest goal for this week on his fourth character and which guild is currently advancing safely to conquering Section X this week I definitly agree with that. So what could we want as GSF rewards to help with that. Well most thinks are already mentoined in this thread. -Decorations I was told stronghold bonus is good for conquest. So we need decorations to decorate our strongholds to get stronghold bonuses. I definitly would support fleet commendation sold decorations for this purpose. There are already a lot of suggestions in this thread the only one I havn't see so far you can buy imperial and republic soldiers from the PVP vendor why not imperial and republic pilots for fleet recommendation? From the other suggestion more model ships and model sattelites are definitly my favorite. In addition to fleet recommendation based Decorations I am also a little sad that there is no Archivment based Trophy decoration. However after Odessen proving Grounds was also released with out one as opposed to every other warzone and Gods of the Machine was also released without out boss specific Trophy as opposed to every other operation I have the feeling that you generally walked away from that, which I found sad not only for GSF but SWTOR in general. -Companions and Companion Gifts and Jawa scrap There are no greater battles of attrition than Conquest crafting weeks. Especially for characters that havn't advanced to KOTFE because they are still enjoing the earlier releases, where for some of them you can't get back when you start KOTFE, additional methods of getting companions for crafting purposes that dosn't require to start KOTFE would be nice. The idea of getting the GSF Crew members as companions for the ground game is defintily a good one especially after some of there in game GSF lines could be used for there in game comments without having to hire a voice actor. After I am playing the German version of the game I am not sure if I retranslate everything correctly but running around with the already mentoined Salana Rok and hearing some of her GSF kill comments in regular ground battles like "Uh I think I can see body parts" or "Ha ha that was not bad" definitly would be good for a lough or two. And of course after the companions needs to be leveld too companion gifts for fleet commendations is also something I can get behind. In fact the artifact box for 300 fleet commendation that usually drops a grade 5 purple companion gift is my go to fleet commendation sink right now but after that one also drops a bind on pick up pet that can't be sold to a vendor it sometimes is a 300 fleet commendation fee for destroying a pet I already have. So directly buying companion gifts would definitly be an improvement. And after these leveled companions wan't something to do there was the option in 4.X to buy Jawa scrap with PVP commendations opening up the option to buy them with fleet recommendation seems to be another Idea how GSF can help you doing conquest by doing conquest with GSF. There is also the additional bonus that everything that can be bought with fleet commendation can also be bought by playing the PVE space missions giving also an incentive to do those as well. In this regard the idea of letting Space PVE and GSF use the same reputation track is also something I can get behind. I am a little bit more conflicted about another suggestion in this thread. Giving out Valor for GSF. After there are decorations that have a valor requirement including some that you get from the stronghold intro quest giving more option to actually use the decoration would be fine. On the other hand right now the only requirement for playing ranked is Valor 25. I don't think getting access to ranked PVP by playing GSF is working as attended. There are threads in the forum that ask to remove the valor requirement from the decorations from the intro quest and there are threads in the forum that say Valor 25 is a bad requirement for ranked PVP, ranked PVP needs a gear requirement to prevent gear advantage in ranked PVP. If one of these threads gets noticed by the devs these could impact the discussion if GSF should giving out Valor or not. Should the Valor requirement from the decorations from the stronghold intro quest be dropped I don't see a need for GSF to give out Valor. When we getting asked for Items that require to play GSF why shouldn't be there Items that require to play PVP with a Valor requirement? The only problem with that is if you do the stronghold intro you didn't play PVP and getting punished for not doing so because you can only use your rewards by playing PVP. On the other hand if the requirement for ranked PVP is changed so that Valor is not the requirement there is no getting access to ranked PVP by playing GSF. After a Gear requirement would open Ranked PVP for every one with a high Command Tier or succeess in Operations I think removing the Valor requirement from the decorations from the Stronghold intro quest is the solution with less negative side effects. So after we talked now about how to advance the ground game with GSF I would say that there is also still some GSF cosmetics items that are missing where I would like to see them even when the didn't advance the ground game. Imperial green - blue laser beams: did you see the trench run in Star Wars Episode IV A new hope recently? Along green laser beams the Imperial weapons are also using green-blue laser beams there, this was also used in Star Wars Rebels where different Imperial fighters use green-blue beams instead of green ones. After SWTOR copies the art style of the Satr Wars films and animated series I am surprised that so far I havn't seen any green-blue imperial options so far as a result. Paint jobs with Imperial or republic logos for all ship classes: Right now you can only get the republic logo on scouts while the imperial logo is not available on bombers. I definitly would like all my fighters with the correct logo. After the Imperial Gunship paint job with the Imperial logo only has half the imperial logo and spread that one out above all parts of the fighter so that the logo is barrely noticeable I definitly wouldn't mind a new Imperial Gunship paint job closer to the look of the Imperial scout paint job which use more smaller imperial logos all across the ship. Based on the profile of the Imperial gun ships I think that would give the best chance to identify at least one of the logos on the ship.

I would consider that more as spam guild invite than an attempt to manipulate the match. I even got ninja invited in a group once to found a guild. After I was already in a guild that didn't worked but there are strange things going on even without an attempt to maipulate a match. After I had a discussion a few month ago how gold spammers use /who to find charakter names to create lists who to mail lets say if a guild invite spammer uses similar tactics the chance is very high that you were registered while you waiting for a game and the invite just arrived during the game because of how long it took after you where next on the lists and how long it took to get a game. Still if possible I would report such a behavior. Even if it is "just spamming" spamming is still against the TOS.

If I didn't fumble the calculation from CET to EST 12 to 16 EST should be server primetime maybe a little bit more on republic side because of wargames. That off course could be longer than your lunch break. But if you fly as Ramalina I had a game against you before 5.2.2 with oly the two old starter ships and the Quarrel.

Why in theory I agree with the grouping advice in real life there is often a reason why the weak side of the server is the weak side. One of them is a resistance against grouping up because premades are baaaaaaaaaaaaaad. From my last two attemps to form an imperial group on T3-M4 where Imperial side is the weak side I am the only one who didn't completly switched fraction, server or stopped playing completly. So depending on the state of the weak side of the server sometimes the efforts of one player alone are not enough to turn the tide.

Before getting to business I would like to say thank you Drakkolich for coming back and bringing this thread back to life. So I hope nobody is to angry that I start with an "user testimonial". People who follow this thread can pinpoint when I started flying, December 2015, because I put a question there after around 10 games of flying. Drakkolich answer I revisited during January this year. Why? The answer that Drakkolich gave me went miles further than what I was asking. In fact after at that point I just had finished around 10 games and was still trying to figure out why the scouts I fly don't fly in a straight line but instead look like I am riding a bull which didn't happened on other ship typs and I was also fighting why I always lose missile locks so the part of Drakkolich answer that went beyond my original question I didn't understand what he was talking about at that point of time. Anyway after I got what I wanted at that point of time I was still happy and decided to continue working on the basics until I get there that I understand what he was talking about. And yes what I wanted to say with that after one year of flying I finally reached the point that I came up with the question that Drakkolich already answered when I was asking my original question. So he didn't only answered not only my original question but he also figured out the inevitable follow up question even when I needed one year to get there. But than all I needed was to reread his original answer because he already had me covered. So one year later I was even more impressed with Drakkolich answer than original. And because Drakkolich is Drakkolich he also answered Lord Turin innocent question in a way that he was already talking about the topics I wanted to ask to advertice Drakkolich other resources for the target audience of this thread. But after I want details lets go anyway. 1) Drakkolich already mentoined his shipbuild thread and that it is mostly up to date (that was the first part of my question). For the cartel market which are copies of other regular ships what would be your alternative build including upgrades and crew members if someone would want to use the cartel ships to explore a different build of the ship builds you posted in your thread? 2) Drakkolich also mentoined the damage overcharge clusters, which are power up spawnpoints in team deathmatches who only spawn damage overcharge and nothing else. What he didn't mentoined is his damage overcharge spawnpoint location guide where you can see screenshots and maps where you can find this spawnpoints. And yes my question was if you see the need to set up a gunship nest in a TDM how much do you consider the location of the super clusters to decide where to set up the nest? I recently PUGed into a TDM imperial side no wargame where someone decided that the bombers should set up a nest in the B4 grid of the Lost Shipyard Map. Not only was that awfull close to the friendly spawnpoints which opened up B2 for the enemy scouts to attack our own spawn points it also sacrifieced the entire C row of the map where most of the superclusters on the map are located so that the enemy gunships could sit close to the superclusters and pick apart who was sitting inside the nest because they could ignore the bombers who didn't post a thread to them. After in addition to the location before I complained 4 bombers where building a nest for a single gunship and after I complained 3 bombers where building a nest for 2 gunships to say that that game was a beating was an understatement. And in my opinion the location of the nest was as much to blame as the ship composition.

Well I think the greater issue with your first entry is that it is a few month old because this thread is about games after Patch 5.2.2 which is a few weeks old not month. However after I saw you flying after you posted that you flying for a few month because of CXP I realised that you a quick learner compared to most on our server and so I think you will get a newer game quickly. Also noted that Caravix is one of your characters. ;-) Now if we could get Imoss, Kentrraras and Zappatero to post their games so that some people see that T3-M4 is still alive even after Danalon mostly left for other games would be nice. But in general this would be a good idea to consider if the record entry should contain a date when the game happend. While that can't be checked it at least can sort out the accidently submitted older games. In addition should this record thread age as well as some of the previous ones it might be an idea to see if we battling "historical" records that where archived once in lifetime or if the records are recent ones where the sticks are still getting moved. When I am back from vacation I probably have to post one of my TDMs, based on the old record thread I didn't considered the numbers worth submitting but there wasn't a greater number of kills submitted yet.

After it doesn't make sense to keep two threads about the changes I add my promised updates here: The Intro Mission grants now 25000 Fleet Requisitions, which means after completing it you can choose enough ships to equip your entire bar and still have Requisitions left to buy Crew Members. That is really amazing and more than I expected. The upgrade costs: First upgrade indepent what component 500 Requisitions The following upgrades depends on the component. Main Components Weapons: 2. Upgrade: 1250 Ship requisitions 3. Upgrade: 2500 Ship requisitions 4. Upgrade: 5000 Ship requisitions 5. Upgrade: 7500 Ship requisitions Main components other (Shield, Engine, Systems...): 2. Upgrade: 1250 Ship requisitions 3. Upgrade: 5000 Ship requisitions Secondary components (Armor, Capacitor, Reactor...) 2. Upgrade: 750 Ship requisitions 3. Upgrade: 1250 Ship requisitions Most of the time that is a price cut of 50%, in some cases a little less. And yes Mangler / Quarrel also costs 1500 Fleet requisitions.

Fleet Requisitions: Mangler / Quarrel, Razorwire /Rampart: 1500 Other Ships: 3000 Crew Members: 600 Ship Requisitions: Main Components Weapons: 1000 Main Components other (Shields, Systems, Engines...): 750 Secondary Components (Armor, reactor...): 500 First Upgrade: 500 After I had to log into a character who didn't purchasen anything to see the prices I will try to add the prieces of the other upgrades later.

Storage cap is still 1000.

Tier 1 to 3 costs as much as before 5.2 Tier 4: Mainhand / Offhand: 324 per Piece Implant / Ear / Relict: 216 per Piece Chest / Legs / Hands / Boots / Helm: 270 per Piece Bracer / Belt: 210 per Piece

You realise that the link is broken down in four categorise with different health settings for the dummy and only in one category Plasmatech / Pyrotech is trailing that much? If you look closer you see that for every bracket and every Discipline the indicate the number of parses that was made for this category and Discipline. If you look at the number at the 500.000 Health dummy you see that only one Plasmatech /Pyrotech parse was used to measure this number while other disciplines or other Health settings have tripple digit numbers of parses contibuting to the final numbers. Especially after the 1.500.000 Health dummy and the 2.500.000 Health dummy, where most parses where made, show different results it seems more that the single Plamatech that made the 500.000 Parse didn't know his rotation. Of course you could alwys argue that some screw the numbers but the influence of one bad parse is of course much greater if it is the only parse compared to be one parse out of a three digit number of parses. At both of the most used Health settings both Sorcerer / Sage DPS disciplines and Plasmatech / Pyrotech are the Flop 3. That definitly is something to consider. So while I would agree that Plasmatech / Pyrotech is also in bad shape that Powertech / Vanguard DPS disciplines overall need more attention than Sorcerer / Sage DPS I wouldn't agree after all Sorcerer / Sage DPS disciplines are in bad shape compared to only one Powertech / Vanguard DPS discipline.

The Adds in this fight are not coming from nowhere, the Droid is standing in the middle of a plattform with a lot of trash mobs. If you attack the droid all trash mobs on the plattform aggro you and join the fight against you. I havn't done this mission in 5.X but in 4.X at Level 65 with a influence 50 healing companion you died when you tried to skip the trash mobs and attack the droid without doing them. Even a two player group with two healing companions couldn't survive the incoming damage if you ignored the trash mobs. However as soon you realise that it is quite obvious what you need to do before engaging the droid attack the trash mobs one by one and kill them and when you killed the trash mobs than you can safely attack the droid. So I would say you killed the mobs before attacking the droid with your sentinel and you didn't on your marauder. I am not 100% sure if you really need to kill all trash mobs but after it is quite a long Heroic I didn't bother to try how many trash mobs I needed to kill to survive and just killed all. In fact combining the length of the heroic, with the fact that it has two boss fights (the droid and the captain) and has a debriefing cut scene that is a little bit different if you do it with muliple players instead of one caused some speculation in my guilld that it originaly was intended to be a flashpoint and was later downscaled to a heroic. The one where you have to battle the final boss of the Heroic with the fire-extinguisher also looked like it original was intended for a little bit more than just a heroic.

Augments are the most flexible Gear Slot where you have full controll what you can put into it. That means look what you are missing and than use the augments to get it. For Healers this mostly will be a mix of Alacrity and Crit. You can look here for what numbers you should aim at. While Nozomi is right about the 45% crit rate, I feel Nozomi discredit what Alacrity do for you. Force regeneration is not the only thing. It reduces the channel time which means Alacrity is often the difference if the healing arives just in time or just to late. In addition it reduces your cooldowns which means you can use the same ability faster again. So if you feel you need to wait to long before you can use an ability again it might be an alacrity issue. For more information about the individual stats and what they do for seer sage I recommend the following two guides: For PVE For PVP

Despite contrary information previously released the drop rates of unassembled components from GSF matches are increased. I just got 4 components for a loss (previously 3) and 10 for a win (previously 8). It was previously said that drop rates will stay the same. The daily and weekly however didn't give out unassembled components as previously mentoined.

Hello everyone I am not sure if the topic was discussed before, if yes I didn't found it, or if I missunderstand what I see on the Dummy and in the Parse. So before I report a bug I would like a second opinion if I came up with the right conclusion. If I am correct this bug date back at least to 4.X where the Parses looks exactly like I will describe below but should also work like they should do now what I think they are not. Even the 3.X Parses looks that way but after I started playing during the final days of 3.X, so final that even wih 12x Exp I didn't manage to hit max Level, I am not sure how Crushing Darkness / Mind Crush worked in 3.X and if that is relevant for my observation or not. So everything started Sunday when I should show someone how the Lightning Rotation works, and said: "Look at the Dummy after casting Crushing Darkness you will see a DOT and a Debuff". But the Debuff didn't show up. Curious if it was only not shown or not applied I went for the Parse, especially the "Log view" and "Effects". If you look into this Parse: Lightning versus Operation Boss you found under Log view the following lines: 18:00:58.993 @Szadêk @Szadêk Crushing Darkness Event : AbilityActivate () 18:01:00.921 @Szadêk @Szadêk Spend : Force (36) 18:01:00.921 @Szadêk Annihilation Droid XRR-3 Crushing Darkness ApplyEffect : Crushed (Crushing Darkness) () 18:01:00.922 @Szadêk Annihilation Droid XRR-3 Forked Darkness ApplyEffect : Vulnerable (Force) () So Crushing Darkness is casted, Force is consumed, and the DOT (Crushed) and the Debuff (Vulnerable (Force)) is applied. If you look into the Effects Tab under "Applied on Targets" you will see the following line: Vulnerable (Force) 1 Annihilation Droid XRR-3 324.321 99.23% Which shows the Effect was applied and how long it was applied on the target. Now let's compare that with a Dummy Parse: Lightning versus Dummy 19:46:49.729 @Sioncognus @Sioncognus Event : EnterCombat () 19:46:49.772 @Sioncognus @Sioncognus Spend : Force (36) 19:46:49.772 @Sioncognus @Sioncognus Sprint RemoveEffect : Sprint () 19:46:49.772 @Sioncognus Operations Training Dummy Crushing Darkness ApplyEffect : Crushed (Crushing Darkness) () Thanks to entering the combat by precasting Crushing Darkness the cast of Crushing Darkness is not mentoined but we find the Force consumtion line and the Dot applied line, what we don't see is the Debuff applied line. If you switch to the "Effects" Tab for this the line I quoted for the uptime of the Debuff is also missing. Based on that I am pretty sure that the Force Vulnerable Debuff is not applied when Dummy Parsing. After the Debuff results in the opponent taking more Damage that should mean that Lightning is Parsing to low right now. After I mentoined that even 4.X Parses looks like that these seems to solve the mystery why I am pulling compareable DPS numbers on a Dummy and on Bosses like Annihilation Droid XRR-3 which I already noticed in 4.X and again in 5.X. While the movement should reduce the DPS the fact that in live Fights the Debuff is applied and not on the Dummy seem to compensate for that. So the good news is for live fights this does not matter but the bad news is if you want to know where you stand or apply for a spot on an Operation Group that wants your Parse as part of the application you will not get a correct number. After the mirror classes should be identical but in cases of bugs sometimes only one half off the mirror was hit I checked Telekinetics next: Telekinetics versus Operation Boss Log view: 22:08:08.674 @Vyldyssun @Vyldyssun Mind Crush Event : AbilityActivate () 22:08:10.331 @Vyldyssun @Vyldyssun Spend : Force (36) 22:08:10.331 @Vyldyssun Annihilation Droid XRR-3 Mind Crush ApplyEffect : Crushed (Force) () 22:08:10.331 @Vyldyssun Annihilation Droid XRR-3 Mental Momentum ApplyEffect : Vulnerable (Force) () Effects: Vulnerable (Force) 1 Annihilation Droid XRR-3 227.918 98.97% Telekinetics versus Dummy Log view: 06:56:17.778 @Numendar @Numendar Event : EnterCombat () 06:56:17.811 @Numendar @Numendar Spend : Force (36) 06:56:17.811 @Numendar @Numendar Sprint RemoveEffect : Sprint () 06:56:17.811 @Numendar Operations Training Dummy Mind Crush ApplyEffect : Crushed (Force) () Effects: ----- So Telekinetics seem to be effected as well. While I didn't checked every Parse on parsely I checked the top Parses for both Lightning and Telekinetics and from the Top 10 of both I didn't found the Vulnerable (Force) Effects once. So what do you think, did I overlooked something or did I came to the wrong conclussions? Or is Parsing of Lightning and Telekinetics officaly bugged now?